Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2)


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 1813
Offline
Quote:

afishinado wrote:
Quote:

troutbert wrote:
The PFBC should be allowed to keep their funding up with the rate of inflation by increasing their license fees accordingly. If the current rate of inflation is 3% per year, then they should be allowed to increase their fees by that much each year.

That just seems like common sense.

What I can't understand is why the legislature is preventing them from doing this. It's like they are trying to starve out the PFBC.

But why? What is the legislators' beef with the PFBC?

Are they trying to force the PFBC to do something? If so, what?


If the legislators allow the PFBC to raise license fees independent of the any action of the legislature, than the politicians lose influence / power over the commission. Right now they (the politicians) have the hammer, since they control the revenue stream of the PFBC, giving them the ability to ask for favors in return for funding.

quid quo pro > you scratch my back.... > Do what we say or we'll pass a term limit for you Mr. ED >


Right.

But what do they want from the PFBC? What are they trying to force them to do?

They are threatening to get rid of the ED. So they are mad about something. But what?


Posted on: 2/4 11:44


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission

Joined:
2013/12/8 21:26
From Granville
Posts: 827
Offline
Just out of curiosity how many of us donate some extra dough when we buy our license? I always do. I donated $5 above and beyond the cost or my regular license, button, and trout stamp. I have no idea what that money will get appropriated for but I also don't care. I can part ways with a small trivial amount of money and hope that I'm doing some good.

Posted on: 2/4 11:54


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 1278
Offline
http://www.paflyfish.com/forums/Open- ... ch-for-Kittatinny-Trout/6,45844.html

Quote:


Launched in 2011, the Unassessed Waters Initiative has led to the discovery of more than 5,600 miles of wild trout water in the Keystone State. Pennsylvania boasts more than 86,000 miles of running water, second most in the US only to Alaska. There are still thousands of miles of streams that have yet to be assessed given this vast landscape but the success rate of the UWI has shown how resilient trout can be in even some of the most pressured watersheds. Trout require the cleanest and coldest waters to survive and are often referred to as the canary in the coal mine—in such that the health of a stream can quickly be assumed based on the presence of trout.


The Kittatinny Ridge encompasses 360,000 acres in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and a small chunk of Maryland. It boasts more than an 80% intact forest and shrub habitat and is one of the most renowned birding destinations in the East. Given its undeveloped status, the Kittatinny Ridge is also a perfect place to focus protection efforts for wild trout. However, it sits atop both the Utica and Marcellus Shale, and in the coming years will be affected by the construction of multiple pipelines, including Atlantic Sunrise, which is under construction, and PennEast, which is under review by state regulators. These development pressures threaten the wild nature of the corridor and offer potential threats to trout, birds, and humans alike.


You really don't think this has anything to do with it?

Posted on: 2/4 12:08
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 3034
Offline
Quote:

troutbert wrote:
Quote:

afishinado wrote:
Quote:

troutbert wrote:
The PFBC should be allowed to keep their funding up with the rate of inflation by increasing their license fees accordingly. If the current rate of inflation is 3% per year, then they should be allowed to increase their fees by that much each year.

That just seems like common sense.

What I can't understand is why the legislature is preventing them from doing this. It's like they are trying to starve out the PFBC.

But why? What is the legislators' beef with the PFBC?

Are they trying to force the PFBC to do something? If so, what?


If the legislators allow the PFBC to raise license fees independent of the any action of the legislature, than the politicians lose influence / power over the commission. Right now they (the politicians) have the hammer, since they control the revenue stream of the PFBC, giving them the ability to ask for favors in return for funding.

quid quo pro > you scratch my back.... > Do what we say or we'll pass a term limit for you Mr. ED >


Right.

But what do they want from the PFBC? What are they trying to force them to do?

They are threatening to get rid of the ED. So they are mad about something. But what?



Well, the unvarnished truth is they're "mad" about John Arway, proposing (threatening?) to cut stocking in districts where the legislator opposes a licnse increase.

Read this article for more details.

The sad thing, this whole controversy proves where and how much stocking is done is based on political reasons rather than conservation, biological or even angler desires. Very sad, indeed.

Posted on: 2/4 12:12


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 1813
Offline
It might be all about stocking.

But, if the legislators wanted a lot of trout stocked, you'd think they would realize that it requires money to raise and transport trout.

And that if the PFBC is not allowed to raise fees to keep up with inflation, then their ability to raise trout will be gradually eroded by inflation.

Another theory I've heard is that some legislators are trying to strong arm the PFBC in regard to their putting all these streams on the wild trout list, which gives them additional environmental protections. And the coal and oil & gas industries are complaining about that to their legislators, so the legislators are leaning on the PFBC and trying to starve them of money.

In some ways this seems like a more plausible theory than the stocking theory. Because starving the PFBC of money would lessen their ability to raise and transport trout and support the coop hatcheries.

Starving the PFBC of money could also reduce their ability to do wild trout surveys, water quality & sediment surveys, and environmental law enforcement.

Maybe that's what the legislators care more about.


Posted on: 2/4 12:58


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission
Moderator
Joined:
2016/1/24 14:30
From Gettysburg
Posts: 2572
Offline
I share troutbert's perspective on this.

The legislature's hostility to the PFBC is a mystery to me. In the case of the Game Commission, we know that legistlators have been hearing from angry constituents for years about lack of deer etc. and that this forms the main thread running through funding issues with the PGC.

I'm not aware, however, of any such large scale and coherent protest by the state's anglers. The umbrage at Arway followed Arway's threat to close hatcheries in districts....which was itself a protest against the long running failure to raise license fees. No, this problem predates Arway's tenure and his issues with the legislature are but a symptom of the problem, not the cause.

The issue of the state government trying to starve the PFBC to prevent further listing of wild trout streams seems plausible to me too...although I'd add that I'd need a lot more evidence to consider this as probable.

The stubborn refusal to grant a license fee increase to PFBC really seems strange and unecessary to me.

Posted on: 2/4 13:08


Re: Article on fees and revenue for the PAFB commission

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 1278
Offline
It's like talking to yourself around here.

Posted on: 2/4 14:08
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/






« 1 (2)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Sponsors
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

USGS Water Levels
The New Keystone Fly Fishing Book
Polls
Do You Have or Will You Obtain Multiple State Fishing License’s for 2018?
Yes 68% (64)
No 31% (29)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2018/7/20 10:51
5 Comments





Copyright 2018 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com