Financial Troubles May Loom for Fish and Boat Commission

[McSneek]

No surprise IMO.

http://triblive.com/sports/outdoors/8726363-74/commission-schaeffer-agency#axzz3fy80dQKh

 

[wildtrout2]

They should just charge $15 for the Trout Stamp. The number of stamps sold should show the Comm roughly how many serious trout fisherman are out there, then they can see which hatcheries can be closed because of less demand/need. Problem solved. lol

 

[phiendWMD]

It seems unfair to decrease the cost of a license and increase the cost of the trout stamp to me. Why should trout anglers be expected to pay more when everyone else is paying less?
I'm not opposed to paying a little more, many other people have stated in the past a fishing license and trout stamp are a good deal compared to other activities. I just feel everyone who utilizes the resources the PFBC provide should contribute. Maybe PA needs a bass stamp.

 

[dryflyguy]

Wonder if this might - again - raise the possibility of merging the fish and game commissions.

Personally, I splurged on the 5 year license this spring. And it's looking like a pretty good move now.

 

[wgmiller]

What percentage of the PFBC's hatcheries are used to rear trout? If it's a large number, it would seem to make sense to charge more for the trout stamp based on the simple fact that the largest majority of hatcheries are for trout.

I know that there are other fish reared in PA's hatcheries as well such as musky, etc.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

Just charge more for a license/ stamp or whatever is needed to fund the programs. Everything costs more these days. Reality is that many guys buy hundreds of dollars in equip and gas to fish for trout and other species and though they might bitch about cost of license it is a small part of what they put out each yr. (People spend more on coffee in a month than on a fishing license.) Make a higher license cost and then do a REALLY GOOD job and you will see increased interest in the sport in general. Stock more quality fish....manage the wild resources better (including getting real about pollution) and have wardens that care. Like any other business these days it never pays to cheap out. Quality counts.

How did that $1.00 decrease in license cost pan out? Seemed ridiculous to me.

 

[poopdeck]

I think trout take up a lot of time for the pfbc. I bought a trout stamp for 20 years but never fished for trout but did fish in trout waters from time to time. It's only in the last 2 years that I actually went trout fishing again but these trips made up about 2% of my fishing.

The decrease was one of the most hair brained ideas to be initiated. I agree just raise the price of a trout stamp or license in general and stop with the gimmicks. I would also cut all the programs designed to get people into fishing. As with any social program these are an ineffective drain on resources.

 

[JackM]

Stop stocking for two years and reduce the trout stamp price significantly. After two years raise the trout stamp price but make it apply only to waters actually stocked by PFBC, which would be reduced from prior levels. Observe behavior and purchase data for the next 5 years, increasing price and increasing stocking where warranted by demand. Everyone's happy except the wild trout fanatics for the first 2-3 years or so.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

Get real about the fact that MOST wild trout fishing in this state will never amount to much other than fishing very small streams for very small trout and this activity appeals to a very small number of anglers.....(with a few exceptions of course). Stop trying to commodify the wild trout fishing in Pennsylvania. Less pressure not more on that resource. Emphasize warm water fishing and then increase stocking of all species if warranted including trout. Stock better quality fish for anglers who have supported your trout stocking programs for decades. Acknowledge that the destruction of the Susquehanna and other impaired waterways has turned off at least two generations of potential anglers. Hire WCO's who are knowledgeable about the sport and environment and want to make a difference. Charge enough to fund the whole thing.

 

[MKern]

I know a guy that works for an outdoor agency of this state and he has mentioned to me several times that there is a plan in place for the fish commission to be absorbed by the game commission because of the fish commission's ability to spends funds efficiently.

License prices need to go up. I get the idea of dropping them, like a coupon, but $30 some dollars is nothing. Most people drop that on a case of beer that only last a weekend.

 

[LarryFine]

From the article:

“At the agency's quarterly meeting, held Monday and Tuesday in Harrisburg, executive director John Arway said the agency needs to come up with $9.12 million by the 2016-17 fiscal year, which starts July 1. The infusion of revenue is needed to cover looming pension, personnel and other costs, he said”.

From the PFBC Quarterly Meeting Notes:

“HARRISBURG, Pa. (July 14) – At is quarterly business meeting held yesterday and today, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) elected new officers, approved the acquisition of property in Erie County, added waters to the list of wild trout streams, endorsed legislation which would extend certain health benefits to waterways conservation officers (WCO)”.

PA has a BIG problem with soaring costs related to employee pensions, benefits and expenses. You only need look at the announcement recently by the PA Turnpike Commission regarding 30 years of toll increases on the Turnpike to realize it is out of control and not fixable, without doing something drastic to correct the problem and curb the out of control spending...

...or continually milking the public for more finding.

I for one, favor the former.

 

[CRB]

Time to reduce wcos. cant even reach them unless you call the regional office for dispatch.

 

[Fredrick]

Makes you wonder about the Save our Susky program . I guess they were trying to knock out to birds with one stone on how they stated buying licenses will help fund research on the Susky once they reach their annual quota .

 

[fishbaithohaha]

Somebody understands economics and politics. Apparently, demand for licenses is elastic. Dropping the price increases total revenue. (% change decrease in price < % change increase in sales). Demand for stamps is inelastic, raising price increases total revenue (% change increase in price > % change decrease in sales).

As for politics, new leadership can blame prior administrators for necessary pricing changes if tactics fails. Claim credit if tactics are a success.

 

[SteveG]

I've long said that there should be separate licenses for harvest and c&r or ff only trout. Heck, get rid of the "stamp" altogether and have a separate license for warm water fish. As stupid as raising trout, at a monetery loss, only to be harvested, is, I'm sure growing out musky is even more expensive. While money spent on raising fish isn't the only cost they incur, it makes you wonder where else they're hemorrhaging money.

If anything, they need to learn what sustainability is, and promote that to the public.

 

[TimRobinsin]

I partially agree with most of you.

As JackM said: reduce stocking in streams that support wild reproduction and *perhaps* consider lowering the cost of the trout stamp. I honestly think you just leave the trout stamp go.

But as is suggested in the article, take 6% of the 6% sales tax collected on fishing related items and send that directly to the commission.

in addition, the PFBC needs to look at increasing their participation with co-op nurseries. They appear to be getting a much better return on their investment by working with these groups.

Decreasing the amount of WCO's is a terrible idea. I enjoy listening to local guys that complain about the amount of fish the PFBC is stocking in one breath and boast about poaching in the next. What's even better is the amount of folks that think not buying a license is cool.

You might not like the PFBC but they are the only tool we have and they are only as effective as we let them be.

of course I'm sure there are some that would love to see our entire state turn into Donny Beaver's private fishing club. if the PFBC keeps heading the direction it is heading they might just get their wish.

 

[MKern]

They won't stop stocking wild trout streams because Billy Bob Bait Angler for the first weekend would have a fit and not buy a license.

They are a business, not a conservation agency, as long as people complain about where their license dollars go and about employees making a wage and retiring. And businesses must aim to make consumers happy, which is apparently stocking trout and filling a stringer in the first ten minutes of fishing.

Now, if we want them to worry about fish and waterway management, research, and aquiring land people need to stop complaining about how much of their trout stamp goes to a collectively bargained retirement system.

BTW, I know people will disagree with me on this, but this is the same for the game commission and the deer population. Currently the deer population is too high and over the carrying capacity in most of the state. This causes disease to spread and deer interfering with humans. However, if Billy Bob doesn't see a deer the first morning of rifle season, he complains.

 

[afishinado]

phiendWMD wrote:
It seems unfair to decrease the cost of a license and increase the cost of the trout stamp to me. Why should trout anglers be expected to pay more when everyone else is paying less?
I'm not opposed to paying a little more, many other people have stated in the past a fishing license and trout stamp are a good deal compared to other activities. I just feel everyone who utilizes the resources the PFBC provide should contribute. Maybe PA needs a bass stamp.

I read that the cost of the trout stocking program breaks down to $17 per licensed angler. The current cost of the trout stamp with fees is $10. Right now the bass anglers/non trout anglers are paying $7 of their $22 license fee to the trout program and never fishing for them.

The proposal in the article was to raise the trout stamp by $8. That would more or less fund the current trout stocking program 100%.

Something has to be done, but there are no easy answers. Cut stocking and license sales/revenue go down. Raise license fees and license sales/revenue go down. Do both at the same time and.......you see the problem.

 

[afishinado]

Here is a recent thread discussing the financial difficulties of the PFBC.

 

[k-bob]

afish: "Raise license fees and license sales/revenue go down."

from memory, I thought that higher license fees in the past had reduced the # of license sales, but, given the higher price, increased total revenue?

one thing they haven't done: just say that they'll creep the price up by 50 cents a year. sounds like nothing, but then you get a bit of slow revenue growth because it sounds like nothing? may be the dreaded political realities in the way of any fee change, but running an organization on a fixed or declining budget is not a good thing.

putting a planned $.50/year increase would also reduce publicity about fee increases that might result from a sudden $5 increase...

so fwiw, I say raise it $2 and $.50 a year from there. I'm sure its not that easy..