IFPAG Meeting and Related Matters

[Ski]

Don - that is a great idea and easy to implement as long as the local support can be generated. Education is the key - we have to make all those great trout/salmon guys understand that the tigers won't eat all their fish. I think a feasibility study should be done statewide on where tiogers would best thrive, best serve the key purpose of eating roughfish, etc (pikeminnow) and finally where the economic impact would be most beneficial to the WDFW. They should prioritze the lakes based on that criteria and implement when feasible. I know that study would cost money but the return would definitely be compouded several times over. No where else in the country are there more, healthier and bigger tiger populations than here in WA state (at least that is my belief along with Buddy). We should market that to increase support and funding.

[Anonymous]

Don, thanks again for being in the right place/right time and putting the bug in Jim Scott's ear. I know the process can be slow and tedious, especially for the SEPA paperwork, but it has to start somewhere, eh? Samish appears to be similar to Curlew: 810 acres, 4 miles long. Beautiful lake.

[kevinb]

Thank you for your insight Don...much appreciated.

I wish Wa state would consider the stamps again,it seems like the best way to raise funds and
support a fishery. Just my humble opinion.

Thanks for all the information:salut:

[Ski]

Kevin,

Stamps are too costly - I think Don mentioned that the old "stamp" was incorporated into the general license. With everything being computer generated, it would be easy to give fishermen the option to make a donation towards the stocking of their favorite species like they do with the tax return campaign fund. Don, what do you think about that?

[Don Wittenberger]

With everything being computer generated, it would be easy to give fishermen the option to make a donation towards the stocking of their favorite species like they do with the tax return campaign fund. Don, what do you think about that?

This topic was discussed at length on Saturday at the IFPAG meeting. Deputy Director Joe Storer pointed out that WDFW has legal authority right now to accept donations from the public. So, if you want to kick a few extra bucks into the pot, don't be bashful! It might save a game warden's job, and we all want more protection of the resource, right?

As far as a checkoff system goes, the question there is whether it would bring in enough donations to cover the cost of reformatting the license system. Keep in mind the campaign fund checkoff on your tax return doesn't cost you anything; it simply diverts a couple bucks from the Treasury to the campaign fund. How many people would pull out extra dollars at the license point of purchase is an open question; it's an idea worth thinking about, and without a doubt the best time and setting to ask for donations is when people are buying their licenses. I think this is worth raising in the next IFPAG meeting and I'll try to remember to do that.

Joe Storer also told us that WDFW is considering license surcharges. However, as some of the fishing club representatives pointed out, all of the IFPAG members (and all of you) are hard-core fishermen who are willing to pay a little more for our licenses, but what about the little guys who take their kids fishing a couple of days a year? Lots of people out there are hurting financially right now, and raising the cost of access to our recreational fisheries is not necessarily the right solution from their point of view.

YellowBear, in one of his comments above, asked who is looking out for the little guy. The answer is that all of us on IFPAG are willing to pay more for our licenses, but several spoke up on behalf the many citizens of our state who can't afford to. And, YellowBear, you also may rest assured that the WDFW managers in whom you have so little confidence are sensitive to this issue. We need to find something that works for both the agency and the ordinary citizens that WDFW exists to serve, which doesn't necessarily consist of reaching deeper into their pockets, even in hard times when the agency is struggling with cutbacks. Especially in hard times, when our neighbors are struggling to pay their bills.

[Ski]

Thanks again Don,

I still believe a donation at the time of license purchase will really add up, cost the WDFW almost nothing, and more people will give than you think.

[Rosann G]

I'm glad to hear there are some that are looking after the little guys in these hard times. Fishing is a good recreational activity for families when times are hard.
Rosann

[Don Wittenberger]

I still believe a donation at the time of license purchase will really add up, cost the WDFW almost nothing, and more people will give than you think.

How about this: To get people to donate, you need to give them a plain objective. Joe Storer told the IFPAG group on Saturday that budget reductions will force WDFW to eliminate 10 or 11 enforcement officer positions. So, why not a donation campaign to save a game warden's job?

To grab the public's attention, you need a snappy slogan, so we'll call it The Save-A-Warden Fund. The plan is for WDFW to asks license buyers at the point-of-sale to kick in a few extra bucks to keep a game warden who otherwise would be laid off.

I'm not sure how much it'll take, I'd guess about $200,000 to fund one position for the two-year biennium, so if WDFW gets a million they could save 5 of the game warden positions slated for elimination, and if they get 2 million they could save all of them. That may be aiming too high, but saving even 1 position is worth doing.

The fishing clubs could get involved by printing promotional flyers and distributing them to license vendors. The outdoor writers could get involved by writing up the idea in their publications. Everyone who participates and donates will feel like they had a hand in keeping these game wardens on the job. Think of the morale boost it will give the officers to know the public is trying to save their jobs. That's "support the troops" with a capital "S"!

So, what do all of you think of this idea? Should I write a letter to the director about it? It's simple, it's concrete, it's easy to understand. I think this would work much better than asking people to donate money for vague and unspecified purposes:

The Save-A-Warden Fund