Skagit Wild Steelhead CnR Fishery........Eliminated 2020

_WW_

Geriatric Skagit Swinger
WFF Supporter
"When agencies begin to act like entrepreneurs seeking
self-funding through fees, and low-income people are excluded, the public
purpose—the very reason for public ownership—is defeated.
So...would fishing licenses, steelhead and salmon endorsements, and the Discover Pass fall under that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JS

quilbilly

Big Time Hater
Discover Pass is most definitely a user fee...
A fishing license I wouldn't consider a user fee, but some might.
User fees, as commonly understood, are like this :
A user fee is a fee, tax, or impost payment paid to a facility owner or operator by a facility user as a necessary condition for using the facility.

In no way would I support rod fees on a per day, per season or per river basis to maintain or even open a fishery.
In fact, I'd work very vocally to oppose them...even the Skagit.
I've supported your efforts in the past, contacting my legislators repeatedly, and appreciate the hard work OS has done in the past.

Go for rod fees and I'm out...
 

Charles Sullivan

Active Member
There's plenty of info out there on user fees and recreation on public lands. Pricing out of population segments, as well as shifting usage patterns come up often as unintended outcomes, as do increasing reliance on user fees, thus decreasing the public funding of public lands, and increasing user fees that never quite close the gap in many cases.

But this below makes sense to me, public resources are just that, public.

"When agencies begin to act like entrepreneurs seeking
self-funding through fees, and low-income people are excluded, the public
purpose—the very reason for public ownership—is defeated.
Why do we have public beaches, hiking trails, campgrounds or teen
centers? For these resources to be legitimately in the public sector, they must
be fulfilling a public need; a clear sense of public mission and public purpose
is essential to the formation of sound recreation policy (More, 2000). Un-
fortunately, this point is often lost in current discussions. Many see fees only
in terms of cash flows—dollars taken in versus operating costs. And the rec-
reation research literature is often most concerned with the mechanics of
setting fees—reference prices, degree of acceptance, revenue optimizing and
the like. Ultimately, however, a strong sense of mission and purpose are
fundamental to the successful management of public parks and recreation.
Our results suggest that fees undercut this mission: they are a major step in
the gentrification of recreation resources. When the parks are reserved for
the comfortably well-off, will they continue to be publicly necessary?"
It's hard to argue with that quote and in fact there is no reason to. I think everything there is true.
A user fee or rod fee would be a band aid for sure. The issue is that there needs to be funding, although I think it could be reduced in future seasons. WDFW will hold up the season to get the funding they want or need. It's their only choice. They need someone to advocate for them. At least Skagit anglers have shown they can write a letter or go to a meeting.
The very system that creates the funding issue requires that WDFW threaten to cancel the season. It's a quandary for sure.

Go sox,
Cds
 

Stonefish

Triploid, Humpy & Seaplane Hater....Know Grizzler
Have there been any studies on the economic impacts with last years spring Steelhead season?
Either on Skagit Co or statewide, as I’m sure out of state angler drove or flew here, needed lodging, purchased licenses and meals for the opportunity to fish the Skagit again plus what area residents spent to fish it.
SF
 

bhudda

heffe'
Have there been any studies on the economic impacts with last years spring Steelhead season?
Either on Skagit Co or statewide, as I’m sure out of state angler drove or flew here, needed lodging, purchased licenses and meals for the opportunity to fish the Skagit again plus what area residents spent to fish it.
SF
Yes, I just did one looking at your question and my conclusions are that the valley did much better last year economically then the previous year :) :) :) , sorry Stoney, I got nothin’
 

Smalma

Active Member
SF-
In a recent article in the "Osprey" written by WDFW staff reports "...in 2019 there were more than 6,000 anglers for steelhead on the Skagit River. These angler trips are projected to have generated more than $1 million of angler expenditures with an economic was over $1.5 million."

Curt
 

ChrisC

Active Member
Discover Pass is most definitely a user fee...
A fishing license I wouldn't consider a user fee, but some might.
User fees, as commonly understood, are like this :
A user fee is a fee, tax, or impost payment paid to a facility owner or operator by a facility user as a necessary condition for using the facility.

In no way would I support rod fees on a per day, per season or per river basis to maintain or even open a fishery.
In fact, I'd work very vocally to oppose them...even the Skagit.
I've supported your efforts in the past, contacting my legislators repeatedly, and appreciate the hard work OS has done in the past.

Go for rod fees and I'm out...
There's already a fee for fishing steelhead on the Columbia and tributaries, in which has been in place for a while and people accept without much complaint. I wouldn't be surprised if that's where WDFW begins and there would be more than enough anglers who would be happy to pay for it.

I understand where you are coming from but even if it comes down to a per day rod fee (not likely imho), there's still enough demand to fish the Skagit/Sauk, not only among WA residents but also out of state anglers. Look at the Classified Water fees in BC where it was implemented despite much outcry from non-BC residents, and yet it remains in place with more than enough visitors paying to justify the program remaining. Likewise with the annual draws and even steeper fees that are in place to fish for salmon in Quebec, Scotland etc, where they have all had significant variability in yearly fish numbers. While I would also question at that point whether I would want to pay that much, there's ample evidence that there are plenty of other anglers who are.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JS

Stonefish

Triploid, Humpy & Seaplane Hater....Know Grizzler
There's already a fee for fishing steelhead on the Columbia and tributaries, in which has been in place for a while and people accept without much complaint. I wouldn't be surprised if that's where WDFW begins and there would be more than enough anglers who would be happy to pay for it.

I understand where you are coming from but even if it comes down to a per day rod fee (not likely imho), there's still enough demand to fish the Skagit/Sauk, not only among WA residents but also out of state anglers. Look at the Classified Water fees in BC where it was implemented despite much outcry from non-BC residents, and yet it remains in place with more than enough visitors paying to justify the program remaining. Likewise with the annual draws and even steeper fees that are in place to fish for salmon in Quebec, Scotland etc, where they have all had significant variability in yearly fish numbers. While I would also question at that point whether I would want to pay that much, there's ample evidence that there are plenty of other anglers who are.

The Columbia River endorsement for Washington anglers ended in July of this year.
SF

 

ChrisC

Active Member
The Columbia River endorsement for Washington anglers ended in July of this year.
SF

Thanks for the update. Perhaps the shortfall that is mentioned in the announcement has an indirect impact on this.
 

doublespey

Steelhead-a-holic
The Columbia River endorsement for Washington anglers ended in July of this year.
SF

Maybe DFW figured out that the major tribs (Wenatchee, Methow, and now the Snake) being closed to fishing wasn't much of an incentive to buy their Columbia "enhancement" tag. I guess the Cowlitz is still open (although their summer returns were also very low).
 

Stonefish

Triploid, Humpy & Seaplane Hater....Know Grizzler
SF-
In a recent article in the "Osprey" written by WDFW staff reports "...in 2019 there were more than 6,000 anglers for steelhead on the Skagit River. These angler trips are projected to have generated more than $1 million of angler expenditures with an economic was over $1.5 million."

Curt

Curt,

Thanks for the info.
is there any type of Skagit County Tourism Bureau or Business Alliance that you know of?
I see ads all the time promoting Grant Co and activities such as fishing, boating act.

I had posted in another thread that perhaps businesses with help from a possible tourism bureau or business alliance could help raise funds to help offset the cost of monitoring.
Just a thought as the state doesn't seem real motivated or isn't likely to make it happen based on budget concerns.

What you reported isn't a insignificant amount of money from those who participated in that fishery.
SF
 

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info

Latest posts

Top