It's been talked about for well over a year, so it wouldn't surprise me if we saw Pennsylvania's kids forced to pay a licensing fee to go fishing. Its an old link, I know, but it does a good job of succintly stating what's being proposed. For those of you into specifics of the deal, I've got the bill submitted to the Pennsylvania House, and here's a newer article discussing license fee increases as well as the proposed youth license.
Basically, the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission (hereafter, PFBC) wants to require children ages 12-16 to purchase a youth fishing license at $5 (historically, fishing has been free in Pennsylvania to all children up to, but not including, age 16). The revenue generated by these fees (as well as federal funds that are to be somehow received as a result of the youth licenses) will be used to institute youth fishing programs and activities.
My first reaction upon hearing this news was what the hell are they thinking?! After a little thought, I realized that some good may come out of it. Still, I've been mulling the idea over for a few weeks now, and I still find something about charging kids a new fee where none existed before to be...well...just wrong.
The issue has caused quite a stir in several threads over on the FishUSA forums.
Mixed in with all the semi-intelligible ramblings, contention, and internet muscles common to any internet message board, there's a great pros vs. cons debate if you can filter out the nonsense.
As far as I'm concerned, its just bad business to charge anyone, especially children, for something that's been free to them since time immemorial. I dont care what the money is going to or how little it may cost, The Man shouldn't be holding his hand out, waiting for payment from a 12 year old.
They want to increase youth programs and find ways to increase youth interest in fishing, and turn around the recent downturn in youth participation in the sport. All of this is a very noble goal...but to pay for it...they're charging the kids?!
Alot of people argue that they're really charging the parents, and in the majority of cases it probably will be the parents that will foot the bill, but even at that, I dont like the situation (especially coupled with the license fee increase for everyone, included in the PFBC's proposition). So if dad's picking up the tab for junior, now dad's licensing fees have jumped by more than 25% in one year. Way to encourage guys to take their kids fishing.
Still, I'm sure most serious fishermen that are passionate about the sport will get the kids license and take the kids, but what about the kids that would love to fish, but their dads (or moms) just aren't into it. While my dad loves to fish (slowly but surely, I'm getting him back into it), my mom isn't a fan. Before I could drive myself (the targetted 12-16 year old demographic), she'd drop me off at a local lake and either go for a walk, or run errands or meet friends, while I enjoyed a long summer afternoon/evening of fishing. If I hadn't been so interested in fishing, it would have been just as easy for her to leave me at home to play video games, and now, not only will it be easier, it'll be cheaper.
On a more objective note, the PFBC really needs to hire a few more economic analysts, because if they'd bother to look at trends, they'd see that any time they've increased license prices, sales have dropped accordingly. So if you start charging for something that's free, what do you think is going to happen? I think they'll turn lots of kids away from fishing. If they were really, truly serious about getting more youth involved in fishing, they'd make fishing as accessible as possible to children of all ages and income levels ($5 isnt much, but its more than free).
If they want to run youth fishing programs, either charge a small entry fee for the program, or cut back in another area (like stocking trout at keystone power dam?). Better still, get a few sections of stream designated as youth-harvest-only (who doesnt want to fish WITH Dad?), and maybe a week or two in early to mid-April designated as a youth trout season, when the kids can rock the "uneducated" stocked fish, before they're traumatized by the general season opener later in the month. In fact, I think that'd be an awesome idea. It wouldnt cost the PFBC alot more than a few more hours laber to have WCOs at the lakes on those days on the minimum side (to make sure adults arent coming down fishing and ruining the experience), and on the other end of the spectrum, they could have the two preceding Saturdays as "Youth Fishing Days" complete with a pre-fishing seminar about the fish, how to use their gear to catch them, conservation, and maybe even recipes for cooking their catch. At the end of the talk, they'd get a patch, button, license, or whatever, and then they could spend the rest of the day fishing.
Sound like an idea?
As always, I'd be delighted to hear from any reader with an opinion on the subject. Feel free to leave your comments, I'll read them all!
2 comments:
I too am perplexed on this issue, and go back and forth on my opinions. But, if the fee stays $5 say for the next 10 yrs.(yeah right!) then no problem. Simply make if one of your kid's christmas gifts. They'll be using it long after the legos have been lost, and the transformers broken. Also, my grandson is becoming quite the little fisherman. Limiting out on numerous occassions on various species, so $5 seems a small fee to pay to reinvest in the programs the PFBC supplies.
I certainly understand your point, and even agree with you on most. I have no doubt that a $5 fee wont significantly impact kids with parents that are avid fishermen/women. The ones I'm worried about are the kids of parents that dont fish, or normally only go for a few days each year. These are the kids I see getting gypped.
Either way, I just hope it works, but I cant see extra fees getting more people involved in fishing, especially kids.