There is now a percentage on the hatchery bill. If you have not yet sent in a letter of support, it only takes a minute on the AB 2280 website. www.stormsource.org/ab2280/

Let's keep California's hatcheries from closure.....



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: MORGAN CRINKLAW
May 7, 2004 (916) 319-2025

HATCHERY FUNDING BILL SET AT 33 1/3 PERCENT

(Sacramento) – Assemblyman Dave Cogdill (R-Modesto) announced today that AB 2280, will dedicate
33 1/3 percent of sport fishing license revenue directly to the Hatcheries and Fish Planting Facilities Program. The bill had previously left the dedicated amount unspecified. This amendment will set the funding requirement for the Hatcheries and Fish Planting Facilities Program at 33 1/3 perecent of fishing license revenue.

“Sport fishing is vital to California’s tourism economy,” commented Assemblyman Cogdill. “It is essential that we pass legislation like this to allocate funds to their proper places, so that each generation of Californians will be able to enjoy the benefits of our State’s waterways.”

The Department of Fish and Game receives roughly $45 million in sport fishing license revenue each year. The sport fishing industry produces over $2.3 billion in retail sales, $1.2 billion in wages and salaries, 43,000 jobs, and $224 million in state taxes. In some Sierra communities, sport-fishing tourism provides almost the entire economic base for the community.

Despite increased license fees, California’s hatcheries are experiencing decreased funding and have had difficulties delivering an adequate number of fish. In previous years, the Department of Fish and Game terminated several seasonal employees at the height of fishing season. This bill will completely fund hatcheries with license sales revenue, so it will not take from the state’s already overdrawn general fund.

“As rumor spreads that hatcheries are slowing or closing down their operations, we will see a decline in license sales, and consequently fishermen, causing a financial strain on many rural communities,” stated Ed Inwood of the Mono County Fisheries Commission. “This bill will ensure the vitality of this industry and the economic well being of many rural areas.”

This bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Assemblyman Cogdill represents the 25th Assembly District, which includes all or part of the counties of Calaveras, Fresno, Madera, Mariposa, Mono, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne.

###




James "Brad" Willis
CSEA Bargaining Unit 11 Negotiating Council
Mojave River Hatchery
Victorville,CA
mojavekroc@msn.com or
jwillis@dfg.ca.gov

What are some of the OPPOSERS' point of view??? I like to get both sides of the big picture.
I already sent my leter of support anyways. It really does only take less than 1 min. or round about.

Well, as of right now, there is no registered opposition. However, when the bill was in the first committee, the wild trout people spoke against the bill. They are anti-hatchery. They would like to see all fishing with 0 take, catch and release only. I have no problem with designating some waters with C&R. The dept is supposed to designate 25 miles of stream and one lake per year by law. Making all waters C&R is unrealistic. It kind of excludes fishing for children and people who don't flyfish.

The other opposition to the bill is from DFG itself. They don't think that the legislature should be telling the dept how to spend their money. Well, actually the money is being spent unwisely and illegally. Fish and Game Code 711c says in so many words that fishing license revenues shall be used for fishing programs only and shall not be used for non game programs. They are spending fishing license revenues for whatever purpose they feel like.

Assemblyman Cogdill met with the new Fish and Game Director to see what percentage of the revenue would be acceptable. He would agree to no percentage. If the bill does not pass, 4 or more hatcheries will be closed. Does the dept have a plan on how to plant waters where hatcheries will be closed? NOPE

The Legislature's job is to create legislation brought on by requests of the citizens of the state.

In some rural communities, sportfishing tourism is the whole economy. Take for example Mono and Inyo counties. Almost every business in those counties is benefitted by sportfishing. From the gas stations to the restuarants, sportfishing is what brings them money. Trout fishing fuels a $3 billion economy in California.

DFG would have you believe that the bill will take funds from other programs. Well, if the programs are not supposed to be funded with our fishing license dollars, then it might. No one is proposing an expansion of the hatchery program. This bill only keeps California's existing hatcheries operating. DFG is planning on closing Hot Creek, Mojave River, and Merced River Hatcheries. Mad River Hatchery was closed on April 1st. There are also looking at possibly closing Mt. Whitney Hatchery. Mt. Whitney and Hot Creek provide 2/3 of the trout eggs for all DFG hatcheries.

So far,42 Assembly Members have committed to co-authoring the bill. There are only 80 members in the Assembly. Many senators will also join up in the fight. This is how popular this bill is in the Legislature. This bill is a matter of fairness. Why should anglers pay for DFG programs that are not fishing related?

I can also tell you that most DFG employees in the field as well as headquarters, who are involved with fishing programs, want the bill to pass.

There will still be a big struggle. Even if the bill makes it through the Legislature, the Governor could veto it. The Governor needs to know how important hatcheries are to anglers.






James "Brad" Willis
CSEA Bargaining Unit 11 Negotiating Council
Mojave River Hatchery
Victorville,CA
mojavekroc@msn.com or
jwillis@dfg.ca.gov

Good info. I hope it passes.