Re: Why do recreational fishers pay so much more than commercial?


JuJee Beads, handmade flamework glass beads

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by average jane on October 20, 2003 at 13:19:31:

In Reply to: Re: Why do recreational fishers pay so much more than commercial? posted by Sonke on October 20, 2003 at 08:55:10:

The DFG intentions as you put it are transparent.

IF:

Recreational fishers paid almost $50 million to the state of California in 2001 and they took about 50 million pounds of fish, thus $1 per lb. taken.

During that same period, commercial fishers paid $3.4 million and took over 400 million pounds, thus $0.01 per lb. taken.

AND

You propose to raise fees to your recreational constituents that are not proportional to the commercial industry

THEN:

What is apparent is that you are milking the cash cow of least resistance.

Is there a limit to this imbalance or will the DFG forever continue to increase the tax on the masses, to benefit the few that impact the most?

Let's try this scenario for a change:

Recreational fishers pay $3.4 million to the state of California in the future and they take about 50 million pounds of fish, thus $0.07 per pound

During that same period, commercial fishers pay $50 million and take over 400 million pounds, thus $0.12 per pound

In this case I do not have a problem if you want to increase the recreational fees 150% to obtain parity, and you get more funding!




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]