There has been some serious talk behind the scenes lately about instituting a Sockeye stamp. It was a subject taken up recently by the KRSMA board (brought up by their legislative liaison), and I keep hearing tidbits about it, but can't exactly pin down what it would consist of or where the money would go. My best assumption is that it would be similar to the King Stamp?
I thought a good first step would be to look at where the money from the King stamp has been spent, and how that has helped the resource. All I've found so far is that it is spent on things like habitat restoration, and often used to match federal funding for habitat projects and things of that nature. All of a sudden it makes perfect sense to me why some Non-Governmental Nonprofits are pushing hard for a Sockeye stamp - would it replace lost funding from reduced King stamp sales?
All I can do is guess, and I'm sure that someone has a little more info than me on this subject. As we would all pay this extra tax, (yes, I am a commercial fisherman, but I'm pretty sure I have bought a King stamp every year it has been required, and I would no doubt also have to buy a sockeye stamp) it would be good to examine where this money would go, and the best indicator is to look at where it's went in the past.
To be honest, I'd be supportive of this stamp if the money went to help fund the required riparian habitat assessment studies that ADFG is NOT doing - I've heard funding is an issue. Something tells me, however, that the money may get diverted to some NGO's such as the "Educational Nonprofit" that produced the most recent Kenai River habitat report, which does nothing more than outline many of the federally funded habitat restoration projects they have conducted on the Kenai. I'll bet my king stamp fees helped fund this organization, their projects, and probably some of their employees' six-figure salaries.
But like I said, I'm speculating. Anyone have any info on this?