Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 63

Thread: BIG Kenai sockeye forecast for 2016

  1. #1
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default BIG Kenai sockeye forecast for 2016

    4.7 million expected this summer out of 7.1 million to UCI

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/ap.../631907582.pdf
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  2. #2
    Member akhunter3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    824

    Default

    Awesome news! Hopefully this pans out.
    Nurse by night, Alaska adventurer by day!

  3. #3
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Serious legislative discussions about a new sockeye stamp went no where last year, but seems to be gaining traction in this year's fiscal crunch.

    http://www.adn.com/article/20160324/...ng-and-fishing
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  4. #4
    Member Col. F Rodder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    295

    Default

    I can see a $15 stamp for non residents but up to $150 thats crazy. For residents and or dip netters that will go over like a "fart in church"

  5. #5
    Member kenaibow fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    2,039

    Default

    I actually like the idea, I think a $15 dollar stamp is fine for residents.........as for none well I think $150 is a bit much, but I don't think they should get away with a $15 dollar stamp. I actually think they should combine a King/Red stamp and make it like $20 or some thing like that.....maybe $30?
    I think there should be some thing in the reg that states U.S. citizens pay a lower rate verses people from other countries all together. But whatever the answer is, I feel the people that utilize the resource should pay for it and help out with funding regardless of the states economic situation.

  6. #6

    Default

    I generally think AK has been pretty fair to us non-residents, but if they think they can make up for their fiscal irresponsibility by beating up the non-residents I think they're gonna be sorry.
    I bring my wife and 2 daughters...that's 600 bucks (if they went for 150/pp) and that's just crazy, frankly. I'm already in for several thousand (minimum) to make the trip...theres a tipping point, and 600 is it.
    I know, I know...don't let the door hit me in the butt on the way out...it's just sad.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    1,592

    Default

    I've got no problem with paying extra to catch reds. Maybe something along these lines: Resident angler = $25; non resident angler = $50; alien non-resident = $100; dip net license = $50.

  8. #8
    Member 0321Tony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Sterling, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    Eventually there will be a tax or license or fee that we will have to pay to simply breathe and the government will pass it off as being for some sort of special funding but that money will go back into the general fund. Then they will waste that money and look for somewhere else to steal money.
    Now if the government can guarantee that every penny of this "tag" will go back into restoration or enforcement and the first legislator that even attempts to pull a single dollar from this account for something else will be brought up on charges and put in prison then I am not in any way shape of form for any more fees.
    How many taxes, tags, fees, licenses, and any other form of extortion are we going to let them get away with. This money will find itself in the general fund providing abortions to some junkie mom or some other handout and very little if any will find itself to the river.

    Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Member kenaibow fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    2,039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0321Tony View Post
    Eventually there will be a tax or license or fee that we will have to pay to simply breathe and the government will pass it off as being for some sort of special funding but that money will go back into the general fund. Then they will waste that money and look for somewhere else to steal money.
    Now if the government can guarantee that every penny of this "tag" will go back into restoration or enforcement and the first legislator that even attempts to pull a single dollar from this account for something else will be brought up on charges and put in prison then I am not in any way shape of form for any more fees.
    How many taxes, tags, fees, licenses, and any other form of extortion are we going to let them get away with. This money will find itself in the general fund providing abortions to some junkie mom or some other handout and very little if any will find itself to the river.

    Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
    Actually all the money spent on hunt/fish licenses tags ext. does go directly to ADFG. So that is a start but after that only they control where it is spent. And I generally agree with how or where they choose to spend the funds. I also agree with you on that break down Gary. And just a thought but look at how much people are charged to hunt and fish in the lower 48's. I have seen and heard of people spending well over a grand just to do so. So I don't think it is totally unreasonable to ask none residents/alien non residents to pay for the opportunity, what they pay shouldn't be out right outlandish but it shouldn't be 15 bucks either. And in particular I think the alien non residents should pay more. Kinda like they do to us. Just my two cents.

  10. #10
    Member 0321Tony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Sterling, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenaibow fan View Post
    Actually all the money spent on hunt/fish licenses tags ext. does go directly to ADFG. So that is a start but after that only they control where it is spent. And I generally agree with how or where they choose to spend the funds. I also agree with you on that break down Gary. And just a thought but look at how much people are charged to hunt and fish in the lower 48's. I have seen and heard of people spending well over a grand just to do so. So I don't think it is totally unreasonable to ask none residents/alien non residents to pay for the opportunity, what they pay shouldn't be out right outlandish but it shouldn't be 15 bucks either. And in particular I think the alien non residents should pay more. Kinda like they do to us. Just my two cents.
    But they're trying to push it through as funding for bank habitat restoration. Then if that's the way they push it through then that's what it needs to be used for, every penny of it. Don't tell me that they need it to fund bank habitat and then once passed spend it on a hatchery in the southeast.

    Don't get the idea that I don't support enforcement because I do and I wish we had the funding to patrol more area as well as the dipnetters more closely. If I remember correctly the king stamp was supposed to be for only 2 years when first implemented.
    I just get fed up with being charged another fee or tax or pay for a new stamp or tag and be lied to about what the money will be used for. I would rather them just come out and tell us that we squandered our money and now we're charging you another fee so we can get more of your money to do with what ever we want. Like spend 250k on a new supercub.

    Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Makes it all HELLA-MORE palatable if we the payors can be certain that all of the increased rec/PU fish taxes go right back to ADFG/Parks/DNR to specifically manage habitat and/or monitor/enforce the existing rec/PU sockeye fisheries.

    Most would OPPOSE the measure if the funds weren't earmarked for their intended purpose.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Soldotna, AK
    Posts
    254

    Default

    150$ for a sockeye stamp is going to put a serious dent in the tourism industry. Not only will that will reflect on the guides but also on the restaurant industry, B&Bs, Hotels, Coffee shops, Hardware stores etc etc. Kenai/Soldotna is what it is because of the tourism industry. 15$-40$pp would be fine and I would fully support, but 150$ for a non-resident...Thats nuts. For a family of 4 that means 600$ in just sockeye stamps not including the actual fishing license itself. That will be a serious tipping point for many travelers. After all many of the tourists that come here come here because it is affordable, or at least more affordable than a remote fly in. Make a sockeye stamp, but make it affordable so blue collar people can still go fishing! For a non-resident to go fishing with this proposal they might pay up to 400$ in licenses.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    2

    Default

    I am a non-res. I buy a lic. and not the stamp. So I fish for Silvers and release the Reds, that's just crazy if you think that the Reds will not have a pointless mortality rate! Put the whole deal on the other foot, how many "residents" would be fishing with those kind of costs!

  14. #14
    Member ysr_racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Happily in So Cal.
    Posts
    583

    Default

    How do you guys think Bernie is going to pay for all the "free" stuff
    brad g.
    So Cal, USA
    Visit my Sporting Clays website
    http://www.ysr-racer.com

  15. #15
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    http://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_docum...29&docid=53317

    In a nutshell the proposed NR sockeye taxes will be...

    $15 for 1 day
    $30 for 3 days
    $45 for 1 week
    $75 for 2 weeks
    $150 for the season

    These are identical to the proposed NR king taxes.

    These are in addition to the identical proposed baseline NR fishing taxes.

    So for the guy wanting to spend the entire month of July pursuing BOTH species, the total fishing tax would be $450.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  16. #16
    Member DRIFTER_016's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Yellowknife, NWT
    Posts
    3,318

    Default

    I already pay $145 for my license.
    Which is pretty much twice as much as any other state I've fished.
    Ain't no way I would spend $150 for a sockeye stamp.
    Alaska is getting worse than BC with all these fish taxes they are implementing.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Makes it all HELLA-MORE palatable if we the payors can be certain that all of the increased rec/PU fish taxes go right back to ADFG/Parks/DNR to specifically manage habitat and/or monitor/enforce the existing rec/PU sockeye fisheries.

    Most would OPPOSE the measure if the funds weren't earmarked for their intended purpose.

    More likely it will go towards filling in wetlands and paving parking lots.

  18. #18
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    A lot of licenses have already been sold for 2016. If this passes, you think they will wait until 2017 to implement.... or will they make it retro to Jan 1 2016?
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Soldotna, AK
    Posts
    254

    Default

    So... Who do we write to to complain?

  20. #20

    Default

    Wow this thread sure took a sharp turn. I'll pile on. For our 2 week trips we now pay $80 each. With the proposed new tag we'd pay just shy of twice as much. Talk about a drastic increase! Almost double in one year! That ain't right. By the way guys, my state (LA) has much more in common with yours than you might think. We both have economies based to a large degree on extraction of oil and gas, timber, fishing, and tourism. We have a couple things going for us that aren't as big for you like shipping and refining. But our state budget is in as bad or worse shape than yours. So far we haven't been trying to squeeze the tourism industry. Well at least not as obviously. Our sales tax is going up 1% soon, to 10% in some places.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •