Charging kids to fish
The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs announced a proposal for fishing license increases that includes a $2 junior fishing license feeand a $1 issuing agent fee. I asked my so-called fellow sportsmen why they would make such a proposal. They have many answers. First, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission would be eligible for $3.25 in federal funding for every $2 junior license they sell. They will have to sell 190,477 junior licenses to equal a million dollars. Compare this to the $270 million dollars needed for repairs to hatcheries and it is a very insignificant amount.
Another reason they cite is that children have to buy junior hunting licenses. Why not a fishing license? Children also have to take hunter/trapper education courses before they get hunting licenses. There is no course requirement for fishing.
Remarks were made that it will give them something to be proud of. I would agree if they had to earn it, but they don’t.
Children do not need, and most do not carry, identification. Junior hunters carry hunter safety cards and are with an adult. How do you identify a kid fishing? Are we going to invent another state program to give photo IDs to kids? When the water conservation officers are out checking licenses, how can they be sure this child is the one to whom it was issued? This will become a nightmare. Are we going to require children to fish with an adult?
We are at a crossroads. We need leadership, not a finger-in-the-dike mentality. We need to do more to encourage and less to prohibit fishing and hunting. I see a junior license as a very prohibitive step. We need changes to encourage our young people to get involved. Additional licensing and fees are not the answer.
We have to look for alternatives to the Fish Commission’s funding problem. Why can’t sportsmen help provide labor for some of the hatchery repairs? We have saddled future generations with correcting all our mistakes and given them the unenviable task of dealing with diminishing habitat and wildlife populations.
Now is the time to exhibit some leadership. We need to let all our legislators know how we feel. We need to preserve hunting and fishing, not drive kids away. At one time I proudly proclaimed I was a member of the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, but not anymore.
James H. Houston
Hermitage
Brownsville stands to lose
The view of the Herald-Standard regarding Mayor Ryan and Ohwista Ko: Wah was printed in the Nov. 9 editorial section. The following statements were made:
– A ministerial-led effort to circulate petitions in attempt to thwart the plans of Ohwsita Ko: Wah.
Fact: No such effort exists. However, a group called Brownsville First has been founded by a broad coalition of Brownsville residents including ministers and business owners and public officials and taxpaying residents. This group was founded to preserve the character and protect the future of Brownsville. It is true that this group believes a casino will cause greater harm than good to the Brownsville Area. Therefore, the group is in opposition to plans for a Native American casino.
– The investors are the ones who stand to reap the greatest riches or suffer the greatest losses.
Fact: The greatest losses associated with casinos are not with the investors but with the host community. The host community will require additional infrastructure, maintenance and services. The host community will see an increase in crime, bankruptcy and social problems. The host community will experience an increase in taxes. (National Gambling Impact Study Commission, National Council on Problem Gambling, Gamblers Anonymous).
– That’s capitalism
Fact: A Native American casino requires sovereign nation status. Taxes are not required and the economic welfare of the host community is not accounted for. The cost of a casino far outweighs the benefits. For example, when Florida considered legalized gambling, their office of planning and budget estimated that for every $1 of new tax revenues, abut $8-$12 of casino related costs would be incurred by taxpayers.
– Ohwista Ko: Wah is just starting the lengthy process of obtaining legal recognition to continue with this venture.
Fact: This business is not just starting but has been pursuing this venture for over 10 years. Ohwista Ko: Wah is the latest version of this pursuit and was founded by the Liggetts in 2002 with their home address as the place of operation. Furthermore, this business has no basis for legal recognition and cannot legally be considered a Native American venture.
Mark A. Kovscek
Brownsville