How much do I love fishing?

[rvrwdr]

I'm one of those guys who lives just over the border from Calif, here in Reno. I went down to the fly shop this weekend to get my license so I could hit the Truckee a few miles west of my home. Out of state license for non-Califonrnians is now $100. I went ahead and paid for it, but jeesh, sounds a little steep to me. I think they jacked it up knowing that we are all fanatics and would probably pay even more....But I wonder, what is your limit, and do you think this is fair?

[Darian]

At the risk of being called a.... (gasp!!!) Dittohead :lol: :lol: :lol: , I agree with Carl. When I go to Nevada, Oregon, Baja or anywhere outside my state boundaries, I have to pay a fee for the license. 8) 8) It is legitimate to feel that the fee may high but not that they're unfair. License fees go toward funding fish/wildlife causes within this state and your own (with any luck at all).... 8) 8) To qoute a wise member of this BB, "if you want to dance you have to pay the band." :D :D :D

[mems]

Aloha, I don't mind paying to fish, and I hope the money goes to good use. I always buy the liscense in another state, infact I kinda like to collect them. Here in Hawaii you only need a liscense to fresh water fish, the ocean is wide open, and that is great, but we have no protection. I guess you get what you pay for. Mems.

[Dave Neal]

At least it's good for the year. A One Day skiing lift ticket to Mammoth Mtn. (or most other resorts) is almost that much... :shock:

With the signing of new version AB 7, CA hatcheries AND the Wild & Heritage Trout Program is getting a shot in the arm...money wise. At least a portion of that license fee will go directly to benefit (fresh water) trout you catch on the Truckee and elsewhere.

I don't want to think about how much I would spend on a license to fish...I'm afraid to think what that figure would be?

[flycaster5]

Every year I add to the madness. This year, it's out-of-state fees for Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Montana. That isn't to mention the temporary licenses I get for BC & (every few years) Alaska.

I could stay in state and probably get an extra fly rod every year instead, but how much fun would that be? Oh, wait. . . .

[rvrwdr]

I agree with you guys. 100 is a milestone with anything. I am sure most of us have spent more on far more useless things. When i think that an hour on a psychiatrist's couch costs as much the $100 for a whole year looks to be a very inexpensive alternative :D

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

Back in the 1960s we would drive from Sacramento up to the 'Gold Fields' on the lower Yuba River to fly fish for American Shad.

I think I was with Joe Shirshac (85), Georgie Martin (late) and Henry Starr (late) on one trip up there.

Back then we complained all the way up and back about the $3.00 per car load they charges up there to drive right in on the south side of the river right at the Daguerre Dam.

The nerve!!!!

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I would hope they do something with that fishing license money beside shifting it quietly over to the 'General Fund'.

I have heard tail of that deal for too many years.

Not the CA DF&G's fault. It's our lovely politicians who pull stuff like that yearly while we are happily having a wonderful live here in the good old USA.

[slim]

Yes, it is excessive! Just got my Wash. license the other week (non-resident), with parking permit and steel report card for about $49.
If the money paid to the state were used for ONLY fishing related issues, then I wouldn't have a problem with the fees being "somewhat" higher, but to answer the question-YES, $100 is too much, though there is some damn fine fishing in Cal. Good excuse to fish more and "get your moneys worth." :D
slim