Hatchery closure--help keep Wolf Creek Hatchery open

[Basswipe]

I have no problem with the trout hatchery and supporting the fisheries in general, but the fact remains that we've stretched the Federal Budget possibly beyond repair. Something has to be done NOW.

I don't think it's the job of the federal government to run a trout hatchery. Turn it over to the state. There's revenue to be generated with the program and capacity there.

We, as people that use the outdoors pay our own way in this state. Hunting and fishing licenses pays the bills. Why should this be any different? The people that want to elk hunt continue to pay for that program with the tag and lottery system.

Maybe the best plan would be get a consortium of states that get fish from the hatchery to take it over and fund it themselves. I'd think that a group of 4 or 5 states could share the cost rather easily. Add a dollar to the fishing license and a few bucks to the trout stamps in each of those states to pay for the operations and share the fish equally.

Regardless of how it's solved, the Feds don't need to be running fish farms in Ky. They're already 14 trillion in debt.

[Tim_T]

If they stop funding the hatchery there will be a ton of lawsuits. They would be rbeaking a long standing contract that was agreed upon when they destroyed the original fishery. It would seem to me that the only way they could get out of it would be to remove the dam and let it revert back to the native fishery it was before they built the dam.

[DJD]

I have no problem with the trout hatchery and supporting the fisheries in general, but the fact remains that we've stretched the Federal Budget possibly beyond repair. Something has to be done NOW.

I don't think it's the job of the federal government to run a trout hatchery. Turn it over to the state. There's revenue to be generated with the program and capacity there.

We, as people that use the outdoors pay our own way in this state. Hunting and fishing licenses pays the bills. Why should this be any different? The people that want to elk hunt continue to pay for that program with the tag and lottery system.

Maybe the best plan would be get a consortium of states that get fish from the hatchery to take it over and fund it themselves. I'd think that a group of 4 or 5 states could share the cost rather easily. Add a dollar to the fishing license and a few bucks to the trout stamps in each of those states to pay for the operations and share the fish equally.

Regardless of how it's solved, the Feds don't need to be running fish farms in Ky. They're already 14 trillion in debt.

Yep that about sums it up for me as well. Once you take the emotion out of it.... it has to come to money and budgets. The gubment is a very inefficient money hungry machine and in the long run the less they have to do the better off we will be.

[Tim_T]

Would someone please explain to me exactly what the US Fish and Wildlife Service is supposed to do? This is not about emotion it is a legal question. They signed a legal agrement in order for them to build the dam. Either remove the dam or abide by the agreement imo.

Is everyone overlooking this part?: Each dollar ($1.00) of rainbow trout hatchery expenditures is associated with $67.19 in economic output.

[DJD]

Is everyone overlooking this part?: Each dollar ($1.00) of rainbow trout hatchery expenditures is associated with $67.19 in economic output.

I read that part Tim and asked myself if this is true, concrete fact and without a doubt then why is this being proposed? If it's true then this is ridiculous...I agree with you there but I'm a skeptic on data that seems so outlandish when considering the proposal.

Was this a snippet of info taken from some data just to support there cause? Is it false? Are the powers that be idiots? I know the answer to that one but had to ask....

The gubment does very few things that makes sense to me so maybe this just comes down to other folks fighting harder for their cause than this one. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and the silent one gets the shaft.

[Tim_T]

I read that part Tim and asked myself if this is true, concrete fact and without a doubt then why is this being proposed? If it's true then this is ridiculous...I agree with you there but I'm a skeptic on data that seems so outlandish when considering the proposal.

Was this a snippet of info taken from some data just to support there cause? Is it false? Are the powers that be idiots? I know the answer to that one but had to ask....

The gubment does very few things that makes sense to me so maybe this just comes down to other folks fighting harder for their cause than this one. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and the silent one gets the shaft.

It came straight from the Fed's themselves, so who knows. It was in the report issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servcie.

IMO they are using this as a political ploy where they can say "look at us, we cut all this wasteful spending" when in reality they are cutting something that is profitable.