Could Federal Hatcheries Be In Peril

[gotmuddy]

...and when the government makes it possible to make money it's called "stimulus", or "pork", depending on whether or not you're the one making the money.

the only way the government can make it possible to make money is if they decrease taxes.

[Tim Smith]

the only way the government can make it possible to make money is if they decrease taxes.

Well would be the point of privatizing the hatcheries, Muddy.

[Justin Spencer]

the only way the government can make it possible to make money is if they decrease taxes.

The only way to afford decreasing taxes is to decrease spending by getting rid of unneccesary programs, like federal fish hatcheries. (For the record I hope they don't do this!)

[snagged in outlet 3]

This was posted by Steve Dally on an Arkansas forum.

It seems the corp has it both ways, without paying for trout mitigation.

"Discussing it with a couple of people this morning who hav been reading this stuff they were amazed the Corp receives a such a large slice of the generation revenue AND gets the year to year operations and maintenance bill footed by the Presidential Budget, and special capital works come from the Budget too and yet don't pay for mitigation

Perhaps this state of affairs was understandable when the dam was first built with a much lower population/power demand. Now Bull Shoals is paid for and its a cash cow.

The Corp simply should meet the bill with an earmarked very specification allocation to meet the needs of the mitigation hatcheries, including the $ in deferred maintenance _ after all that was the intent of the statement in the budget from the Commander in Chief"

SIO3

[Outside Bend]

This was posted by Steve Dally on an Arkansas forum.

It seems the corp has it both ways, without paying for trout mitigation.

"Discussing it with a couple of people this morning who hav been reading this stuff they were amazed the Corp receives a such a large slice of the generation revenue AND gets the year to year operations and maintenance bill footed by the Presidential Budget, and special capital works come from the Budget too and yet don't pay for mitigation

Perhaps this state of affairs was understandable when the dam was first built with a much lower population/power demand. Now Bull Shoals is paid for and its a cash cow.

The Corp simply should meet the bill with an earmarked very specification allocation to meet the needs of the mitigation hatcheries, including the $ in deferred maintenance _ after all that was the intent of the statement in the budget from the Commander in Chief"

SIO3

Thanks SIO3, that's what I was trying to get at

[Justin Spencer]

Am I correct in saying that the Corps of Engineers is a government run program? If so where do their profits go. No doubt the first thing any excess money should go to is mitigation of resources effected by their actions, but I'm sure this is not the case. Without knowing what kind of revenue the county and state gets from the generation it is hard to know who should pay for the hatcheries. Makes sense to me that everyone who profits should help pay (Federal, state, local govts), as well as some sort of yearly trout tag that should be required on any of the stocked waters.

As for privatization, other states that have urban trout programs buy fish from private hatcheries already and there are many out there, Missouri even buys fish from time to time if shortages occur in their own hatcheries. Westover Farms is an example of a private (or now bank owned) hatchery that probably makes more money selling fish than the resort brings in. Depending on how the feds would relinquish control of the hatcheries, there is no doubt in my mind that privatization could work in a way that the owner could make a living and the area could still harbor world class trout fisheries. Unfortunately I'm sure the feds would somehow find a way to make it very difficult for a private company to meet all the requirements neccesary to run a large scale operation such as this.

[Danoinark]

Here is another thread of interest with different perspectives on this topic:

http://flyfishingarkansasandmissouri.yuku.com/topic/7008/Budget-Shortfalls-for-Hatcheries

[Tim Smith]

Am I correct in saying that the Corps of Engineers is a government run program? If so where do their profits go. No doubt the first thing any excess money should go to is mitigation of resources effected by their actions, but I'm sure this is not the case. Without knowing what kind of revenue the county and state gets from the generation it is hard to know who should pay for the hatcheries. Makes sense to me that everyone who profits should help pay (Federal, state, local govts), as well as some sort of yearly trout tag that should be required on any of the stocked waters.

I agree the fund from power generation are a logical source for these funds (although it's not clear to me the Corps collects any of that). If the dams are a cash cow you can be sure there are people lined up to collect who will be hopping mad if their financial ox gets gored. To get any money out of the COE, you'd have to sue them and the people paying the higher electric bills may not feel especially happy to take on that burden.

As for privatization, other states that have urban trout programs buy fish from private hatcheries already and there are many out there, Missouri even buys fish from time to time if shortages occur in their own hatcheries. Westover Farms is an example of a private (or now bank owned) hatchery that probably makes more money selling fish than the resort brings in. Depending on how the feds would relinquish control of the hatcheries, there is no doubt in my mind that privatization could work in a way that the owner could make a living and the area could still harbor world class trout fisheries. Unfortunately I'm sure the feds would somehow find a way to make it very difficult for a private company to meet all the requirements neccesary to run a large scale operation such as this.

This is exactly right as well. But believe me you don't want the government just letting hatcheries do whatever they want to do. Thats a necessary cost for all aquaculture. There are enough numbskulls in the world for one of them to fall into a position of responsibility who is sloppy with disease issues or parasites or who thinks that snakeheads would be a great fish to stock, or maybe wels.....and hey shouldn't we try that freshwater shark from Africa...or that genetically engineered carp....You gotta have oversight because some of those effects would never go away. Genes last longer than nuclear waste.

[Tim Smith]

Here is another thread of interest with different perspectives on this topic:

http://flyfishingarkansasandmissouri.yuku.com/topic/7008/Budget-Shortfalls-for-Hatcheries

Interesting thread. You should advocate directly for the hatcheries here if you're leaning that way, Dano. Plenty of good reasons to do so and it's certainly the most direct route toward keeping trout densities high.

Do you think people should join Friends of Norfork Hatchery?

[flytyer57]

Do you think people should join Friends of Norfork Hatchery?

I tried doing that this AM and was redirected to PayPal which I will not use, so I didn't join.