DFG Diverts License Money To Global Warming - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

Croaker Dave · 09-11-2012, 09:21 AM

What do you get when you pay your fishing license fee? More useless jobs for government bureaucrats. Time for another letter writing campaign.

“DFG Launches Climate College to Better Understand, Address Climate Change.”

I learned a lot from this earnest news release. For example, I didn’t know the DFG had a “Climate Science and Renewable Energy Branch.” I always thought the DFG was focused on fish and game, critters and habitat, not windmills and snowpacks. The state has other departments to study that, right?

This Climate College, the DFG proudly noted in its press release, is being launched “to increase climate literacy.” (Huh?) …The release promised “lectures, presentations, online discussions, reading assignments and a final project.” The reward for completing the course? A “certificate of completion.” And “the opportunity to show their final project to DFG leadership.” Oh joy.
…
The release went on to say: “The college is another initiative that keeps California at the forefront of climate-related planning and action.” OK, maybe there’s a place for that in state government. I don’t think it’s the Department of Fish and Game (emphasis on fish and game).
…
When Californians forked over $52.9 million last year for fishing licenses and stamps, and $22.7 million for hunting licenses and tags — a grand total of more than $75 million — I’m betting they didn’t think it would be used to help develop a Climate College or to fund the salary of a person called “Climate Change Adviser.”

http://www.chicoer.com/editorials/ci...ur-tax-dollars

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/Climate_and_En...imate_College/

wiredantz · 09-11-2012, 09:25 AM

and here i thought the money went to pay DFG Wardens and fish hatcheries

well i can't say it was a surprise either

mtnbykr2 · 09-11-2012, 10:59 AM

can you say "Californication"...no surprise here either, actually it is expected

TEAMFISH · 09-11-2012, 10:59 AM

It's like giving that homeless dude standing on the freeway offramp a dollar. You hope it's going to a good cause but down deep you know your just buying crack for him.

blitzburgh · 09-11-2012, 11:53 AM

Completely f#cking ridiculous.

PE.rider · 09-11-2012, 12:58 PM

They don't call CA the left coast for nothing... I always thought the funds went to fisheries mgmt and DFG warden personnel...

If they want to study climate warming of other similar topics, shouldn't they apply for a grant from the Dept of the Interior or EPA?

GregAndrew · 09-11-2012, 01:08 PM

Just another means to get "Scientific studies" that confirm their suspicions that the California Lizzard Fish and Sand Dab are 90% depleted. So they can close off the bottom 40 feet of water to fishing, and require reels with line counters.

tagyak · 09-11-2012, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PE.rider

They don't call CA the left coast for nothing... I always thought the funds went to fisheries mgmt and DFG warden personnel...

If they want to study climate warming of other similar topics, shouldn't they apply for a grant from the Dept of the Interior or EPA?

NO, that would be TOO logical and the LEFT SIDE of the brain isn't able to process logic as wells as the RIGHT SIDE

MrM · 09-11-2012, 04:33 PM

This is stupid... If you're going to regulate fishing, regulate fishing. Don't go all Dick Cheney on us. When was the last time state funded research actually did something groundbreaking? It seems like the only people who care enough to research a topic and have an impact are the college professors.

End of rant. So how 'bout those Rams, eh? If anything, they are consistant.

Fisherman4454 · 09-14-2012, 04:20 PM

How much out of that $75 mil do u really think this costs the state? Doesn't seem like anything to get riled up about..

Fiskadoro · 09-16-2012, 03:17 AM

Yep the DFG has set up a series of classes (essentially lectures) where some "scientific experts" in the field will educate DFG personnel about any possible implications that global warming will have (if it exists) on the fish, birds, and game we fish or hunt for.

They are also going to allow the public to attend these lectures when they are not completely filled with DFG personnel.

This is not about funding bogus research it's about DFG educating their own personnel. My take is that if global warming might possibly have some kind of negative impact on our fish, I want the people who manage them to know about it. I also like the fact they will be open to the public, because that way we can keep tabs on what they are being told.

Fisheries like our Salmon fishery are highly dependent on water flow and temperatures in the rivers they spawn, and even small changes can cause huge problems.

Remember the record fish kill in the Klamath in 2002? Where something like 50 thousand Salmon died before they could spawn?

That happened because politicians not scientists said the fish could survive with less flow and higher water temperatures.

Well they didn't, they just all died.

Personally I'd rather they spend money on educating DFG people to possible water quality issues that could impact fishing, then spend it on overtime when they are counting dead fish after something goes wrong with our water quality.

If and I do say if global warming might have some negative impact on our fish, I not only want the people who manage our fishery to know about it before it hits the fan, but I also want the DFG to blame water quality not fisherman if something goes wrong.

Jim

Fiskadoro · 09-16-2012, 05:52 AM

Oh one more thing. Statistically the planet is warming up. Does water temperature effect fish, and water quality? Damn straight it does.

Even if man has absolutely nothing to do with it, and this is just a natural cycle, the temperature change is occurring, so don't you think the people in charge of managing our fishery should be aware of that change and the potential implications it has for our fishery in the future?

I'd say they need to know about the issues warmer temps could cause whether the climate change is man made or not.

I certainly understand why people are skeptics when it comes to global warming, but that doesn't mean the DFG should ignore the fact that planet is warming, or ignore the fact that the change in temperature may have a impact on our fish, water quality, or fish management down the line.

Jim

Croaker Dave · 09-16-2012, 03:16 PM

Well it all depends on what they're teaching and who is teaching it. Wether they are getting their info from populist activist scientists or just the straight shooters. Will they teach the physics of heat exchange and gas exchange between the ocean and air? Because most of what people report in the papers as science defies the laws of thermodynamics. Will they tell them that the earth is in crisis, or will they teach them the big picture on ocean temperatures that shows a long term cooling even as we come out of the Little Ice Age?

09-11-2012, 09:21 AM	#1
Croaker Dave Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: OC Posts: 171	DFG Diverts License Money To Global Warming What do you get when you pay your fishing license fee? More useless jobs for government bureaucrats. Time for another letter writing campaign. “DFG Launches Climate College to Better Understand, Address Climate Change.” I learned a lot from this earnest news release. For example, I didn’t know the DFG had a “Climate Science and Renewable Energy Branch.” I always thought the DFG was focused on fish and game, critters and habitat, not windmills and snowpacks. The state has other departments to study that, right? This Climate College, the DFG proudly noted in its press release, is being launched “to increase climate literacy.” (Huh?) …The release promised “lectures, presentations, online discussions, reading assignments and a final project.” The reward for completing the course? A “certificate of completion.” And “the opportunity to show their final project to DFG leadership.” Oh joy. … The release went on to say: “The college is another initiative that keeps California at the forefront of climate-related planning and action.” OK, maybe there’s a place for that in state government. I don’t think it’s the Department of Fish and Game (emphasis on fish and game). … When Californians forked over $52.9 million last year for fishing licenses and stamps, and $22.7 million for hunting licenses and tags — a grand total of more than $75 million — I’m betting they didn’t think it would be used to help develop a Climate College or to fund the salary of a person called “Climate Change Adviser.” http://www.chicoer.com/editorials/ci...ur-tax-dollars http://www.dfg.ca.gov/Climate_and_En...imate_College/

09-11-2012, 09:25 AM	#2
wiredantz Currently @ MLO Territory Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Under the Shadow Posts: 2,290	and here i thought the money went to pay DFG Wardens and fish hatcheries well i can't say it was a surprise either __________________ Team: Disbanded You only have one chance in this life...make the right decision(s)...so you don't regret it

09-11-2012, 10:59 AM	#3
mtnbykr2 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: newbury park ca Posts: 2,323	can you say "Californication"...no surprise here either, actually it is expected __________________

09-11-2012, 11:53 AM	#5
blitzburgh Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Menifee Posts: 2,509	Completely f#cking ridiculous. __________________ ”The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” ~Thomas Jefferson.........maybe

09-11-2012, 04:33 PM	#9
MrM Senior Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: The Matrix Posts: 643	This is stupid... If you're going to regulate fishing, regulate fishing. Don't go all Dick Cheney on us. When was the last time state funded research actually did something groundbreaking? It seems like the only people who care enough to research a topic and have an impact are the college professors. End of rant. So how 'bout those Rams, eh? If anything, they are consistant. __________________ -Kevin

09-11-2012, 10:59 AM	#4
TEAMFISH Team Kayak Obesessions Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Torrance Posts: 256	It's like giving that homeless dude standing on the freeway offramp a dollar. You hope it's going to a good cause but down deep you know your just buying crack for him.

09-11-2012, 12:58 PM	#6
PE.rider Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: OC, CA Posts: 234	They don't call CA the left coast for nothing... I always thought the funds went to fisheries mgmt and DFG warden personnel... If they want to study climate warming of other similar topics, shouldn't they apply for a grant from the Dept of the Interior or EPA?

09-11-2012, 01:08 PM	#7
GregAndrew Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,384	Just another means to get "Scientific studies" that confirm their suspicions that the California Lizzard Fish and Sand Dab are 90% depleted. So they can close off the bottom 40 feet of water to fishing, and require reels with line counters.

09-14-2012, 04:20 PM	#10
Fisherman4454 Junior Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 19	How much out of that $75 mil do u really think this costs the state? Doesn't seem like anything to get riled up about..

09-16-2012, 03:17 AM	#11
Fiskadoro ....... Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,509	Yep the DFG has set up a series of classes (essentially lectures) where some "scientific experts" in the field will educate DFG personnel about any possible implications that global warming will have (if it exists) on the fish, birds, and game we fish or hunt for. They are also going to allow the public to attend these lectures when they are not completely filled with DFG personnel. This is not about funding bogus research it's about DFG educating their own personnel. My take is that if global warming might possibly have some kind of negative impact on our fish, I want the people who manage them to know about it. I also like the fact they will be open to the public, because that way we can keep tabs on what they are being told. Fisheries like our Salmon fishery are highly dependent on water flow and temperatures in the rivers they spawn, and even small changes can cause huge problems. Remember the record fish kill in the Klamath in 2002? Where something like 50 thousand Salmon died before they could spawn? That happened because politicians not scientists said the fish could survive with less flow and higher water temperatures. Well they didn't, they just all died. Personally I'd rather they spend money on educating DFG people to possible water quality issues that could impact fishing, then spend it on overtime when they are counting dead fish after something goes wrong with our water quality. If and I do say if global warming might have some negative impact on our fish, I not only want the people who manage our fishery to know about it before it hits the fan, but I also want the DFG to blame water quality not fisherman if something goes wrong. Jim

09-16-2012, 05:52 AM	#12
Fiskadoro ....... Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,509	Oh one more thing. Statistically the planet is warming up. Does water temperature effect fish, and water quality? Damn straight it does. Even if man has absolutely nothing to do with it, and this is just a natural cycle, the temperature change is occurring, so don't you think the people in charge of managing our fishery should be aware of that change and the potential implications it has for our fishery in the future? I'd say they need to know about the issues warmer temps could cause whether the climate change is man made or not. I certainly understand why people are skeptics when it comes to global warming, but that doesn't mean the DFG should ignore the fact that planet is warming, or ignore the fact that the change in temperature may have a impact on our fish, water quality, or fish management down the line. Jim

09-16-2012, 03:16 PM	#13
Croaker Dave Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: OC Posts: 171	Well it all depends on what they're teaching and who is teaching it. Wether they are getting their info from populist activist scientists or just the straight shooters. Will they teach the physics of heat exchange and gas exchange between the ocean and air? Because most of what people report in the papers as science defies the laws of thermodynamics. Will they tell them that the earth is in crisis, or will they teach them the big picture on ocean temperatures that shows a long term cooling even as we come out of the Little Ice Age?