Made with FlowPaper - Flipbook Maker
Page of 159The No Fee Fish and Game Stamps of Californiaby David R. Torre, ARAIntroductionAn overprint on a stamp frequently stimulates special interest on the part of collectors. The overprint, be it rubber-stamped or printed, is an additional element to be appreciated and studied. Typesetting varieties may be discovered and in examples derived from a rubber stamp in particular, different colors of ink may have been used. More intriguing is the idea that an overprint often implies a usage that is out of the ordinary as compared to that for which regular stamps were issued. An above average rarity factor may be inferred from an overprinted stamp, if it is assumed that the usage was so limited as to preclude a separate stamp from being printed for it.Prior to fish and game stamps being issued in the 1930s, California issued paper hunting and fishing licenses with beautiful designs in multicolor chromolithography. The pictorial licenses were printed starting in 1909 and ended in 1926. During this time, California made use of overprints to designate licenses for specific classifications of hunters and fishermen, aside from residents that had not lost their license (see Figure 1). FIGURE 1. CALIFORNIA MADE EXTENSIVE USE OF OVERPRINTS ON PICTORIAL LICENSES ISSUED FROM 1909 THROUGH 1926.Page of 259In the field of fish and game stamps, the use of over prints is relatively unusual. Small quantities of stamps are routinely printed to serve limited usages without resorting to overprints. The earliest recorded use of an overprint was by Marion County, Kansas, in 1942 (See Figure 2). Remainders of county waterfowl stamps from the previous year were rubber-stamped with the 1942 year date and then put back into service (Torre, 1993). FIGURE 2. THE EARLIEST RECORDED USE OF AN OVERPRINT WAS BY MARION COUNTY IN 1942.Virginia was the first state government to utilize overprints starting in 1944 with their bear- deer damage stamps. The stamps were required to be purchased by sportsmen intending to hunt bear or deer within certain counties in the state. Funds collected from used to reimburse farmers for damage done to their crops by these animals (Vanderford, 1973). Generic stamps depicting a walking bear were overprinted to specify the county in which the stamps were valid (see Figure 3). FIGURE 3. STARTING IN 1944, VIRGINIA OVERPRINTED GENERIC BEAR-DEAR DAMAGE STAMPS TO SPECIFY WHAT COUNTY THEY WERE VALID IN.Page of 359The next state or local government to overprint a fish or game stamp was Indiana in 1957. In the middle of the fishing season the fee charged for trout stamps was increased from one to two dollars. At that time, all 1957 stamps on hand were rubber-stamped with a large “$2.00” to indicate the new fee (see Figure 4). Since the overprint changed the face value of the stamp exclusively, it is correctly classified as a surcharge (Williams, 1990). FIGURE 4. IN 1957 INDIANA APPLIED AN OVERPRINT TO TROUT STAMPS IN ORDER TO INDICATE A MID-SEASON FEE INCREASE.Starting in 1958, California began requiring the purchase of inland fishing stamps. A small portion of those issued the first two years may be found with overprints. The overprints were used to differentiate various classifications of resident sportsmen that were issued licenses and stamps free of charge. Many of the overprints also contain the phrase “NO FEE.” Since this effectively alters the face value of the stamps, they may be said to bear both an overprint and a surcharge.No Fee sport fishing licenses and overprinted stamps were issued to the aged, disabled veterans, Indians and blind persons. Those overprinted “INDIAN” are believed to be the first fish and game stamps issued specifically for use by Native Americans in the United States. Inland fishing stamps are also known to have been overprinted “VETERANS WIFE.” Originally thought to be No Fee stamps, research for this article suggests that they may be more accurately classified as “Reduced Fee” stamps. California continued to use No Fee overprints on other types of fish and game stamps through 1980-81.Very little information has previously been published about these stamps. E. L. Vanderford briefly described most of the No Fee stamps that had been issued up until that time in his Handbook of Fish and Game Stamps, published in 1973. The purpose of this article will be to cover the stamps in detail. All of the stamps that have been recorded will be listed and described. They will be examined in chronological order, as determined by the year of issue of the first stamp in each series. An emphasis will be placed on the legislation, regulations, news releases, etc. which authorized the stamps and explained these extraordinary usages.The author would like to note at the outset that it is primarily due to the efforts of Bill Oliver, longtime chairman of WESTPEX and a true philatelist, that most existing examples of California’s early overprinted stamps have been preserved. It is to Bill that this article is dedicated.Page of 459Post-War CaliforniaCalifornia’s population grew at a tremendous rate during the decade following WWII (see Figure 5). The 44th Biennial Report, issued by the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) for the years 1954-56, referred to the growth rate as “explosive.” According to the report, on July 1, 1946, the population was 9,559,000 and within ten years it had grown by another 4,000,000—an increase of 42 percent! FIGURE 5. CALIFORNIA’S POPULATION GREW RAPIDLY IN THE POST WWII ERA, AVERAGING OVER 3.5% ANNUALLY THROUGH THE 1960S.The rapid growth provided a complex problem for the DFG, whose responsibility it was to protect fish and game needs. The number of sportsmen was increasing proportionately to the population and this was putting unprecedented stress on the state’s fish and wildlife resources, especially trout. According to an excerpt from a speech by DFG spokesperson Seth Gordon in 1956, “[There are now] 600,000 trout fishermen [that] comprise almost half the 1,300,000 people who buy licenses to fish in this state. In addition to this number are additional thousands of youngsters under sixteen years of age who fish without licenses.”Complicating the situation was the fact that there was only so much fresh water in the state, and water that was developed for consumptive purposes took away from fish and wildlife habitat. Gordon continued, “Unfortunately, acts of man are rapidly decreasing the efficiency of streams as trout producers as well as actually drying up others.” Much of the postwar population growth occurred in southern California, which was short on water to begin with. It seemed clear to the public in the South that the solution was to import water from the North, which they saw as having a relative abundance. Not so obvious was the effect that such action would have on fish and wildlife.Page of 559For decades, conservations and sportsman in northern California had banded together to prevent fish habitat such as the Klamath River from being altered or diverted (see Figure 6). Now, tremendous pressure was put on the DFG to develop a water plan which would provide for southern California’s growing population, and at the same time minimize damage to the state’s fish life. FIGURE 6. CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION LEAGUE PLEA, CIRCA 1920.The new California Water Plan that emerged in 1956 promised to greatly compromise the state fish habitat, especially that for trout. According to an excerpt from the 44th Biennial Report, “The state stands to lose a substantial segment of its migratory fish life when the plan is carried to its ultimate development.”Faced with this prospect, the DFG resolved to increase efforts to protect natural reproduction by improving habitat and further decided that “artificial trout propagation will be used where necessary.” Many new projects including hatcheries, ladders, diversion screens and warm water lakes were planned. However, with expenditures having exceeded revenues for five straight years, the DFG was short of working capital (Program Review and Analysis of the Department of Fish and Game, July 27, 1956).Faced with yet another estimated budget deficit for 1957-58, the California Fish and Game Commission was forced to adopt a series of recommendations calling for increased license fees and began to look at cutting back many newly developed programs. The Commissioner stated that “In order to manage and propagate wildlife resources under present conditions, it has become obvious that additional revenues must be made available to the department for that purpose.” Among the possibilities considered for increasing department income in 1958, was a trout stamp (DFG News Release, January 11, 1957).Page of 659Fishing Stamps IssuedThe California State legislature passed an act to amend the Fish and Game Code, as proposed by Assembly Bill 616, during the spring of 1957. It was approved by the governor on June 10 and put into effect on September 11 of the same year. By this act section 428 of the code was amended to require most anglers to purchase fishing license stamps (Statues of California, 1957 Regular Session). On December 27, 1957, the DFG issued the following press release: “Fishing licenses for 1958, and the new license stamps, are now on sale throughout the state at all license dealers…. All sports fishermen will require a basic sport fishing license, which will cost them $3.00 apiece [for residents], same as last year.The basic license is good for fishing in ocean waters only. In addition, they will require one or two license stamps affixed to this basic license if they are fishing in inland waters. A license stamp will cost $1.00 and may be purchased at any time. California fishermen will need only one stamp on their basic license if they want to fish for steelhead and warm water species in inland waters (except for trout or frogs). They will need two of these $1.00 stamps if they want to fish for trout or take frogs. Each stamp must be permanently affixed in the space provided on the basic license and each stamp must be signed in ink by the license owner.”The 1958 inland fishing stamp was designed by Paul B. Johnson. After attending the San Francisco School of Fine Arts on a scholarship, Johnson moved to Sacramento to work for the California Department of Public Works (DPW) in their Division of Architecture. Johnson, an avid sportsman, while working for DPW also served as a wildlife artist for the DFG. Johnson was commissioned to illustrate various DFG publications starting in 1953 (Outdoor California, 1971). Over the years he designed all of California’s pictorial fishing stamps, the state’s pheasant stamps and the first seven state duck stamps. I was fortunate to acquire Johnson’s original pencil drawing for the first fishing license stamp from Tom Richardson, a fish and game collector and dealer, in the year 2000 (see Figure 7). FIGURE 7. LETTER FROM TOM RICHARDSON (LEFT), THE ORIGINAL PENCIL DRAWING MADE BY PAUL JOHNSON FOR CALIFORNIA’S FIRST FISHING LICENSE STAMP IN 1958 (UPPER RIGHT) AND A STAMP SIGNED BY JOHNSON (LOWER RIGHT). NOTE THAT THESE IMAGES ARE NOT TO SCALE.Page of 759The 1958 stamp featured a California Golden Trout, the official state fish, and was printed in shades of black, brown and salmon colored inks on white paper by the California State Printing Office (Vanderford, 1973). The stamps were issued in booklet panes of five (1 x 5) with a tab at the top and stapled five panes to a book (see Figure 8). They are rouletted 9 1/2 between stamps. Serial numbers were applied to the reverse of each stamp in black ink. FIGURE 8. BOOKLET COVER AND PANE OF CALIFORNIA’S FIRST INLAND FISHING STAMP, ISSUED IN 1958.Page of 859Imperforate stamps exist that are lacking a serial number. These stamps originated from a large uncut sheet that once hung in the DFG Headquarters in Sacramento. The sheet was obtained by E. L. Vanderford, cut down into blocks and pairs and traded amongst collectors. Vanderford recalls that the sheet consisted of about 200 stamps and that a large portion was heavily creased (see Figure 9). FIGURE 9. THIS BLOCK OF SIX IS BELIEVED TO BE THE LARGEST REMAINING MULTIPLE FORM THE ORIGINAL UNCUT SHEET THAT ONCE HUNG IN DFG HEADQUARTERS IN SACRAMENTO.Page of 959California’s 1958 inland fishing stamp is noteworthy in that it is the earliest state or local fish and game stamp to have a print made for it. Johnson had an edition of 85 signed and numbered prints published of the golden trout image (see Figure 10). In 1971 Johnson was also commissioned to produce the state’s first duck stamp and subsequently became the first artist to have a state duck stamp print published. Two editions totaling 650 prints were produced of his design featuring a pair of pintails. FIGURE 10. CALIFORNIA’S 1958 INLAND FISHING STAMP WAS THE EARLIEST STATE OR LOCAL FISH OR GAME STAMP TO HAVE A PRINT MADE FOR IT.Next >