Here is a poorly written article from my local paper covering this: http://www.livingstondaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071105/NEWS01/711050303/1002
Don't mind any of the school related issues, the fees are completely separate. Granted it is not real cheap now, but if that money goes directly to the DNR then it is not too bad. A bass license would go from .75 Lucky Crafts to 1.5 or up from 2.5 to 5 bags of Senkos for the year. ;D
This is my on very soon radar to start presenting an accurate picture - our MDNR is in bad straits - we need to help as you have done, to show this is not a big deal considering reality and the benefits/need.
Apparently the only people contacting their legislators are the ones who want to scream about LICENSE FEES DOUBLING?!? I spend more now every single time I go to the movies than I would to be able to fish for an ENTIRE YEAR!! under the new fees. Not a tough decision for me to make.
EVERYTHING that we do day to day, week to week, had gone up EXCEPT our license fees. Should be no surprise that things cost the MDNR more now too. And as usual, they are always the first ones targeted for cuts and receiving less revenue wherever possible. More to come soon...
For now, contact your legislators and tell them the license hikes are a small and fair price to pay for what you enjoy and that you aren't happy having them debilitate the MDNR this way.
Dan,
I agree with you 100%. It's a small cost compared to the money I donate to the many tournament pots. I even buy the all species license to help fund the DNR. Heck just the gas to go to Kent and back costs more than a license!!
Forgive my pessimistic view, but double the price? ??? I already pay $35 to fish it b/c I'm from IN. If I got to pay $70 or close to it to fish in your waters - that's a ripoff. And unfortunately, it will mean less out of state licenses for your state.
Think about it: if I live in mid-Indiana and I want to go out of town for a weekend or more to go fishing and look at Kentucky or Michigan: look at the license costs: guess where I'm going?
I know I spend a lot to go fishing, but I have a hard time justifying it now as it is.
Duke, sorry you feel that way. But, if you want to continue to fish in Michgan like you do now... you should be willing to pay more like all of us are. You will start to notice the difference if the fees are NOT raised, trust me. As it is, there are no garbage containers at any of the DNR ramps I have used for the last several seasons. No money to pay for pickup. Have you noticed the amount of trash at the ramps just laying around? Over the last several seasons I sure have!! Next thing to go would be the lights I'm sure. No money to pay the electricity. Hope everyone has a good flashlight or alternative light source. One ramp I fish from often, the light at the ramp has been burned out or broken for several seasons... the parking lot lights work so I know it's not an electricity thing. There's just no money to maintain the ramps these days.
I for one would support this "double fee increase" with no issue. I think $56 is still a deal for all I get. I fish every season. Spring, summer, fall, winter. I more than get my money's worth for sure.
If you want legislation here in Michigan to hear that you support an increase, here are some people you could contact directly:
Speaker of the House Andy Dillon: 888-737-3455 (toll-free)
Representative Michael Lahti: 888-663-4031 (toll-free)
Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop: 877-924-7467 (toll-free)
Senator Michelle McManus: 866-305-2135 (toll-free)
I got no problems paying more for my fishing license. Even at $56 dollars a season it's still a small amount of what I spend on fishing. But the question comes to my mind is how much of the MDNR's budget comes from license fees? If it gets other money's from the state will they then be reduced? Another question I have is how are the license fee's being spent? I would like to know that my "extra" money is being spent wisely by the State.
The Kalamazoo Duckman
duckman, check this link.
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10366-30397--,00.html
That clears things up a bit for me, I am happy to see that the money stays within the intended group.
Now a concern that I am thinking about is the occasional fisherman, once to 5 times a year. $30-60 seems a little high for them, whereas I think I fished 40-50 times this year so far.
I am just thinking that for us it is not too big of a deal, but what about the more recreational guy that wants to take his kids to Kent or Ovid for a day? Is that high price fair or the hassle of getting a one day pass which will still be expensive?
Raising the fishing license fees is fine. That would help. But, what about all of us who use the boat launches actually buying the stickers for those too?
This past summer I was at Half Moon and saw roughly half the tournament boats there get ticketed for no daily or seasonal sticker.
There's more to this than just the license fees.
This wouldn't seem like much of an issue if everyone wasn't caught on DOUBLING!!!! the fees. I'm behind in my homework, but the original fees only showed a few doubling. And doubling isn't much when you consider they haven't gone up AT ALL in 10 years.
Yes, this should be handled differently by not waiting so long that the result is an emergency like state with people worked up on both sides, but it's too late now to fix the last 10 years' mistake.
Yes, everytime fees are raised, there are some people who choose to stop buying and doing, or some who may cheat, but the MDNR needs to be funded and they aren't going to get a bunch of general fund money. I think too many people think that our state will continue to get a 1.5 billion dollar shot in the economy from the outdoors with or without an MDNR, but I've always felt humans use selective memory too much. It used to be 2 billion?!?
How many people still live in Michigan because of the lakes and the outdoors? Enough to make it worth taking care of right. There are people from all over the world falling over themselves to come here and fish. That will not change to any significant degree over a 10, 20 or 30 dollar increase in cost. We've got it and they want it.
Heck! I want it!
QuoteAnd doubling isn't much when you consider they haven't gone up AT ALL in 10 years.
I've only been bass fishing the past 9 years and I've seen 2 increases in license costs for me - maybe its different for the non-resident. ???
I'm surprised with the cost of living going up that no one else is disappointed that it's going to cost more to go fishing. (And maybe I know it's going to be more difficult to tell my wife that my fishing license is now $60-$70 :-[)
I'm also surprised that there is so much faith in the Michigan government to spend the money where they claim. Maybe the word gullible comes to mind...
How long until it will cost me $100 to fish your state? Do you really think this increase will be the last? It was just a few years ago it cost me $27 to fish MI. Now $70???
And who wouldn't cry foul if the price, of anything, doubled overnight? At least gas only does it a quarter at a time.
I am just amazed at your willingness to spend more in an economy that is increasingly getting more expensive to live in.
I'm a teacher and this will hurt me. Is that a problem for society and teachers or is it a sign for the majority of our society that makes less than I do? But you know what they say; big corporations & rich people run our society.
Well, we won't fix all of the world's problems and evils of greedy rich people here in one week. We can only handle so many challenges at a time. I think there's a difference between greedy gas companies wanting to make obscene profits verses wanting to make sure our MDNR only loses a third to half their employees rather than more than half.
Let's keep things in perspective - one time fee that provides up to a year of enjoyment is different than day-to-day costs of things like gas to drive or just going to the movies. I'd rather skip one movie and have enough to pay for the additional cost of a license.
Our economy sucks more than any other in the country, but that doesn't mean we have the 'luxury' of painting everything with one brush. I'm willng to pay more for a fee that directly goes to the agency that has the most to do with what I'm most interested in.
I don't have the luxury either of saying I'm going to let them close parks, ramps and shut down necessary work because they might use the money wrong. I think making sure the money is used right is just another responsibility of mine (and yours). One can't exclude the other. I've always considered that a copout kind of like when lake association members say at almost every public meeting about public access I've ever spoke at: 'don't build a PUBLIC ramp on my lake, it will only bring in more - pollution/trash/theft/ tickets/accidents/injury/etc/etc.
I don't like things costing more than anyone else, but things cost more for everyone including the MDNR and they have not significantly raised license fees to increase their working capital in years. They should have done something gradual years ago, but in this state (probably in most), a number people fight any fee increase as rabidly as they fight any new boat ramp attempt. The cost of running the same services now verses 10 years ago cost more. Just think if any of us were earning the same amount basically now as 10 years ago. We'd be hurting.
Just because I sometimes criticize the MDNR about specific things doesn't mean I don't recognize their position to protect and enhance our natural resources. Criticism (and trying to make sure taxes/fees are spent right) is part of the oversight responsibility every democratic citizen has, and too few practice. That has a great deal to do with why some parts of our government smell at spending. I can easily see though, a direct benefit from the MDNR to my enjoyment of life, and the value. Since the MDNR is awash in general tax revenue, and can't just reach out and appropriate new money whenever they want, they have no choice but to spend the money they do have more wisely.
Sure they can improve, and I'll help as much as one person can, along with other like-minded parties. I also know that our natural resources are constantly under attack from many sources and the MDNR is best positioned to provide a strong front to slow down those attacks, so they are a most valuable tool for myself and other like-minded citizens. I'm willing to pay for and work to properly utilize quality tools.
Part of the non-resident license issue is also being driven by calls from Michigan anglers and hunters who pay more in other states and want the charge reciprocated too. That has been a longstanding issue between various state and province wildlife agencies and government. "You charge my citizens more, I'll charge your's more" basically. There has been talk of prorated nonresident fees in the past - charge more to residents of states who charge us more, but no one really wants that much complication.
If we choose not to fund our Department of Natural Resources we will be cutting employees and resources which keep our access to the Inland Lakes open. Lakefront owners would soon be lobbying even harder than they do now to cut off all access to the lakes to save the state money. Lets not give them the opportunity to take away our right to fish. Pay a few bucks to keep the DNR solvent
Being a non-resident now, I know I will see my license go up, but when I get stopped several times a year to check my license and measure my fish during a tournament, and people throw smallies in the trunk of their car 3 weeks before the season is even open, saying these are rock bass, and the DNR tells you something like, "What do you want me to do about it?" That is all I have to say in order to curb myself from another fight that will lead to me surely being reprimanded. I'm not saying the fee increase is bad, it's not, but use it to make the money from the guys that don't even have a license, not the guy in the 30,000 dollar boat fishing for money with only 8 hours to do it and you stop him and take 25 of those minutes. I think there are some priority, and or confrontational issues present there. >:( >:(
Quote from: djkimmel on November 14, 2007, 09:35:05 PM
This wouldn't seem like much of an issue if everyone wasn't caught on DOUBLING!!!! the fees. I'm behind in my homework, but the original fees only showed a few doubling. And doubling isn't much when you consider they haven't gone up AT ALL in 10 years.
Yes, this should be handled differently by not waiting so long that the result is an emergency like state with people worked up on both sides, but it's too late now to fix the last 10 years' mistake.
Yes, everytime fees are raised, there are some people who choose to stop buying and doing, or some who may cheat, but the MDNR needs to be funded and they aren't going to get a bunch of general fund money. I think too many people think that our state will continue to get a 1.5 billion dollar shot in the economy from the outdoors with or without an MDNR, but I've always felt humans use selective memory too much. It used to be 2 billion?!?
How many people still live in Michigan because of the lakes and the outdoors? Enough to make it worth taking care of right. There are people from all over the world falling over themselves to come here and fish. That will not change to any significant degree over a 10, 20 or 30 dollar increase in cost. We've got it and they want it.
What state do you live in? Is the fishing so terrible there that you have to come to Michigan just to enjoy your time on the water? If this is true... don't you feel you should pay MORE than a resident? After all... we pay taxes here and you don't. I know it costs me a LOT more to fish in Ohio than it does in Michgan... and I'm a.o.k. with that... I don't pay taxes in Ohio so I should pay more than a resident of Ohio. I guess if you don't like the fee (or the increase) you are free to NOT fish in Michigan. But I think you will find that fishing in Michigan is worth just about whatever a license will cost you. There is no other place in the United States like Michigan for fishing... so be ready to pay for the awsome privelage of being able to fish here. I know I'm ready to pay more than I do now to KEEP my privelages.
If we don't fund the MDNR to a reasonable level, there won't be enough conservation officers for you to ask anything of. There's already so few I'm not surprised some of them feel overwhelmed. We have more police in Lansing than there are COs in the entire state.
Guys, we are mostly adults here and should be able to discuss things we may not completely agree on in a way that does not end up confrontational or require any 'reprimands.' I've been involved in working on outdoor related issues my entire adult life so it should be no surprise to anyone that I have strong opinions on these matters. I'm not sure what you mean about priority? I think it is clear where I stand - the MDNR has lost almost all the general fund money years ago even though other citizens besides anglers and hunters enjoy the outdoors, and have not had a significant increase in license fees in 10 years, while costs have just gone up and up. You can't run anything that way - not many businesses I can think of charging the same price now that they did 10 years ago. And the MDNR is important the health and protection of the outdoors that is so important to me. My priority is to find reasonable funding to not only allow the MDNR to continue offering the services it does now, but even to make improvements in areas improvements are needed, such as more COs.
I pay $100 every year to fish Ontario and Walpole Island. For the enjoyment I get out of that, it seems reasonable. Expensive, but reasonable - a years fishing opportunity verses taking my wife to the movies 3 more times.
As far as having enough COs to actually really get after all the bad people out there? Well, that's a whole nother ballgame. There's just not enough of them to deal with all the issues, and the loss in money means only less COs. And if you're out there and they're out there, you may get stopped. It's their job and they can't show favorites. Sure, sometimes it seems like maybe there's some bias towards bass boats, but we do stick out, and they're only people. My advice is always the same about this issue. Be polite. Be friendly and hope for the best. Most of the time, things go well. Unfortunately, there are a few people even in $30,000 (or more) bass boats who also don't follow the laws and regs. It's the MDNR's job to keep everyone following the rules.
How'd your head make it through the door Waterfoul?
Quote from: Duke on November 16, 2007, 08:58:33 AM
How'd your head make it through the door Waterfoul?
The same way you're does. Not sure why you seem to think I have a big head, I assure you nothing could be further from the truth, but then again you do not know me. I simply state things the way they are.
I'm just sick and tired of people (in-state and out) complaining about the services (or lack there of) that the MDNR is able to perform (or should that be NOT perform?). These same people then turn around and complain about having to pay more to keep these services. The current $28 all-species license is a STEAL people!!! For those of you coming from other states.... look around you the next time you are in Michigan. Find another state with as many lakes and rivers to fish that actually produce fish. Look at all the lakes and rivers the MDNR has to oversee and protect. If you and I are not willing to pay for them to do their jobs, who will? Jenny? Never... she's already proven she doesn't know a thing about conservation or maintaining our fisheries. Legislature? To tied up by the lobyists in Lansing. The voters in Michigan? I highly doubt it, based on recent elections and votes it appears that we as sportsman are simply outnumbered by those who have never ventured into the woods or out onto those lakes and rivers. There really are no other options at the moment... either we as sportsman suck it up and pay a bit more or we will continue to lose services, CO's, hatcheries, and ramps in this state. I for one am willing to pay double... or more to keep the services we have now... knowing full well that if I (we) don't things will only get worse.
Duke, next time you are up this way check out the Wolf Lake Hatchery just outside Kalamazoo... I think it's one of the greatest tourist attractions nobody goes to. They run on a skeleton crew as it is... and the State want's (needs?) to cut that down. It would be a tragedy if that were to happen, both for us and all the fish they raise on an annual basis. There would be NO sturgeon plantings if this facility closes... there would be much less salmon and stealhead plantings.... and walleye or musky? They would almost cease to be available if this facaility weren't able to produce them.
It's a HUGE picture that some people just don't seem to be able to see.
I truly don't understand why things get so hot about the small amount of money involved in every attempt to raise license fees, but it happens. When I posted up I did not know about the above exchange - sorry. C'mon guys, lets keep it about the issue and not about people or individuals. I understand the various messages everyone is trying to get across - let's just do it in a way that doesn't immediately incite 'retaliation.'
Yeh, it's frustrating in a way that anyone who spends the amount of money most of us do every year on fishing to get hot over another $10 to $50 for an entire year, but it happens every time they try to raise the fees and we all have a right to our various opinions. Not everyone of us spends a lot, I know and probably most of us are frustrated with some aspect of all the things costing us more.
Let's try to keep the tempers down on any side or position. I've seen some important issues mucked up unnecessarily because of personalities and emotions. In the end, I'll say the same thing I usually try to - I will be a happy person, if we take some of this energy and put it directly towards the issue - contact your state reps and senators and tell them how you fell EVEN if you have a different opinion than mine. We anglers (and hunters) seem continually behind in getting involved effectively.
Okay, I've read the posts and I'm trying to understand this, but isn't the fee hike graduated over the next 6 or so years? From my limited experience of fishing your water, I have noticed that the state parks on the Detroit River , St.Clair and Lake Erie are much better maintained than the inland parks I've been to. I understand the tourism and draw of those body's of water, but on the other hand, I think the inland parks and lakes are your most valuable resource. I just think that money could be spread around a little better. So, how much will I be paying for an out of state seasonal license next year anyway?
I am very much against more taxes, and more fees, but in this case I agree with Dan K. Fishing, at least tournament fishing is a big $$$ sport. Licenses are the least of my concerns. I am concerned at how the average recrational angler will be impacted, but for me $10 or $15 more for a license is just money that I would have wasted on tackle!
This state is losing jobs like no other. Every day I drive to work I amazed at how much commercial real estate is empty. Because of the economy and lack of job growth, I have considered moving out of this state. There are two thing keeping me here; My freinds and family, and the fishing. Go take a look at the BFL results nationally, there in NO PLACE in this country like Michigan for fishing.
I don't know about hunting, but as far as fishing goes, the Michigan DNR has done a lot of positive things in the last few years. These include their new policy on tournament permits, and their opposition to the portion of the VHS fishing movement ban enacted by the Federal Government that impacted tournament. I did a lot of letter writing last year on the VHS ban, and the response I received from the MDNR, and especially Gary Whelan was very supportive and even helpful. If they need another couple buck from me each year, the will get it!
That's pretty much where I'm at too - very well said. So many things to fix, but you can't take it all on. Pick your targets and put your energy directly into the target so something gets done.
I agree with Andy that double is excessive. I live only 3 miles from the Michigan line and have a place on a lake in Michigan. Since it is not my full time residance, I have to get the more expensive licence. This year I had a Michigan, Indiana, Minnesota, and Kentucky licence and Michigan cost me the most....And had the shortest season. I'd say if the price is going to go up, at least let me fish all year. I have to say that I fish in Michigan more than anywhere else. I have been to quite a few lakes and Michigan ramps even at very small lakes are much better than anywhere else I have been!
Just some FYI for y'all. Here's our neighboring states fishing license fees.
Ohio resident license $19.
Senior resident license $10
non-resident seasonal $40
non-resident 3 day $19
Plus, Ohio has a program that if you buy 2 non-res. 3 day licenses and then puchase a 3rd one you automaticaly get the seasonal (2x19= $38... 3rd time gets you over the $40 seasonal fee).
Illinois resident license $19.25
senior resident license $10
Heck if I can figure out the non-resident fees... their internet site kinda sucks.
Indiana resident license $17 Additional $11 for trout/salmon
seniour resident license Unavailable???
Non-resident license $35
Non-resident one day $9
Non-resident 7 day $20
Non-resident trout/salmon $11
Wisconsin resident license $20
Senior resident license $7
resident 16 and 17 year olds $7
great lakes trout/salmon $10
Inland trout $10
Non-resident seasonal fishing $50
non-resident 4 day $24
non-resident 15 day $28
non-resident inland trout $10
non-resident great lakes trout/salmon $10
non-resident great lakes fishing $10
Then Wisconsin has a seperate sturgeon fishing fee of $65
It seems Wisconsin is the most expensive place to fish if you are not a resident (and even if Michigans fees double we will still be cheaper than Wisconsin).
Just got back from an extended fishing trip. Fished in Kentucky for a day, think it cost about $15 for a daily, $50 annual nonresident. Alabama, you can't buy a daily, so we had to pay around $26 to fish for a day and it's also about $50 for a nonresident annual unless you are from a couple of states, like Louisiana, whom Alabama charges more. Florida had a three day for about $20 bucks and again about $50 for a nonresident annual. Nice thing about Florida, your license is good for a year from the time you buy it.
I don't like to think about paying more to fish, but because of politics there weren't increases for many years. Time to pay for that mess, like it or not, if we want services.
If you want to get angry look at how education funds districts. You would think there would be equity, but there isn't and many don't know that. Some districts get thousands more than others. It's a proverbial case of the rich districts get richer and the rest, well...
The money trail is an important one and that's why we need to stay vigilant and knowledgeable about how legislative action and funding really works. Some times it's all smoke and mirrors. Like, schools get all the Casino tax money. Most think that that is in addition to what they were getting. Not so, what the Casinos give the state takes out so schools don't get any extra money and their budgets are getting raped year after year and it's the kids that bear the burden.
We can carry a little bit more of the load in licenses. Have you paid for a cart and a round of 18 lately?
Quoteeven if Michigans fees double we will still be cheaper than Wisconsin
That's not true if it doubles. I already pay $34, multiply that by 2 = $64.
Waterfoul, I never meant to be insulting towards you and your head. The previous post you put up to that you were quite high on the bodies of water in Michigan. I made a poke that was intended to put a smirk on people's faces as they read it. I should have put a smiley face next to my comment. I apologize if you took offense.
I still don't think MI is worth that kind of money. And its simple for most MI residents to get along w/ this proposal, but I've spoken w/ quite a few IN residents about this already and we're not too happy. I would expect MI to sell fewer non-resident licenses next season as a result. But they'll probably make up the $ in increased fees. And that's OK if they're more interested in making money than promoting fishing and the outdoors.
Besides, don't you all know that Michigan is backwards in everything? You're backwards in the backwoods! ;D <-- notice the smiley face!
Do big deal Duke. I've had a rough couple of days. Lost my job on Friday.
I guess what I'd REALLY like to see is the state using the money that the DNR is supposed to get for legitimate DNR issues!!!
I hearby solemnly promise to get the latest fee proposal information up this weekend (I'm taking Friday off too - normally work - I'll pay for it next week though) since I'm not up on what actual proposed fees are in the latest version. I have a packet from the MDNR to review. One thing I did see was that the Minnesota DNR has twice as many employees for less water (counting the Great Lakes).
I'll get some real numbers up for Michigan and we can see where we are at.
I've been too broke to fish all over lately myself, but I remember one year buying 8 different fishing licenses and mostly what I remember about that year is adventure and fun, not how much the licenses cost.
Michigan has somewhere around 11,000 inland lakes and access to the great lakes. How many does Indiana have 5? (and only 3 with a Bass in them);D
I am totally against ANY fee increase in our licences. This is yet ANOTHER tax increase...and I see no benefit at all.
Why should I pay more when I can only tournament fish for 5 months a year?
Why should I pay more when lots of these funds go to sustain catch-and-kill fisherman (salmon, walleye)?
Why should I pay more when the state does nothing to enhance bass habitat?
Why should I pay more to a state with a closed bass season?
The state does not need more money. I will never support giving them more of my money, without something in return.
Seth
I look at it as the cost of having fun. I'm old and remember when a license was 7.50 and the wife was free. Funny no one has mentioned having to buy 2 stickers ($ 44.00 ) to fish Kent. Looking outside today with the forecast of snow tomorrow, I can't wait to pay my money to fish next year, Whatever it costs...
Happy Turkey Day all
I spoke to a Conservation Officer this past week in gladwin county Deerhunting. He explained that the dept is basically decimated of funds from Lansing - not Just Jenny, but all those idiots combined, and they are now laying off 18 of the 50 someething CO's left, and closing the fish hatchery programs. The License package is basically a step to ensure bare survival mode of the dept. So sitting here debating the merits of the cost increase is positive in terms of information spread, but futile in results. channel that frustration and energy to your local reps - with a strong and consistant message,the DNR(not just bass fishing) gets the funding it needs to preserve the outdoors and resource heritage of Michigan.
For you out of state guys griping about fees, look at the hunting fees for out of state tags - can be as high as 7 or 8-1 vs in state. don't think that fishing isn't gonna go there?-Just wait. Easily could if the legislature has their way with no opposing message. The problem of funding has always been very political, and needs to be addressed in that arena. The staff left behind are now havign to pick up the extra workload, and the resources and fees will suffer because of it.
there is no easy fix here - so stay energized with your gov't officials and let then know where you stand such that they can take that message to lansing.
Jack
Quote from: SethV on November 21, 2007, 08:08:12 AM
I am totally against ANY fee increase in our licences. This is yet ANOTHER tax increase...and I see no benefit at all.
Why should I pay more when I can only tournament fish for 5 months a year?
Why should I pay more when lots of these funds go to sustain catch-and-kill fisherman (salmon, walleye)?
Why should I pay more when the state does nothing to enhance bass habitat?
Why should I pay more to a state with a closed bass season?
The state does not need more money. I will never support giving them more of my money, without something in return.
Seth
Perhaps you should learn to catch other species besides bass?? I steelhead fish all winter. I pike fish in early spring. I walleye fish when the opportunity presents itself. I even hit the pier for whitefish in late fall (going this weekend). In Michigan, fishing for only one species seems counterproductive to me. All those species and some only target one??
Oh, and I'm still out there bass fishing. Aren't you?
I will have no problem paying the non-resident fee to fish Michigan. Even if I have to just buy 1 day licenses, Michigan bass fishing is, to me, better than bass fishing in Ohio as far as the inland waters go.
;D ;D ;D
OK - Here's the deal - Your DNR gets 76% of their funding from fees, camping, licenses etc; 11% from Federal Funding and 13% from the General Fund. What I learned from the DNR CO is that for the last 4 year, your MI House and Senate removed the 13% from the DNR to help balance the budget, then diverted the 11% these last 2 years.
The threat of more budget transfers away from our DNR was so real that the state had to make a Constitutional Amendment preventing that exact threat. That tells you how serious of a condition the state is in. So the DNR operate on 75% their budget with NO help in the next 4 years.
So now that the DNR is alone, but not responsible with raising their own funds, but, they have until Jan 11 to present a budget. What I was told is 17 COs go, and ALL the fish hatchery programs are terminated. Thats just the beginning.
What next ? No govonor wants a fish and hunt fee increase on their watch and thats why you have no increases the last 10 years.
My vote would be 10% increases across the board every 2 years for 10 years. Something they should have done 4 years ago.
Later.
So what is the next step?
Doesn't the MI House and Senate have to approve a bill raising the fee's/liences/etc. If so, does anyone know what has been proposed (if anything) and where is stands?
Kzoduckman
There will be no state legislature owning the task of sponsoring the first fishing / hunting tax increase in 10 years. Political suicide I guess, but since we have term limits, why cant they just do the right thing on this issue ? I dont get it. ALMOST makes you wish we had were a commonwealth state .... but lets just ask our OHIO buddies how thats working out for them !!!!
I wish a public or even a private conservation group take the lead so we could demonstrate oura collective willingness to provide for our outdoor future in MI.
I'm behind unfortunately again - too many hours at the day job lately. I have some detailed information and will have some structure for interested parties to follow on behalf of TBF of Michigan. Hopefully this weekend.
I'm just curious as when this was suppose to go up?
I actually got mine this year for $15 restricted...last year was $20-$25 if i remember correctly.
I was shocked when they told me it was only $15....
It was 15.00 restricted last year too.
I guess the increase never made it to the books.
Not to start this whole discussion up again, but it's a fee I happily pay - so long as it goes straight to the DNR and not Granholm.
B
Why can't these guys use there heads. Instead of raising taxes again. Do what Australia does to fund big projects. Like some of the hospitals, or the big white concert hall that looks like a bunch of muscels sticking up out of the harbor. I'm talking a lottery. Sell weekly lottery tickets on a 50/50 or 75/25 or whatever till the amount is raised to pay for what is needed. Keep the fees low so we can keep new anglers from in and out of state continuing this lifestyle. That is another point. Is this a part time sport? Is it a Lifestyle? Whatever it is. We all get something differant out of fishing. Is this a love or a hoby? What is it worth for the relaxation/stress/aggrevasion to do what we do. Is this a right, A privelige or an entitlement? Should we pay for just what we use or pay a little bit more so all can use/enjoy?
Mi residents are not the only ones facing these problems, but a time will come for each state to attack. How do we resolve this and keep it affordable for new poeple to want to start and enjoy what we have for years? I'm 55 and can't remember not fishing.
Just my two and a half cents. Well more like, half cents.
Remember to enjoy.
don m