LICENSES FEE UPDATE

[live2fish]

Here is some info for those that did not know and for those that need to get their licenses.

Go buy them this week!

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/12308445/detail.html

Barry N.   

[Revtro]

I'm sure nothing will happen for this year, but thanks for the article.   

[squid]

The number of license holders in Michigan has been on the decline for years. The state sold 1,171,721 hunting licenses in 1992, a figure that had tumbled 33 percent to 789,244 by 2005. Fishing license sales, which topped out in 1988 at 1,644,342, had fallen 29 percent to 1,161,432.

And they believe the increase in fees will increase the sales?   HA...not!!

IDIOTS

[Dan]

Like it or not there is a bureaucracy that is in place and year after year the funding for it has been siphoned off by politicians who try to hide one problem by grabbing funding from another. The result is an ineffectual DNR and programs that are on a shoestring. We need to be fiscally responsible, but we also have to keep a more watchful eye on just what is getting funding and where they are pulling resources from. What is happening in education is akin to this problem. Year in and year out there are cuts that run very deep. Why? Kids can't advocate for themselves. The DNR, as a department, has a hard time advocating as well because there is a minority of the electorate that are available to stand up and say this is what we want.  All of us have gotten too complacent and have forgotten just how all of what we have has come about. We need to be a more vocal minority. The majority does not rule in this state or country. The majority rarely votes. The informed, vocal and active minority make the decisions when all is said and done.
I have listened to several committee members who were a part of the new fee increases and I believe them when they say they are necessary. We as a body of anglers need to be more politically active, or at least actively aware of what is happening, so that once the increases are inacted, as I'm sure they will be, that the funds are safe guarded from "politics" and are channeled to necessary and needed programs. My opinion. 

[Revtro]

Dan, I totally agree about the fact that we are not ruled by majority.  We're ruled by the loud.  I don't want this to turn into a political debate, but I do agree.

[Cy]

I agree with Dan.  We should all be more vocal!  I for one will admit I don't know where to start but I think I'd better figure it out.

I also think it always hurts a little pay more but if that's what it takes to do the thing I love then I am ok with it.  Based on Squid's responce and the falling license numbers, we should all teach our kids, other kids and everyone we know to enjoy the outdoors.  The more outdoorsman we make the licenses will be sold.

Please correct me if I wrong but didn't "we (the state of Michigan)" pass a proposal in fall that allowed the DNR to keep their money for their needs?  I just Goggled up Proposal 1:

Proposal 06-1
A proposed constitutional amendment to require that money held in conservation and recreation funds can only be used for their intended purposes

The proposed constitutional amendment would:

    * Create a Conservation and Recreation Legacy Fund within the Constitution and establish existing conservation and recreation accounts as components of the fund
    * Use current funding sources such as state park entrance and camping fees; snowmobile, ORV and boating registration fees; hunting and fishing license fees; taxes and other revenues to fund accounts
    * Establish the current Game and Fish Protection Fund and the Nongame Fish and Wildlife Fund within the Constitution
    * Provide that money held in Funds can only be used for specific purposes related to conservation and recreation and cannot be used for any purpose other than those intended

I have an article at home on the increases.  It was full of good detailed info and I will post it later.

Cy

[motocross269]

I agree 100 percent with the squeeky wheel gets the oil. We are all grumbling about getting our liscense fees raised and the Shipping industry is literally destroying our fishery.  It appears that there is a big battle brewing between the State of Michigan and the Shipping industry on the law requiring them to sanitize their ballast water.  We had better stand united with Michigan and the DNR against the shipping industry or we may not even recognize the Great Lakes in a few years. 
To be honest a few more dollars on my fishing liscense doesn't really bother me as long as they keep up the Stocking programs that they have.  I just wish they would do more for the bass fisherman.

[BASS FISHERMAN]

ween i stops an think bout this i gets all peeed off 
ifin liesencee numburs goin down juss wheer do the DNRs get the monnie to mess up boat lawnchin sites 
thay go in an plow up everythings then thay brings in them huge stones an putum everiewheer 
lawnchin site that once holes 30 truck an traylor now holes onily 20 truck an traylor 
muss be a **edited cuss word**(revtro) runnin the show down thar 
got to pay thay price of give it up 

BASS CAT BOAT RULE 

[Dan]

Was reading an article on what happens to the money that is garnered by convictions in DNR violations and except for a few dollars the bulk of that money goes to the library fund.  ?? Go figure.

[Cy]

To buy more books about hunting and fishing!?

[Anthony Adams]

Granholm took the DNR's money to use for her own agenda and as a result this has put the MDNR in a bind. They cannot pay the bills. I feel for the MDNR but a increase would have a far greater effect on the economy. It just seems that Granholm and the Michigan Legislature do not understand how an increase like this will effect the economy. Did they not take economics 101? If they had they would understand that an increase like this effects the lower class, it will have a spiral effect on the economy, with lost sales in guns, tackle and equipment. I small $10 increase could have a negative effect on the economy in the $1000's per outdoorsman.

Ask yourself .... how much do you spend a year to go hunting or fishing..... how much do you spend on a hunting or fishing trip ?.... then think .... if this increase cost Michigan further lost anglers and sportsman how will each one of those people lost have an effect on the economy ... and how will this effect tourism?

This has a far greater impact then many realize.

[Dan]

Again not to get political, but if you have followed this over the long haul this began in the Engler era when he would not allow any increases and he was pullling funds so as not to increase taxes. I try to not get into partisan politics, but try to look at what has actually occurred and the reason the licenses are going to jump so high is that nothing has been done for a long, long time. It has been a real bugaboo for both administrations and they both back burner it because of larger issues in this state with jobs. Being that we are such a heavily committed automotive state when that industry goes south so does the state. However, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" so we just have to continue to be vocal and express our concerns regularly.

[motocross269]

ABA, I think you would have a hard time showing that granholm took money from the DNR to use for other causes..Just as Dan said this all started in the Engler era and now the bills are coming due.  I don't want to get political either, but as a Soldier from michigan that saw 2 deployments, one during the Engler era and one with Granholm I can say that Granholm has supported my unit and our families way more than Engler..I am not a party line guy.  I also support Mike Rogers (R) from Lansing.  I just call it how I see it and Engler ran this state into the dirt.
As far as lost sportsman go..A 10 dollar increase on the license fees is not going to make anyone quit fishing.  But losing my Job at an Automotive company, 3 dollars a gallon for gas, ever increasing food bills and a general drop in wages and a higher cost of living, that will make me hang up my fishing rods.  As long as this country continues to practice the onesided trade laws that we do, it will only get worse.

[Dan]

One thing that does help the DNR cause in terms of revenue is purchasing a non mandatory license for those under 17 (Young Anglr All Spec Fish $2.00) the State of MI DNR get back $8 from the Feds because of some revenue sharing deal. I am going to buy my 10 year old grand daughter one. This was one of the recommendations I heard from a member of the advisory panel who sat to look at the new increase proposals that could help the funding short fall.

[motocross269]

So the DNR gets 8 dollars back for every juvenile license sold???  That sounds like a deal....I will have to buy 2 for my kids.
Hopefully they are taking the money that they are saving from not running a stocking program this year to put into future fish stocking.  Do they have any kind of Bass stocking program in Michigan?  I never see anything on the lake maps or anywhere.  Though I have heard rumors that with all of the catch and release practices they are having problems with bass management. 

[Cy]

The MDNR has done some stocking for bass, both Large and Small mouth but not a lot.  It isn't considered a "money fish" here in Michigan, like Salmon, Trout and Walleye are.  You can search the stocking database here.

http://www.michigandnr.com/FISHSTOCK/

Cy

[motocross269]

Thanks

[Dan]

In a recent conversation with a fisheries biologist from the DNR he concurred that very little stocking of bass is done because our lakes have populations that can sustain themselves. One comment that struck me was ...."We have about 185 full time employees right now.  Even some states with a lot less water than we have, like Nebraska, have upwards of 400 employees.  It's the same with Minnesota, Colorado, etc.  I'd say that's the most frustrating part of my job-" The department is spread pretty thin.

[BigSmallie]

Please correct me if I wrong but didn't "we (the state of Michigan)" pass a proposal in fall that allowed the DNR to keep their money for their needs?  I just Goggled up Proposal 1:

Proposal 06-1
A proposed constitutional amendment to require that money held in conservation and recreation funds can only be used for their intended purposes
Cy

CORRECT Cy!!!!!    NOW...I Am NOT trying to start a argument......BUT.......if one were to sit back and look at this proposal that passed................you would ultimately ask yourself........."why is the DNR making such a substantial increase in fees now?"

By reading between the lines..........it appears someone had their hand in the "cookie jar" for quite some time..........and now the cookies are gone!   

This is how it appears to me......personally.

BS 

[Anthony Adams]

This was one of the recommendations I heard from a member of the advisory panel who sat to look at the new increase proposals that could help the funding short fall.

A while back ago in a TBF Board meeting Jack Cahn asked me to check on this as a possible revenue idea for the MDNR ... I did and advised the TBF Board of my findings. The problem with the idea is that it only generates a few hundred dollars.

I do not want to turn this into politics either ... and I am not going to make any more posts in this thread because I do not like to talk politics in an open forum... but lets get the real truth out please. If you doubt any of this call anyone high up in the MDNR and they will back up the following statement .... This is common knowledge and I have heard it from many talks with people in the MDNR.

Per the MDNR - they had a fund that got them through tough times when they needed (like now) and several times in the recent past ... this fund was left over revenue they had from sales, include launch fee's licenses ect... The problem for the MDNR started when a fund they had to fall back on was taken away to fund another program by Granholm... This was one of the first things Granholm did when she took office.... she saw that the MDNR had Millions sitting in a fund they had not needed to use in almost 8 years.... Yet the MDNR did use a small percentage every year to fund some programs ... Granholm took this fund away because she felt at the time the MDNR did not need it.... Now the MDNR does not have the funds to fall back on during tough times like they have had in the past...

If you're truly concerned.... Do yourself a favor ... call an economics professor and ask him how a small increase like this will effect the economy ... I think you will be surprised.

There are better ways to solve the problem...