License Fees to Double?

[dashaver63]

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?

[Vic Cerabone]

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!

[djkimmel]

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.

[TritonTR20]

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!

[Waterfoul]

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).

[Dan]

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?

[Duke]

even 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!  <-- notice the smiley face!

[Waterfoul]

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!!!

[djkimmel]

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.

[Durand Dan]

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)

[SethV]

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

[dartag]

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

[yukonjack2]

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

[Waterfoul]

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?

[dashaver63]

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.

[Mojo]

 

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.

[Kzoduckman]

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

[Mojo]

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.

[djkimmel]

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.

[matt]

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....