New Ice house registration.

[NINETOE]

Stop using words like license, user fees, and registration fees! They are none of the sort! The fact that a portable has to have a license on it and it costs money then it is taxation!!! Look at all of the ways we are taxed and it is given a neat little name like user fee! The only representation we have is the DNR and guess what? They are the big hand that receives are taxation! So it is taxation with out representation! I say throw the tea into the sea!

------------------
"sure are cocky for a starvin pilgrim"

[Guest]

Here is my take on the matter.
Where I work, a group of guys buy one license, make color copies for each of themselves, except for the guy who bought it, laminate "to protect it form the weather" and carry it with us, i mean them when they ice fish.

If the DNR checks them, we, I mean they say the portable belongs to the person who's name appears on the license and they are using the protable, which of course they aren't it belongs to us, I mean them.

There was no way to link the license to the portable fish house with out a name or number.

This sort of thing would not happen if the DNR was held in check.

I imagine some day I will need a licensed bucket to carry out with me on the ice to take a leak in. $50 fine for no "leak bucket"

[Swill]

nice work country joe Plus when the DNR officer wants to open ask you some questions you can refuse due to the new law which says you don't have to let them it...I say screw em back....

On another note how many stupid licences will a guy have to have someday? I have about 10 different licenses in my wallet for small game hunting...duck hunting.. bowhunting...fishing...portable license...trout...ahhhh... If I get check I will just hand them my stack of license and say HAVE FUN! Oh wait I am not opening the door for em....

[the big dipper]

nine toes is right on --- it's all tax -

The two inch letter reg is just another great little "discretionary" tool Officer Friendly can use as a pretext to stick his nose in and check you out. Kinda like the other night I got stopped and pulled over (lights flashing, and siren goin) for a "cracked tail light offense" - (I thought Officer Friendly was going to give me a kiss - he stuck his head right in the window, I suppose he had to give me the old sniff test)

Any way It's really a triple taxation scam - you should pay a shelter surcharge on your regular fishing license, and it would be good for one permanent and or any additional portables. I'm planning on taking my two boys fishing, and I got to thinking: I've got a fish trap and a clam, and I'll need em both, that's two shelter tags. Plus one for my permanent spearhouse, plus a spearing license,.... It's enough to drive a guy to drink, --- Oh I'd better not stop for one, Officer Friendly might detain me for that durned cracked taillight which got cracked while I was hauling my fish house and the trailer jacknifed. And so it goes...

Hey ninetoes -- what's on the spit?

[NINETOE]

The DL # requirement works well for the return of stolen property, but to make it mandatory is nuts. I put it on a piece of stiff plastic and then attach it to my house with an over sized safety pin. For the license I put it in a zip lock and safety pin that to it as well.

Remember taxation is taxation no matter what name they want to give it!

By the way Im cookin " GRIZ" Pilgrim!

------------------
"sure are cocky for a starvin pilgrim"

[LundExplorer]

Don't forget that tax oops i mean registration fee on the trailer too... at least now that one is a "permanent registration". With the state budget in such disarray I doubt that will be the last time we pay tax oops I mean registration fees on trailers... I have already gotten 2 for my snowmobile trailer.

TL

[Northlander]

I have 4 different portables that I use depending on how much ice we have. I have forgotten my license on 1 house when I took another out. We should also be able to recieve free copies for all our different shelters. I just know I will get ticketed one time when I forget my license on another house!

[minneman]

scan-print..?

[Piker]

Well it seems I was wrong there are a lot of people who think we're taxed for this stuff too much. I think it should be like this, forget the rule on the lettering of your name. The only positive reason that I could see putting my name in big letters on my shelter would be the example of the guy's buddy's house getting stolen. If I want that sort of benefit of my name on it I sure don't need the state telling me I have to put it there. I just think there's too many rules and small print, not only do you need your name, but they'll say it's gotta be two inches. I could just about imagine someone trying to give me a ticket for my name being too small. I just think that the deal we're getting for these fees is not that great. I think some of the positive things the DNR does with the money are not as good as it could be and a lot of these things could be provided more effeciently by the private sector. Anything the government can do some determined private group could do better.

[ackotz]

You guys spend thousands of dollars on fishing gear, boats, augers, portables, etc. and you can't pay $11 for a shelter license?!
You'll buy hundreds of dollars worth of beer a year but you can't fork up an $11 shelter license?!

You need to re-align your priorities and get over your "taxation inferiority complex"

The money helps the DNR manage "OUR" lakes (i.e; rear and stock them with walleyes, muskies, bass, sunfish, crappies; study impacts on watersheds and the damage WE do to our lakes; police the waters; pay the salaries of "the understaffed DNR"; etc.)

It's akin to being in a Sportsclub, I think. We pay our "dues" for the privilige of participating in the outdoors. I don't have a problem with it. As a matter of fact, it's much cheaper than joining a healthclub and a lot more fun too. We are paying these people to maintain "our outdoors" for us (and keep us in line), 'cause lord knows if they didn't, the lakes would be polluted and void of any fish. Just look at what we did to Lake Winnibigoshish and the poor perch population. Upper Red Lake's crappies are next. We can't police ourselves, so we need someone else to do it.

...and if I offended you, I'm sorry.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you anyway.--AK

Please abide by the forum policy.
A few policies we hold important here:
1. No Personal attacks on other members.

2. No attacks on businesses.

3. No unauthorized links or sharing of domain names.

4. No unauthorized phone numbers.

Thank you.

[This message has been edited by D-man (edited 12-20-2002).]

[Matt D]

Yes, ackotz. I think offense was taken by many from your post.

"You guys spend thousands of dollars on fishing gear, boats, augers, portables, etc. "...
"hundreds of dollars worth of beer a year"...

"We are paying these people to maintain "our outdoors" for us (and keep us in line), 'cause lord knows if they didn't, lakes would be polluted and void of any fish"

These statements are NOT generalizations typical of most here. More importantly, is this the attitude/stereotype we need perpetuated for the vast majority of law-abiding sportmen who are legitimately concerned about how our resources are being managed? (Read that sentence again!) The anti's would love to get ahold of this one.

Hesitantly, I admonish...

------------------
Best FISHES,
Matt

[This message has been edited by Matt D (edited 12-20-2002).]

[This message has been edited by D-man (edited 12-20-2002).]

[Duffman]

I kinda agree with ackotz, maybe not so much on the stripper comment, but generally I see where he is coming from. It might not be thousands of dollars for everyone, but I'm sure that amount is spent by a quite a few outdoorsman every year.

Heck, everyday on Fishing Minnesota I see examples where people try to skirt around the fish and game laws including this thread. From what I see out on the water and read in the CO reports that there are plenty of people who knowingly break the rules that help keep fishing in this state great.

Just because the majority of people who POST on FM seem like people who abide by the laws doesn't mean they do, and don't forget about the thousands who don't post and come here just to find out where they're biting and then go to said spot and do what they please.

I think the multible sheets of licenses that we need to carry sucks, and putting the lettering on the portables sucks. There is also other stuff that the DNR does that I don't care for but you know what? All that stuff that the state makes us do to be able to enjoy our hobby is really not that big a hassle or deal when compared to what other people are going through (cancer, loss of jobs, etc...). So I pay my fees, try not to biatch to much, and go out and wet some lines.

Life is too short people, quit your complaining and get out there and enjoy your time on this earth.

[MNice]

I think I spend around $100 or a little more per year on licenses. That includes sportsman, duck & pheasant stamps, deer, shelter. I don't think thats a whole bunch for a year.

[Swill]

more fees don't = better natural resources.

Just look at how the DNR has managed our grouse population habitat and you can see that there lask of aspen forest management has caused a decrease in population greater then the populations natural cycle. BUT that is another issue..

My problem is not really the cost rather the inconvience the DNR is putting on us. What will it be like when my son goes fishing on his own 15-20 years from now? Heck by then the DNR will figure out that those who fish the most should pay the most and they will set up a toll system on each lake. Any maybe for each luxury item lets say an underwater camera or vex. you would pay more because the likely hood of catching more increases...Sound crazy right? No more then carrying 20 different licences and spending a couple hundred just to catch a few jumbos up north? Which is cheaper fishing up north or eating a the silver butter steak and Manny's Steakhouse?

[Jarrod32]

Ugh...I'm not sure I want to get in this, but here goes...

First, a comment on the user fees vs. taxation argument. From an economic perspective, the fees for fishing, shelter, etc. are not analogous to taxation, as they are effectively voluntary. It's not like the income tax which must be paid...if you don't want to pay the fee, don't use a shelter.

I see references to elaborate schemes to 'get around' the rules (copy the license, lie about ownership, etc). To me, this seems like more work than $11 is worth.

Let's see...I have a $300 auger, a $350 shelter, an ATV, a $300 flasher, many dollars in tackle, and I routinely drop $10-$15 on bait and propane canisters every time I go fishing. Another $11 is not a big deal.

I think the main issue, and one that has been alluded to in some earlier posts, is the way the money raised from the fees is spent. If there were a bit more responsibility and accountability in the DNR and the way they operate and spend their money, the fees would be easier to accept.

We need to keep in mind the simple premise that fishing is not a right...its a privilege.

[Guest]

For a Portable Shelter that your not leaving overnight, all you should need is the Sticker Registration. and if your shelter has a window stick it to that. That's what I have done with my Fish Trap for the last 3 years with no problems. Even though I think it's kinda weird to have to licence a portable fish house anyways if it's not left over night. (that would make it permanent wouldn't it??) Anyways...it's only $12.50. and the sticker removes fairly easy from the windows when needed. (I remove my old one every year.......

[NINETOE]

Jarrod32, I will dis agree with you about a portable shelter license not being taxation. What purpose does it serve other than to raise revenue? What state expenditures to occomodate portables are used and would need to be recouped by the state? My 0.02

Hey ackotz , your comments must be from personal experiences! If you spend thousands of dollars a year on gear then $11.00 is nothing to you is it!!! Well the bottom line is the state tells you that you need a license and you go "oh yeah no problem" as you reach for your wallet. The tax and spend crowd love you and your kind! I believe that the DNR should be held to some accountability with reguards to thier spending. Do you know where the proceeds go from your licenses? OHH yeah a general fund. Well where from there? The DNR has been top heavy for years! The all the money being spent on these top positions and thier benefits could be used to hire and raise the pay of the in the field type of workers who truly impact our resources.ie CO's , biologists, specialists.

Oh yeah by the way I take offense to your comments and I think you should go back to that "other" board!

------------------
"sure are cocky for a starvin pilgrim"

[Guest]

What I'm seein on this thread, is a whole lot of angst that would be better directed toward the Legislators. If you feel strongly about this, and have the time to post your displeasure here, them get off your butt and send them the same text in an e-mail. None of us in here can fix it, and quite frankly, I'd rather be talkin fishing!

[NINETOE]

Labrat I have done exactly that! If you want to talk fishing then get it on!!!

------------------
"sure are cocky for a starvin pilgrim"

[Piker]

My only point is this, even if every fee were twice that it's worth it because hunting and fishing is awesome. I just think some of these fees and fine print regulations are imposing and unnecessary. The DNR isn't providing anything that would justify having to pay for a shelter license. I'm not saying that about a fishing license, because that's outside of this particular topic. I just wonder where it ends. I'd rather this debate was more civil, but this and the others like it that have come before and will come again, get a little crude. I've stated an opinion and others have stated similar or opposing opinions. I don't really liken the DNR to a sportsclub, because I don't think they have the same accountability. While I think the DNR may be undermanned (In the field), I don't think they are underfunded. I would like the DNR to be more accountable to what they are spending the money on. It is Christmas and there are more important things in the forefront this time of year, so we owe it to those less fortunate to at least be civil. This is my last post in this topic, so Merry Christmas, and prosperity in the New Year.

[This message has been edited by D-man (edited 12-20-2002).]

[SpikeRoberts]

the license fess DO NOT go into the General Fund. They are deposited in the Game and Fish Fund and the Natural Resources Fund.
User fees (licenses, registrations, titling, permits, donations and participation fees) account for 48% of the DNR's biennial (2002-2003)operating budget of $522.8 million. These fees are deposited in special and dedicated accounts, and then are appropriated to the agency.

[Jarrod32]

NINETOE...

Of course the purpose of the fees is to raise revenue. I was just pointing out that the fees are targeted, and more voluntary than taxation. If we don't want to pay the fees (or tax, if you prefer) then don't use a shelter. It's not like the income tax or sales tax, where there is no option for not paying (though I suppose one could argue that they could quit their job to avoid paying income tax). The point being, it is not paid by those who do not engage in the activity being charged a fee (or tax, if you prefer).

I do find agreement in the second part of your post, in that the DNR should be held responsible and more accountable for the fees that are paid. I agree that the agency is top-heavy, and that there are a number of changes that could (should) be made. A little more responsibility and accountability on the part of DNR would make these fees (or tax, if you prefer) easier to accept.

Again, fishing is a privilege...and it is appropriate for those who engage in the activity to pay for the expenses associated with it (CO's, biologists, maintenance of lake accesses, etc) through user fees (or taxes, if you prefer).

Are there some goofy-a$$ details in the fee structure that need some refinement (different fee structure for portables vs. permanents, for example)? Sure...but that is probably a different discussion.

The problem, as I see it, is not the fee itself...rather, it is how the revenue raised from the fee is used. That's the problem.

[cyonko]

Being from NY we are only required to have name and add. on shacks left overnight (no registration) Is it allowed or possible to put your required info on a piece of plywood or other board and then screw it into a permanent shack. On a portable shack you could put in two metal tent grommets and then bolt it on there? When you sell it you remove your info. Just a thought...probably not legal huh?

[NINETOE]

Jarrod32, I do believe that the state has amended the state constitution to include protection for hunting and fishing " rights".?

I just do not believe there is one good reason that a portable should be licensed if it is occupied.

This was on the table not too long ago so I think alot of people believe it. It was not approved because of the loss of revenue.

Call it what it is. I would prefer that the cost of a license go up instead of having a portable license. 0.02

------------------
"sure are cocky for a starvin pilgrim"

[IcePro]

What is the fuss?

Name on a portable-
Buy 2" reflectative decals and put them on the side of the plastic tub. I have not had any problem with any Conversation Officer.

Fish House license-
Put the adhesive lable on card stock and lamitnate. Punch a hole into the card and attach to your zipper or frame of your shelter.

License fee-
Get over it.

Yes, we live in the Land of 10,000 taxes.

Now to stir the pot!
Why don't you need a license for your deer stand? Many of these stands are more elaborite than some fish houses.