Again I will ask.....if you go swimming shouldn't there be a resistration tag on your swim suit? Your arguements seem to support this stance...it's time to stop the pig! Yes it would raise a lot of dollars...which they are already raising and wasting!

$71,000 average government salary...$40,000 average private sector salary..and the private sector has fewer perks!

Woodsman, Spare that Paddler...
 

Surcharge? It does appear so:

http://ulocal.wmur.com/service/displ...77326&d=259694

http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2010/HB1588

Yup. Tax that other guy. :rolleye2:

Perhaps better as a question: "What year was registration required for non-powered sailboats?"

My 1980's photos of my various Hobie 16s and 18s show no bow numbers or registration decals—while in 1993, I was stopped for no decal on my Tornado 20 catamaran. :confused:

Since last year, I don't own any multihull sailboat. :( Say, catamarans have two hulls! :D Trimaran$ have THREE! :D :D

When NHMP are given resources, they go unused. :(

With the advent of "Express Cruisers"—and ever-larger "Mush Cruisers"—the State's "take" of net revenues should parallel boat sizes nicely—just as it has for the past two decades. :)

:look: Y'know, the NHMP doesn't have a helicopter! :idea:

I WROTE VEHICLES. Better believe: I registered my auto, and the surcharge is there. Included, but it's there; I don't think itemized..........

I did not say boats! VEHICLES! Trucks are included; I do not know about trailers.

I guess I am a little confused. When the original fee for non powered boats was proposed it was brought forward as a source of additional funding for Fish and Game, not NHMP. When did this change and why did NHMP get into the mix.

I myself would pay the fee, I at this time do not own a power boat (hopefully that will change soon), but I do own a few canoes and I would pay to put a sticker on each, but I would prefer to see my money go to Fish and Game not solely to NHMP, the reason you might ask, well it is simple. I for one do not paddle on large open lakes, mostly small rivers, whitewater and the occasional sail on a small lake. Most of the rivers that I paddle are not handled directly by NHMP but Fish and Game. If a search is needed it is handled by Fish and Game. Now I would be open to a split of the proceeds to benifit both agencies, but a far greater majority of paddlers do not paddle the big waters that NHMP patrols, I know these numbers are growing as more people seem to have kayaks these days. Obviously row boats and small sail craft are a MP issue more than F&G.

I can understand the want of NHMP to have access to more funding to help fund patrol of, lets face it larger craft. But having NHMP take money from a source that has very little need for patrol and regulation, from the agency thats sole mission is to preserve the areas and waterways that see more canoe and kayak traffic per season than the bigger waterways, just does not seem right. Not to mention that Fish and Game has a far more severe funding deficit compared to MP and it does not get any money from the general fund (I do not know if MP does or not).

I don't know, maybe these two agencies should really take a long look at merging and trying to fill the voids with the amount of overlap that would be present.

Toad, I 100% hear what you are saying regarding government spending, but IMO you are comparing two different sides of the government coin. Asking participants of a particular activity to chip in money to help offset the overall costs of their use and protecting their enjoyment is very different than forcing someone that does not own a boat to pay a tax to help preserve and protect the use of water for boaters (someone else).

I personally feel the money would be going to the wrong agency if it goes to marine patrol. If that is the case then the majority of paddlers will be funding MP to patrol and protect not themselves but the larger craft that MP spends most of its time chasing.

My apologies, no-engine! Since the OP was about increased boat registration fees, I assumed the surcharge included boats too!

I have since found this in HB2 (the state budget bill);
Trailer registration fees also increased but I did not see any mention of a surcharge being applied to those registrations. So that explains that.

After I found the above, I found HB-1588-FN to be introduced in 2010 which, according to the bill analysis, would "..... change(s) the effective date of the expiration of the motor vehicle registration fee increase and surcharge from July 1, 2011 to July 1, 2010." We'll just have to wait and see what happens to this one!

Jmen...

I think some sort of split is a good idea.... 60/40 in favor of F&G? Either way it will help out both departments....

Not sure combining F&G & NHMP would be a good idea... but it certainly would warrant some closer study. I do know that the F&G officers are the most powerful form of LEO in the state....

Woodsy

Wow, I didn't realize there was such a big increase for the big trucks. And then when mud season comes they restrict their use of the roads.

Since you were responding to my post involving a look at my SAILBOAT LICENSE PLATE which is the last plate I had prior to bow numbers confirming another's post that 1989 appears to have been the year when bow numbers went into effect in NH!

Yep, there were sailboats that were required to be registered :cool:

You should pay attention in class! :emb:

What unused resources were they given?

License Plates
 

The place I rent a cabin on the lake has a Sunfish sailboat that still has a 1988 License plate scewed to the transom. The plate takes up the entire starboard side. If the transom was any smaller the plate wouldn't fit. The boat is 13' 10" long. NB

That's interesting; however, I own a 1963 Folbot kayak that the previous owner registered in New Hampshire—unnecessarily! :o 'Wonder how many of those unpowered craft are around, waiting to discover their unintended generosity of revenue to the state of New Hampshire? :confused:

(IOW, the registration of that particular Sunfish, like my kayak, could have been an error predating 1988).

I was interested for the beginning date that sailboats were required to be registered. (Such as the previously-given examples). I would fully expect that any boat with an engine would pay registration fees—at least since the 1950s.

Another Thought
 

The Sunfish I mentioned above was "rented' out to guests. Maybe it was considered "Comercial"...thus requiring plates. Just wondering. :D NB

registration
 

I am having a hard time recalling when the plates were replaced. It seems to me that My Dad had a Kingfisher boat that he had to put the numbers on the bow. He if I recall was upset with that. But we also had the Puddy tat boat at the same time but never went beyond the plate. I removed the Puddy-tat from the lake in Sept 1970 and it never returned to water again.

I was in the Navy then and I don't recall all the numbers.

As for the charge for row boats, canoes, kayaks and other materials I think they should be charged for use on the NH waterways just like moorings. Perhaps not as much but they are protected just as much as anything else and someone has to pay the protector.

Has to be after 1988
 

My 1988 Formula has the holes for the plate above the transom. I remember when the feds required bow numbers on all registered boats, they also required the state to use the fed navaid markers. A big arguement came up as to how the fed markers will work on the lake. The feds finally agreed that our bouy system is far better for NH lakes than the feds bouy system. Thanks God for that!

Property taxes/liforelaxin
 

Liforelaxin, How do you figure that states who have sales and income taxes are holding property taxes in check? There are many other states that have high property taxes as well as income and sales taxes. If NH institutes a sales tax, income tax or both, I promise you property taxes will not go down. And then we will be paying high property taxes and an income tax and or sales tax.

I lived in Mass all my life until I moved to NH 11 years ago and I never want to go back. I am also paying much less in taxes in NH even though many think property taxes are high in NH. I beg to differ. My parents pay a similar amount in property taxes in Mass for a similar size house and their land is 3200 square feet. I have over an acre of land.

All states and towns across the country are complaining about decreased revenues no matter how many taxes they have. Elected officials who support higher taxes amaze me. Don't they know that raising taxes will lower tax revenues? Look at history and when taxes are lowered revenues increase. When taxes are raised revenues decrease.

Try this for size
 

I own a single family in Pawtucket RI as well that I rent out. 5,000sqft of land, ustr under 1600sqft cape home

Last year property value was $235,300 and rate was 12.39 per $1000
taxes were roughly $2,900

This year property value $204,800 and rate was jumped to 17.78 per $1,000 taxes are now $3,641

Are you kidding me, I understand increasing the rate to hold taxes becuase the town is in need and with the drop in value, but to increase me $700 for the year and going down in value. This is kililng people down there, not to mention RI has the second highest unemployment rate in the country and highest average insurance costs in the country.

They wonder why the state is in trouble they themselves are bankrupting the state by over taxing those that can barely afford to pay, not to mention the house sat vacant for 5 months last year and it taks in $250 less a month than the monthly mortgage is.

That's peanuts here in NJ
 

Not to say I don't sympathize with that increase, but that's peanuts here in NJ. I own a 1400sq ft cape on 4700 sq ft of land. My taxes have increased from $2400 in 1990 to $6788 for 2009. We have also had an increase in the sales tax to 7% in 2008 and we also have a graduated income tax. Oh yeah, in the past 2 years, the sewer fees which used to be included in the tax bill are now billed separately, so tack on another $145 to my $6788 tax bill. I just cringe when I hear people say a sales or income tax will reduce property tax bills in NH. DON'T BELIEVE IT, FOLKS! We also have Atlantic City gambling which was supposed to help -- all it does is allow state govt. to spend more - mostly on corruption.

I agree..very similiar here in the "Common" Wealth of Assachusetts. The private sector "pays" while the government "plays"!

What do they mean by "Common"wealth"? :D:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

I remember in Mass when they put in the temporary 3% sales tax. I think Herter was governor? The only thing temporary about it was the 3% part.

My boat registrations only went up about 46% this year. What a deal.

Gov. Volpe ?

"Council taps five marinas to collect boat regisry fees"

is the headline for a www.citizen.com, January 27 article that talks about boat registration fees and the City of Laconia.

Interesting that there's no mention about the five-dollar saving when you register with the state, either by mail or by the Glendale-Gilford Marine Patrol walk-in window.

So, the total registration fee probably doubled but now you can save 5-bucks.....what a deal! ... :D

I dont mind the fee to help boaters safety
 

BUT PLEASE DO NOT USE ANY OF IT TO BUY LIDAR EQUIPMENT...

The people who need hand holding makes the fees hire.. :emb:

The only reason the state got out of the Navaid discussion was that the lakes where land locked.... if Winnipesaukee and the river system had lockes out to the ocean it would have been a different story....

Vermont and many other states got the same deal too.... the only places in Vermont where they have the Fed markers are on the non land locked lakes........ In short the decession was if the Coast Guard doesn't Patrol it, and can't get to it.... then state marker systems are ok.......