Lawmaker wants paddlers to pay

[fpartri497]

O.K. If they start taxing toilet paper I QUIT!!!

[This'nThat]

"a modest, flat fee for all small boats powered by muscle and wind"

What are the Vegas odds on this remaining a modest, flat fee anywhere in our near future? This is simply a poor excuse for money-grabbing. If Representative John Byrnes feels so guilty (as he says he does), then let him write a personal check and mail it in. And to make the recovery of his body easier, Rep Byrnes can wear a PFD at all times.

We don't need to soothe Byrnes' guilt by having him impose a fee on every aspect of our life.

[Pineedles]

I am in favor of this fee given the fact that if you use it, pay for it.

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I am in favor of this fee given the fact that if you use it, pay for it.

Get used to it folks. Budgets in this country are way out of wack. Yes, there needs to be substantial expense cuts, but fees and taxes need to go up as well. It is going to get ugly!

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I am in favor of this fee given the fact that if you use it, pay for it.

Using that logic then how about Boogie and Surf Boards? They “use it” so why not “pay for it” as well?

How about other users that the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department is involved with, i.e., birdwatch or hiking. A wide range of outdoors enthusiasts benefit from the department's work in wildlife biology and habitat protection, but only canoers and kayakers would get stuck with this particular fee -- presumably because they use watercraft on which they can stick a decal, making it easy to monitor compliance.

[Argie's Wife]

Not only is this one of the worst ideas I've heard for raising revenue, but it's going to be the most difficult to enforce. It's going to further hurt tourism in our state, like the camping tax, and cause people to think twice before coming to NH for vacation, as our neighbors don't have this silly tax.

Is there even enough room on a kayak to place a registration sticker so it can be seen? I can't imagine what it's going to take in MP hours, etc. to enforce this... of course, that means that they'll have to hire more officers, have more training, and increase that budget... so more taxes will have to be raised.

No.

No.

No.

Don't let this pass!

More taxes = Not good!

Write your representatives and let them know you oppose this!

Click here to see addresses for your area reps: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/hous...rs/belknap.htm


Next thing to be taxed - floating coolers:

[RLW]

This law would only be good on large lakes that are patrolled as the small, medium to near large are not patrolled at all. They should be as there are more unregistered boats, rules broken on them than one can shake a stick at. Just my worth

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Argie's Wife

Not only is this one of the worst ideas I've heard for raising revenue, but it's going to be the most difficult to enforce. It's going to further hurt tourism in our state, like the camping tax, and cause people to think twice before coming to NH for vacation, as our neighbors don't have this silly tax.

Is there even enough room on a kayak to place a registration sticker so it can be seen? I can't imagine what it's going to take in MP hours, etc. to enforce this... of course, that means that they'll have to hire more officers, have more training, and increase that budget... so more taxes will have to be raised.

No.

No.

No.

Don't let this pass!

More taxes = Not good!

Write your representatives and let them know you oppose this!

Click here to see addresses for your area reps: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/hous...rs/belknap.htm


Next thing to be taxed - floating coolers:

I like this, where can I get one?


The floating cooler is nice as well.

[Pineedles]

I stand by the belief that there should be a fee. I am not going to debate it, because like all other controversial subjects some people will get ridiculous in their examples of what should be licensed and what should not. Bogey boards, sure. Rubber duckies, if you can ride it, why not. Stick a decal on a hiker's butt, OK. Of course these examples are insane, but I pay a huge property tax, for the privilege of using a house that can never be sold for 2-3 weeks a year. I'm not bitter, but I would like to see the tax and fee burden shared.

If you don't agree, fine I can live with that.

[robmac]

Just what I need more things to register

[moose tracks]

Originally Posted by robmac

Just what I need more things to register

If it is powered by muscle then TAX IT! - "Live with Taxes or Die"

[Yosemite Sam]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I stand by the belief that there should be a fee. I am not going to debate it, because like all other controversial subjects some people will get ridiculous in their examples of what should be licensed and what should not. Bogey boards, sure. Rubber duckies, if you can ride it, why not. Stick a decal on a hiker's butt, OK. Of course these examples are insane, but I pay a huge property tax, for the privilege of using a house that can never be sold for 2-3 weeks a year. I'm not bitter, but I would like to see the tax and fee burden shared.

If you don't agree, fine I can live with that.

Sorry Pineedles....didn't mean to get you upset. I just think that the Federal, State and Local govenments need to stop this tax and spend thought process and get more creative with ways to fund some of their departments.
I'm willing to pay a little to register my 2 kayaks and 2 canoes but when does the taxing of everything that we ejoy doing finally stop?

[Pineedles]

I know Sam, where does it stop? I can't answer that, but I still believe that if there IS a TAX or FEE, that it has to be equal. I don't know what will stop the spending of OUR money by GOV'T., but I guess I'm just giving up on trying to control them. Even the recent election doesn't make me very happy about the way things are being done.

[Bigstan]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I stand by the belief that there should be a fee. I am not going to debate it, because like all other controversial subjects some people will get ridiculous in their examples of what should be licensed and what should not. Bogey boards, sure. Rubber duckies, if you can ride it, why not. Stick a decal on a hiker's butt, OK. Of course these examples are insane, but I pay a huge property tax, for the privilege of using a house that can never be sold for 2-3 weeks a year. I'm not bitter, but I would like to see the tax and fee burden shared.

If you don't agree, fine I can live with that.

That is the point - this tax revenue will not be 'shared'. Your personal payout will never go down. The $ will be used to make up for whatever shortfalls occur in other areas. It is simply a way of generating additional revenue. We need government to live within it's means, not look to expand into a new tax base.

We made it this far without this tax, we can make it the rest of the way. Government needs to cut back like the rest of us. Show me where their layoffs are, or where they have tried to balance their budget without adding additional tax revenue. Show me that and I will consider paying a new tax.

[Argie's Wife]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I stand by the belief that there should be a fee. I am not going to debate it, because like all other controversial subjects some people will get ridiculous in their examples of what should be licensed and what should not. Bogey boards, sure. Rubber duckies, if you can ride it, why not. Stick a decal on a hiker's butt, OK. Of course these examples are insane, but I pay a huge property tax, for the privilege of using a house that can never be sold for 2-3 weeks a year. I'm not bitter, but I would like to see the tax and fee burden shared.

If you don't agree, fine I can live with that.

I respectfully submit the following:

Then why not a usage fee?

Why not ask the people using the public ramps to pay an entry fee for using the lake?

The lake front property owners already pay a tax - property tax - and shouldn't have to pay again to register a boat, even if it has motor or paddle - period. If the weekend warriors that come up here to camp or whatever (non-property owners/tax payers) need to fork over some money, then do it when they enter the water. It would be easier to maintain, boats could be checked for milfoil, and there would less MP's on the water.

I am not in favor of raising revenue from anything that may hurt tourism in NH, which hurts businesses in the long run - especially small businesses. Taxes have been raised on prepared food (restaurant tax), vehicle registration, boat registration, camping, etc. - this impacts the locals but it really impacts the tourists and the non-voting tax-payers. It really helps no one and in this bad economy is a poor proposal for raising revenue.

[RailroadJoe]

Yup, now we can hire a whole bunch more state workers to watch over the ramps and collect money. Think!

[robmac]

I agree with AW,I got my tax bill and then boat registration bill. Might be time for a second job that is after I get back to work.

[jrc]

There are always two parts of any budget shortfall, spending and taxes. Just because people agree that spending should be cut, doesn't mean that fees should not be adjusted.

I believe that fees addressed at a user of services is more conservative and even libertarian than general taxes paid by the masses to benefit a few.

NH must and will provide rescue services to a drowning kayaker. Should the kayaking community help pay for this service through fees or should everyone in NH pay through general taxes?

[SIKSUKR]

Will I have to register my water skis? How about all you divers? Those fin propelled wetsuits fit right into that catagory don't they?

[Pineedles]

As for ramp fees, I already pay a fee for my jet ski launched at Center Harbor. Don't other launch sites charge already? I have only seen powerboats launch at CH, no yaks or noes.

I guess I'm looking at this from a non-resident, non-voting, non-local business owner's perspective. That's who I am. Frankly, I am guessing though that this proposal is headed nowhere.

[Argie's Wife]

Originally Posted by jrc

There are always two parts of any budget shortfall, spending and taxes. Just because people agree that spending should be cut, doesn't mean that fees should not be adjusted.

I believe that fees addressed at a user of services is more conservative and even libertarian than general taxes paid by the masses to benefit a few.

NH must and will provide rescue services to a drowning kayaker. Should the kayaking community help pay for this service through fees or should everyone in NH pay through general taxes?

Budgets are based on the previous year's expenses and on expected revenue for that year. Shortfalls can occur when there's unanticipated expenses, such as a sudden increase in fuel prices, and that's when something like a contingency fund can be set up. Money within a budget line item can be transferred to the budget line item where you have an anticipated shortfall - or a municipality may leave that budget line item alone just to show where there was a shortfall for next year's budget planning... Generally speaking, if something within a budget is a MAJOR capital improvement expense (like renovating a town building or purchasing police cruisers), it will be paid for in a fund that extends out over several years vs. a one-time high payment which would result in a tax increase for that year...

That being said...

Personally, I don't place the cost of rescue at the same level as hiring more MP personnel or other use-related activities. It may be that an emergency never happens - or it may be that there are several on a lake in a year - and who can plan on someone just needing a tow back to shore vs. someone needing the DHART (Dartmouth's helicopter) to take them to a trauma center? You can't plan emergencies... and whether it was me, my kids, you, or your loves ones, I don't think you can put a price (or charge) on emergency services provided by municipalities. All towns have a "mutual aid" policy that I know of - they will come to each other's aid at a time of need, with no charge - and reciprocate. You can't put a price on that!

[fatlazyless]

Every town, city or the state with a boat ramp on a lake has the opportunity there to install one of those steel fee deposit tubes similar to what's used in the White Mountain National Forest trail head parking lots. They are about 48" high x 10" diameter and get anchored into a concrete base, right next to the launch ramp. Without having to pay a town attendant, it would be there 24/7, and every time someone used the ramp to access the lake with a trailer they could be expected to pay a fee.....say 10-dollars. These would in all likelihood greatly increase the revenue stream and lower the cost of collection.

For security, the local police could stake out the boat ramp from a distance with a pair of binoculars and slap any boat ramp scofflaws with a 75-dollar fine, plus publish their name into the local newspaper police beat column! Plus, just have the local police eye ball the ramp as they roll past as part of their regular routine.

The big question would probably be: Which town employee can be trusted with the key to the all cash, fee tube padlock. No doubt, it would not be a first for so called trusted town employees to undergo a criminal transformation by turning themselves into "ten dollar bill collectors" as a new source for personal income.

So, if it requires a trailer to use the ramp, the fee tube must be fed ten dollarinos.....no exceptions...........period!

Hey...if the town decides to put steel fee deposit tubes down at the town ramps at Lake Waukewan, Big Lake: Meredith Bay, and Shep Brown's....I'll can volunteer myself to be administrate'n the official removal of the revenue stream from the fee tubes ..... !

[jmen24]

Folks, F&G does not have access to the general fund, in or out. They get a $50,000 dollar match per year from the general fund for non-game related use.

I have no problem with paying a fee for my canoes as long as long as ALL of the proceeds go to Fish and Game. Marine Patrol funds their budget from our taxes, F&G does not.

Most S&R is headed by F&G, most (the others are typically on the town level) public access sites in the state of NH are aquired by, developed to a useful standard by and maintained by, Fish and Game. This includes all lakes, ponds, rivers and streams in NH.

The only boats I own are paddle craft and I have no issue with this request, as long as the money goes to the agency that needs and will provide the best use of it, Fish and Game. If MP gets any of this money than I will not hold the same position that I have stated today.

Don't believe me. Do some research.
http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Insi..._QandA.new.htm

And before anyone tells me to give them my own money so they can keep theirs. I have conservation plates on my vehicle, I pay over $100 a year in hunting and fishing licenses, as well as OHRV registrations ($50+), I donate information gathered in my time in the woods, to help the state biologists with game management. And I also donate an amount of money each year as a personal contribution.

I somehow believe that this has nothing to do with funding a vital agency in this state that is in serious need of additional funding. And more to do with filling the state coffers.

[ronc4424]

I agree with jmen24 100%. I would think that since the state had to spend extra money on radar guns and manpower to enforce the newly enacted speed limits to improve safety for canoes and kayaks that they would jump at the chance to pitch in. I pay my fair share to recieve the same benifits they do.

[fatlazyless]

I'll probably be the first one busted for paddling without a sticker, or for unloading a boat down the ramp without paying. Not paying at the ramp is like a local sport for all the locals....nobody pays....everybody just unloads and ignores the sign down at Shep Brown's town ramp.

Pay to paddle....NO WAY JOSE......Live Free of Die....you gots to stand up and fight for your rights......

[Pineedles]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

I'll probably be the first one busted for paddling without a sticker, or for unloading a boat down the ramp without paying.:

I think I'll suggest a new provision to the proposed bill. "Shoot the first person who breaks this law."

Sorry FLL, you set yourself up for that one. I am guessing you did it on purpose.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by jmen24

Most S&R is headed by F&G, most (the others are typically on the town level) public access sites in the state of NH are aquired by, developed to a useful standard by and maintained by, Fish and Game. This includes all lakes, ponds, rivers and streams in NH.

1) ...including Vermont's very long border with New Hampshire.

2) Anyone check this year's NHF&G rescue log?

http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Newsroom/newsroom.htm

The majority are lost hikers—many from out-of-state—and a Vermont kayaker who was lost on Vermont's very long border with New Hampshire.

Yup. Let's tax ourselves into Prosperity.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Argie's Wife

Not only is this one of the worst ideas I've heard for raising revenue, but it's going to be the most difficult to enforce. It's going to further hurt tourism in our state, like the camping tax, and cause people to think twice before coming to NH for vacation, as our neighbors don't have this silly tax.

I personally am wondering if there is a number of people, who are trying to do just that. Through rules and regulations that make it hard to enjoy yourself they are trying to make NH a elitest state. First their where speedlimits.... Now that has kept a certain group from wanting to come to the lake, but it hasn't helped as much as initially thought. Well what is next, lets start making it less enjoyable for others...

ideas I consistently here kicked around

-- use tax or registration for kayaker, conoeist and row boat owneres
-- HP restrictions on boats on inland waters
-- use permits for out of state registered boats
-- campers and hikers taxes / fees

I am starting to think that while NH has thrived by being the play ground for the Northeast US, that there aren't some that would like to get rid of the tourists and all the money they bring to the state. NH will have a fall from grace if this happens. By making it harder and more of a financial burden on the tourist NH only hurts itself.

[topwater]

Tourist will NEVER stop coming. maybe thats just what NH needs is a fewer &#*% coming up here and ruining it for the majority of the people. The out of staters think that NH will close if they don't come up. In any state you have to PAY to PLAY. Don't like and Don't come up. Tourist come here to get away from the CRAP in thier state. They won't stop coming!! IMHO if laws and rules that were applied to the State of NH were made by people that were born and raised in NH, Not the implants from other states, New Hampshire would still be a Great State that is once was.
Say what you want, but so many out of staters (not all) have moved here to get away from situations in thier own state that they didn't like, only to move here and try to impliment they same things up here. I think you would be amazed how many not born and raised people indivituals are in NEW HAMPSHIRE politics. Yes, it is thier right to run for office, however its hard to teach old dogs new tricks.
Things will NEVER change for the better and I know it, just like this country, once we were strong, well respected, powerful , and prosperous, now, well you can see the difference for yourself.
BUT, I will have a MERRY CHRISTMAS, and I hope everyone else has a MERRY CHRISTMAS as well.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by topwater

Tourist will NEVER stop coming...They won't stop coming!!

These are the folks who will be most impacted:

(Add it up).



OOooooooo...New Hampshire forgot to tax the bicycles of tourists! When they're not getting lost on the lake, they're wearing out the state's roadways!

[sunset on the dock]

Originally Posted by topwater

Say what you want, but so many out of staters (not all) have moved here to get away from situations in thier own state that they didn't like, only to move here and try to impliment they same things up here. I think you would be amazed how many not born and raised people indivituals are in NEW HAMPSHIRE politics.

In particular the president of SBONH is one who moved here from out of state and wishes to change our NH laws. Even the Abenaki Indians came here from "out of state".

[Yankee]

I for one was born, raised, and live here stdotd. And I will support anyone or any organization that promotes safer boating. SBONH has at least made an attempt to do just that. And please eschew yet another of your obsession laden diatribes.

I'm not sure where your rant was going with the Abenaki reference, but whatever.

IMO,the people who are complaining in this thread about taxes, fees, etc... are their their own worst enemies. They have no one to blame but themselves. In their arrogance these people want to visit, vacation, own second homes here in NH yet they do not wish to pay for services that they're accustomed to back in their home state. Heaven help us locals if the roads are too bumpy, crowded or unsafe. Or that the police couldn't respond fast enough, or that the fire department didn't have the staff or equipment to put out the fire in their McMansion.

[Bear Islander]

I notice that all he is trying to do is "eliminate an exemption". More doublespeak for a tax that has never existed.

From a practice point of view I think he might have a hard time describing which "vessels" require this NEW type of registration. At our place we have lots of inflatables. A couple of them look like inflatable boats, one is a dragon you ride on, one is a tube with a seat for a toddler. And of course there are a couple of small lounge rafts. Which will require these stickers?


Is this a boat? Will a Marine Patrol officer think it's a boat? What if the kids were holding paddles?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I notice that all he is trying to do is "eliminate an exemption". More doublespeak for a tax that has never existed.

From a practice point of view I think he might have a hard time describing which "vessels" require this NEW type of registration. At our place we have lots of inflatables. A couple of them look like inflatable boats, one is a dragon you ride on, one is a tube with a seat for a toddler. And of course there are a couple of small lounge rafts. Which will require these stickers?


Is this a boat? Will a Marine Patrol officer think it's a boat? What if the kids were holding paddles?

Good questions.

I am seeing a number of bills regarding boating now being introduced that are poorly researched and horribly worded. We have a number of laws that many of us have noticed over the years that are vague and confusing. But instead of addressing the problems we have, we have a rush to add more red tape.

I am disappointed that so many conservatives that ran on a platform to trim Government are instead bowling each other over to add yet more layers of regulation. The only real difference I see so far with the new legislature versus the old is just a different set of special interest groups calling the shots....

[ITD]

Originally Posted by Skip

Good questions.

........

I am disappointed that so many conservatives that ran on a platform to trim Government are instead bowling each other over to add yet more layers of regulation. The only real difference I see so far with the new legislature versus the old is just a different set of special interest groups calling the shots....

That's the problem, this guy isn't conservative and I doubt he thinks himself one.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by This'nThat

If Representative John Byrnes feels so guilty (as he says he does), then let him write a personal check and mail it in...We don't need to soothe Byrnes' guilt by having him impose a fee on every aspect of our life.

With retired officers so much in the news with six-figure pensions, Representative John Byrnes would want to be less conspicuous to NH taxpayers.

Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam

Representative Richard Drisko (R-Hollis) said, explaining that expanding the number of boat registrations could provide additional funds for the matching grants the N.H. Department of Environmental Services distributes to municipal governments and local organizations to address milfoil.

Paddlers and sailors are very poor spreaders of milfoil fragments.

Representative David Hess (R-Hooksett) has filed legislation to repeal all tax and fee increases enacted since 2007.

But the NH Legislature won't be able to steal those increases to pay the pensions of retired officers from Keene!

Jared Teutsch noted that in Maine a $20 fee is levied on canoes and kayaks and the proceeds are applied to controlling exotic and invasive species.

Let's try not copy taxation from highly-regulated states that continue to bleed population.