Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

Skip · 09-16-2010, 09:37 AM

Back on the topic at hand.

As a sledder and a boater I have no problem contributing to the current $200,000 rescue fund. Many rescures indeed involve boaters & sledders.

That said I do oppose the raiding of hunting & fishing funds each year when the original rescue account is depleted.

Obviously the entire system of funding needs to be examined, but in the interim once the $200,000 is reached I believe the Legislature has a duty to fund any additional rescues out of the General Fund.

Remember, even though the State politicians cry poverty most of the time, each 2 years as we approach re-election day these same politicians boast about the excess funds they have returned annually to the General fund due to their fical conservatism!

Why the General fund? Because too many very expensive rescues involve folks that don't boat, sled, fish hunt or hike. The current search going on for an alzheimer's patient in Waterville Valley shows that no matter what scheme is proposed to tax outdoor recreationalists, expensive rescues for those that would never be taxed or pay a fee will still occur.

Don't know what the best answer is, but do not believe the current process is fair or correct...

09-16-2010, 09:37 AM	#10
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Use genearl fund to assist after 200K... Back on the topic at hand. As a sledder and a boater I have no problem contributing to the current $200,000 rescue fund. Many rescures indeed involve boaters & sledders. That said I do oppose the raiding of hunting & fishing funds each year when the original rescue account is depleted. Obviously the entire system of funding needs to be examined, but in the interim once the $200,000 is reached I believe the Legislature has a duty to fund any additional rescues out of the General Fund. Remember, even though the State politicians cry poverty most of the time, each 2 years as we approach re-election day these same politicians boast about the excess funds they have returned annually to the General fund due to their fical conservatism! Why the General fund? Because too many very expensive rescues involve folks that don't boat, sled, fish hunt or hike. The current search going on for an alzheimer's patient in Waterville Valley shows that no matter what scheme is proposed to tax outdoor recreationalists, expensive rescues for those that would never be taxed or pay a fee will still occur. Don't know what the best answer is, but do not believe the current process is fair or correct...