Registration Increase?? What the He double hockey sticks!

[Woodsy]

I do not have any problem with requiring non-powered watercraft to pay an "access fee" of $5 - $10 per craft. Full blown registrations are a completely different animal... no need for that.

A simple yearly sticker, same color as the powerboat sticker affixed to the watercraft would do.... fine for non compliance should equal the cost of the sticker + $10


Woodsy

[TOAD]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I do not have any problem with requiring non-powered watercraft to pay an "access fee" of $5 - $10 per craft. Full blown registrations are a completely different animal... no need for that.

A simple yearly sticker, same color as the powerboat sticker affixed to the watercraft would do.... fine for non compliance should equal the cost of the sticker + $10


Woodsy

I guess my stance is where does the government pig stop. It just keeps growing and eating into the wallets of taxpayers to support bloated governemnt perks, pensions, and flat out waste that are out of control.

The reasoning in the quote above gauls me. What's next? You'll need a government registration tag on your swim suit in order to go swimming in a lake or stream?

The relentless growth of government has to be stopped and stopped soon.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by TOAD

"...The relentless growth of government has to be stopped and stopped soon..."

We could move elections from November up to April 16th.

Originally Posted by Airwaves

"...the sailboat plate I have hanging on the wall is 1988, so 89 is probably the year of the switchover..."

As I recall, no-engine sailboats weren't "taxed".

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

"...the first year or two we just zipped tied the plate to the Outboard motor..."

AHA! You most likely had a Mercury over 20-HP back then.

[Woodsy]

Toad...

I am most certainly one of the biggest anti-spend advocates here on the board. I think your GW quote is absolutely spot on....

With that being said, I dont consider the NHMP part of the government bloat... they are funded soley by boat registrations (which have been declining for a few years) and Federal Grants. They do not get any $$$ from the State's general Fund. Essentially your boat registration is a 'Use tax". I dont have much of a problem with "use Taxes" as they only apply to certain people and can be avoided....

At this point, paddlers are not required to help pay for the NHMP, even though they are some of the more vocal NHMP critics. I have no problem with a $5 or $10 access sticker being required for paddlers.... They can help pay too!

Woodsy

Woodsy

[Sunbeam lodge]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Toad...

I am most certainly one of the biggest anti-spend advocates here on the board. I think your GW quote is absolutely spot on....

With that being said, I dont consider the NHMP part of the government bloat... they are funded soley by boat registrations (which have been declining for a few years) and Federal Grants. They do not get any $$$ from the State's general Fund. Essentially your boat registration is a 'Use tax". I dont have much of a problem with "use Taxes" as they only apply to certain people and can be avoided....

At this point, paddlers are not required to help pay for the NHMP, even though they are some of the more vocal NHMP critics. I have no problem with a $5 or $10 access sticker being required for paddlers.... They can help pay too!

Woodsy

Woodsy

Wait a minute. I allready pay on my 23 bowrider and jet ski. Why hit me again on the kyack. I can only use one at a time.

[Woodsy]

Sunbeam... and others,

Its understandable how people who don't own motorized boats are against this proposal, they have been able to use the public resource of NH lakes, ponds and rivers for free... its in THIER best interest to keep it free (for them)!

But the safety and maintenance of those waterways does have a cost associated with it! During the Great Speed Limit debates this forum saw canoeists and kayakers complain vociferously about the NHMP and its lack of enforcement.... especially of the 150' rule. however they pay nothing to support the NHMP.

So you dont want a fee? How do YOU propose we fund the NHMP? Fuel, personnel and maintenance costs increase 3-5% every year. Should it stay as it is now where only powerboaters bear the burden of funding the NHMP? We see the results of that policy in the doubling of our registration fees.

Short of not paying anything at all, wouldnt you rather a $5 or $10 fee on your kayak instead of a double digit increase in your powerboat and PWC registration again in a couple of years? and again in couple more years?

I do understand that "getting hit" again with a small fee is definiately a pain! But lets try to be realistic... a $5 or $10 fee isnt going to really be all the detrimental compared to your motorized boat registration fees doubling every 2-3 years....

Requiring a NH waterway access decal would raise alot of $$$ for NHMP while minimally impacting EVERYONE who uses the water resources... and doesnt put the financial burden soley on one group.

Woodsy

[TOAD]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

But the safety and maintenance of those waterways does have a cost associated with it!


Requiring a NH waterway access decal would raise alot of $$$ for NHMP while minimally impacting EVERYONE who uses the water resources... and doesnt put the financial burden soley on one group.

Woodsy

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!

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by TOAD

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!

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.

[ApS]

Surcharge? It does appear so:

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

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

"...I have no problem with a $5 or $10 access sticker being required for paddlers..."

Yup. Tax that other guy.

"...Sailboats over 16 or 20 feet with engines were required to be registered with a license plate then bow numbers..."

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.

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

"...however they pay nothing to support the NHMP..."

When NHMP are given resources, they go unused.

"...Short of not paying anything at all, wouldnt you rather a $5 or $10 fee on your kayak instead of a double digit increase in your powerboat and PWC registration again in a couple of years? and again in couple more years...?...a $5 or $10 fee isnt going to really be all the detrimental compared to your motorized boat registration fees doubling every 2-3 years..."

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.

"...Requiring a NH waterway access decal would raise alot of $$$ for NHMP while minimally impacting EVERYONE who uses the water resources...and doesnt put the financial burden soley on one group...I am most certainly one of the biggest anti-spend advocates here on the board..."

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

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

Sunbeam... and others,

Its understandable how people who don't own motorized boats are against this proposal, they have been able to use the public resource of NH lakes, ponds and rivers for free... its in THIER best interest to keep it free (for them)!

But the safety and maintenance of those waterways does have a cost associated with it! During the Great Speed Limit debates this forum saw canoeists and kayakers complain vociferously about the NHMP and its lack of enforcement.... especially of the 150' rule. however they pay nothing to support the NHMP.

So you dont want a fee? How do YOU propose we fund the NHMP? Fuel, personnel and maintenance costs increase 3-5% every year. Should it stay as it is now where only powerboaters bear the burden of funding the NHMP? We see the results of that policy in the doubling of our registration fees.

Short of not paying anything at all, wouldnt you rather a $5 or $10 fee on your kayak instead of a double digit increase in your powerboat and PWC registration again in a couple of years? and again in couple more years?

I do understand that "getting hit" again with a small fee is definiately a pain! But lets try to be realistic... a $5 or $10 fee isnt going to really be all the detrimental compared to your motorized boat registration fees doubling every 2-3 years....

Requiring a NH waterway access decal would raise alot of $$$ for NHMP while minimally impacting EVERYONE who uses the water resources... and doesnt put the financial burden soley on one group.

Woodsy

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.