Hiking in Maine - Do you have your permit?

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Fitz

New member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
181
Reaction score
11
Someone please tell me I'm wrong. I'm an avid paddler and I'm all bent out of shape by the State of Maine's pending efforts to register all canoes, kayaks and sailboats, but if you read through more of the budget bill I came across this tidbit:

LD#468
Sec. III-47. Nonconsumptive user card or permit; report.
The Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Commissioner of
Conservation, known in this section as "the commissioners" shall
work jointly to develop a card or permit for the purpose of
raising revenue from the nonconsumptive outdoor recreational user
base and to determine the distribution of those funds between the
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Department of
Conservation.

Anyone on this board know anything about this gem?
 
Here's alittle more information...

While Maine slept, millions were spent
By Stephen Bowen
Source:
Bangor Daily News
Tuesday, 03/22/2005
Edition: all, Section: a, Page 9


The sun was just coming up when we left the State House Saturday morning after pulling an all-nighter to vote the state's biennial budget out of the committee. We had sat in the Appropriations Committee room for seven straight hours, beginning at 11 p.m., spending millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars while taxpayers themselves slept soundly, unaware, mercifully, of what was going on.
This was not a task that should have taken all night. The budget document had been drafted in January, had been presented to us at length by top administration officials, and had been subject to review, in part, at least, by every legislative committee. Even at 350 pages, it was a document we knew well. What took us all night, though, was not the bill we had all worked on, but a series of amendments, probably 50 in all, that had been drafted by various parties in the days leading up to that evening's work session. They came to us in packets of eight or ten at a time all day Friday. New packets that came later in the day often contained amended versions of amendments we had been given earlier, so that those actually voted on deep into the night were sometimes identified as "version 2" or "version 3." They were literally being made up as we went along.
Were these technical amendments to change drafting errors? Were they budgetary modifications agreed to after days of bipartisan negotiation? They were neither of these. For the most part, the amendments offered into the early hours of last Saturday, and attached to the budget bill by majority vote, were an attempt by the Democrats, who offered nearly all of them, to subvert the committee public hearing process in order to jam through, in one night, a vast collection of policy changes, tax increases and interest-group payoffs.
Without any public notice or public hearings, without the knowledge of any committee of oversight and without even much explanation, the Democrats made both wholesale changes to the budget document itself and added entirely new elements to the bill that had no bearing on the budget at all.
Through amendment, the Democrats slipped in a major policy change to Business Equipment Tax Reimbursement, or BETR, for instance, the state's most widely known and successful business investment program. They did this without any prior warning to the business community, which had offered several hours of testimony in support of the BETR program before the Appropriations committee only weeks earlier.
Through amendment, and without any public hearing or notice, the Democrats invented a new fee and sticker requirement for all "canoes, sailboats and kayaks," with a fine of up to $500 for noncompliance. While they were at it, the Democrats also included language to develop a "non-consumptive user permit," whereby outdoor enthusiasts such a hikers and bird-watchers would pay a fee and obtain a state permit to engage in those activities.
In a blatant bit of payback to their loyal supporters, the Democrats attached to the budget a $40 million collective bargaining agreement with the state employees, which grants them a 6% raise and preserves for them the most generous benefit package in the state. This new contract was provided to us for our review less than four hours before it was voted on.
There's more. The Democrats went on the make substantial changes to the Medicaid estate recovery law, which will impact estate planning for nearly everyone. They cut a deal to funnel the state's multimillion-dollar Medicaid pharmacy business away from community pharmacies and to a mail-order monopoly operated by the Penobscot Indians. They created a new tax for satellite television services, raised countless fees, restored previously agreed-to cuts in social services and, despite the enormous fiscal challenges facing the state, approved the hiring of four new permanent staff members for the state Senate, at cost of over $230,000 a year.
And we still haven't gotten to the really bad part. As their last act of legislative merry-making for the night, the Democrats tossed out the governor's $250 lottery securitization plan and instead voted in a plan to borrow over $440 million, to be paid back over the next 20 years, and which includes a provision to use some of the borrowed money to make interest payments on the rest of the borrowed money. They intend to enact this borrowing plan to fill the hole in the budget that their overspending created and they do not seek to gain voter approval to do so. Remember that when you go to the polls this fall to vote on the governor's $200 million bond package.
In short, the Democrats, who have already figured out how to pass a budget without Republican support, despite decades of precedent against doing so, have now also figured out how to do deficit spending in a state who's constitution requires a balanced budget. They no longer need to raise as much money as they spend, they have discovered to their glee, they can just borrow it, like the federal government does, and they don't even have to ask voters if they approve.
The sun was indeed rising as we were leaving the State House that morning, but it rose on dark day for Maine. While taxpayers were snug in their beds, a door to unlimited state spending was opened by a Democratic majority for whom compromise, fiscal responsibility, and respect for the public process of legislating would appear to mean nothing.
Rep. Stephen Bowen represents Camden and Rockport in the Maine House
of Representatives and serves on the
Legislature's Appropriations Committee.
 
Typical Maine.......taxes, taxes, taxes. This is why I do all my hiking and flyfishing in New Hampshire. Maine Fish & game laws are so convoluted, and the Dept. of IF&W is in shambles. Everytime we turn around in this state, the legislature is slapping some kind of new tax on us......sickening. It's getting to the point where I just might start moving my belongings next door to NH.
 
Fitz said:
LD#468
Sec. III-47. Nonconsumptive user card or permit; report.
The Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Commissioner of
Conservation, known in this section as "the commissioners" shall
work jointly to develop a card or permit for the purpose of
raising revenue from the nonconsumptive outdoor recreational user
base
and to determine the distribution of those funds between the
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Department of
Conservation.

WTF does that mean? I have tested negative for TB.

"Liberty and property are in peril when the legislature is in session", or something like that.
 
Does this mean that when AT thru-hikers reach the border of Maine they will be stopped and forced to buy a card so they can continue hiking to Katahdin? Will we have registration numbers planted on our backpacks? Seriously how could they ever regulate this?
 
Fitz said:
. . . an attempt by the Democrats, who offered nearly all of them, to subvert the committee public hearing process in order to jam through . . .

Gee, do I detect a slight partisan harangue here? :rolleyes:

(Disclosure: I'm a D, so the quoted article certainly does not reflect my personal views.)
 
In a blatant bit of payback to their loyal supporters, the Democrats attached to the budget a $40 million collective bargaining agreement with the state employees, which grants them a 6% raise and preserves for them the most generous benefit package in the state. This new contract was provided to us for our review less than four hours before it was voted on.

The key phrase here is "collective bargaining agreement" over which the legislature has no authority anyway. Just to clarify, it's a 3% COLA each year, our last COLA was 2% in 2003. Anyone eligible for a merit did not get one in 2004.
I'm not whining, I'm glad I have a job - HOWEVER....it does irritate me that LEGISLATORS convienently never mention that they vote themselves raises every year, change laws to benefit their own retirement, and rarely, if ever, give up Legislative funds to help the budget when the natural areas agencies are getting whacked to the bone.
 
Last edited:
I may be wrong but I think Maine has surpassed Massachusetts in per capita taxes that include all levels of taxation (sales, income, property etc.).

That's surprising given the more rural character of the state, the lower wage rates and the plain old tradition of yankee frugality. Some attribute the high cost of governing Maine to the many layers of governance ... towns, counties, various taxing districts and the state.

So? where do the politicians try to consolidate? The hospitals. I'm sure there is a strong economic argument for it but before they so strongly inconvenience the citizens maybe they should set an example and inconvenience the bureaucrats.

As for hiking passes, what's the difference between a hiking pass and a parking pass? They're both designed to get into your pockets. I don't know the details but I expect that some of the pressure comes from hunters and fisherman who must buy licenses for their recreation, why shouldn't hikers?
 
...If you take a walk I'll tax your feet.

"Let me tell you how it will be, there's one for you nineteen for me.... Cause I'm the tax man, yeah, I'm the tax man. And you're working for no one but me Taxman!"
 
I don't mind paying necessarily, but I don't think these ones make sense. The wardens are already overworked and are sometimes placed at risk checking sportsman licenses. This is an added burden and risk. I also think it will hurt Maine's campground business. If someone comes to camp on vacation in Maine, they will have to fork over $10.00 per person to hike in certain lands and $10.00 per canoe/kayak. I think that will turn a lot of vacationers away and backfire on the state.

Also, if the state looked at this logically, why wouldn't they apply the same logic to beach walkers or salt water fishermen?
 
NPR mentioned this morning that the canoe/kayak fee was taken out of the budget. I have no further details, but as many suggested, this isn't a big surprise.

nothing was mentioned of the Wilderness Card, although that was just an idea and I don't think it was even in the budget yet (did someone already say this?)

spencer
 
Stan said:
As for hiking passes, what's the difference between a hiking pass and a parking pass? They're both designed to get into your pockets. I don't know the details but I expect that some of the pressure comes from hunters and fisherman who must buy licenses for their recreation, why shouldn't hikers?
Fish & Game costs money for fish hatcheries & stocking, game wardens, hunting area management, etc. & I believe the hunters & fisherman realize that. Hiking bears no expense (beyond initial acquisition of land) other than trail maintenance. Maine already charges a nominal fee to access many parklands (either $1 or $2, they do it on the honor system through those "iron rangers") which seems reasonable to me, but I think it's silly to have to pay for a permit & carry a card to access public land.
 
Users card

It seems even more absurd in that most of the peaks and hiking in Maine is not on public land but rather on private holdings of paper companies. so the legislature is now forcing you to buy a permit to hike on private land (you already have to pay to enter state publicly owned lands.

I know Maine's average income is down there with the deep south so it's quite hard to raise enough money to provide for decent services, but this program is likely to do more damage than benefit.

I believe the quotation from Mark Twin runs "No man's life, liberty or property is safe so long as the legislature is in session."
 
bill bowden said:
I believe the quotation from Mark Twin runs "No man's life, liberty or property is safe so long as the legislature is in session."

I agree. Big brother is out of control and grows more powerful and invasive every year. In my opinion we are beginning to live in a society where whatever is not compulsory is soon forbidden. Whatever happened to the freedom of the hills?

If you go along with a walking fee, what's next, a fee for breathing? Will they put a toll on NH/Maine border for AT hikers? Laws such as these beg for civil (or not so civil} disobedience.
 
I read in the Portland Press this morning that they had taken out the canoe/kayak fee as Spence said. nothing was said about the rest. :rolleyes:
 
funkyfreddy said:
I agree. Big brother is out of control and grows more powerful and invasive every year.
I would posit that we are actually in the middle of an age of burgeoning freedom. We are governed by people we elect, not a far-away hereditary monarch, No one in this country is legally enslaved. Women and people of color can vote, something most could not do practically or legally a century ago. Information is freer and more practically available than it has ever been. Communication of every sort is available in a way it never was before (example: our discuussion right here, cell phones, WiFi, etc. Travel is cheaper and faster than it was 30 years ago. Taxation is relatively low, not just by international standards, but and even just American history of the last 20 or 30 years. Police abuses are generally quickly reported and dealt with. We are not in thrall to many diseases that killed or disabled in our parents' memory.

Yeah, we're all suffrerin' pretty bad right now :rolleyes:

The whining that everything is going to heck in a handbasket is really sort of tiresome -- offensive, even, when you think of 100s of millions who really aren't free and the ones who risk and give their lives preserving our freedom.

What can you not do now that you could do before "Big Brother" got "out of control"?

And if being reminded of how good it really is torques you off, you are free to just complain to Darren about this post, he'll PM me to knock it off ;)
 
Last edited:
I really like your posts Bob, but I think you've jumped the gun on the last post.

Is the answer to a concern of growing government involvement that 'in every day, in every way things keep getting better and better'?

Technology has improved, eliminating some problems, while creating others. Some diseases have been cured, new ones have arrived, and some of the old ones are getting more deadly. The government we have at the national level is distant enough from the average citizens life that it might as well be as castle in Oz.

Are things pretty good for most people posting here compared to migrant farmers, miners and the unskilled? Hell yeah. Is bitching a pervasive habit in society? Yes, Bob. But the problem here may not be taxation. For me, it is the nickel-and-diming effect of a legislature that can't be honest enough to propose raising taxes or cutting programs.

The problem is the idea (which hopefully gets nixed like the kayak fee), of paying to walk around the outdoors on land funded by the democratic government that taxes us already. If it needs more, charge more... But to say it is a wonderfully democratic society that charges people to walk on publicly funded land because a committee railroads it through a budget session is an affront to the concept of democracy.

I think I'm not alone in saying that an effective appeal to the hiking community to raise voluntary funds for trail maintenance / land acquisition would probably raise more money than this proposed fee program.

If this is true, I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable paying. Maybe I'm a pathetic romantic, but a hiking ID?! Yuck. Might as well put time clocks at the trailheads so we can punch in/out and pay accordingly.
 
I like user-tax situations. The WMNF Pass costs me $25.00 per year, but I use the forest. Those who don't hike don't pay. (I know they do pay fed taxes, work with me here). I don't paddle so I won't pay a paddle tax. Now, if only I didn't have to pay for the utterly failed public schools, since my child will be home-schooled.

Maine has the lowest per-capita income (or 2nd lowest), but the highest average tax burden in the U.S. The tax burden, combined with hostility toward business, causes the poverty.

The poverty excaserbates the addiction to social programs (mommy government). The social programs cost more and more money every year, so they have to raise more taxes.

More taxes on people and business, more poverty. More poverty, more socialism. more socialism, more taxation. Love those dems ;) Maine has the oldest average age in the US (not Florida), not because older folks are moving in, but because young people leave as soon as they are old enough to leave. It's a disaster.

Meanwhile NH has the highest average income in the US, and the second lowest tax burden.

Maine is an absolute diamond in the rough. It is such a beautiful place, with mountains, oceans, rivers, pretty little towns. It's a tourism gold mine, but the government stangles the citizens with taxation.

I'm saving money to buy a campground. I would not even consider Maine, even though the land is much cheaper. And so it goes...
 
A little perspective might help, McRat.

Government is growing. So is the hiking/skiing/snowmobiling/powerwalking community. Hunting is actually shrinking in many of these places (don't know about Maine specifically) and we used to let them pay the bills and enjoy the fruits. Now we might have to step up and pay for it.

Pay for new biologists, etc.?

If the traffic and use is heavier year round, there might be legitimate needs for more study of these environments, so maybe we need another biologist there.

Who should pay for it?

The growing hiking community or the shrinking hunting community or somebody who never sets foot there?

I may be jumping the gun and maybe everything isn't better (re:traffic and use impacts above), but I do grow weary of people saying it's conversely all going to hades.

If legislators are dishonest (no doubt a percentage are) they are merely mirroring the general population, and that includes folks here. Should dishonest or incompetent legislators be held to account?

You bet. So should we all.

Ever camp within the quarter-mile no-camping limit? Let the dog run free in a leashes-only zone? Have a campfire against regulations? Not pay the RMC for a night at the Perch when he didn't mange to track you down? Camp above tree line? Well, don't worry, we love the place, so we can't really hurt it.

It can't cost all that much to maintain our private hiking preserve, can it? Not 10 bucks! Better yet, tax everybody for what only a few of us use. And then complain bitterly that taxes are too high. Have your cake, eat it, too, then demand that somebody else pay for that cake.

The government bears watching, for sure, but not everything it does is wrong -- just like not everything we do is right.

And forget the migrant farmers, miners and the unskilled -- I've got it better than my parents and my grandparents had it in more ways than I can count.

P.S. to forestnome:
to be fair, New Hampshire also benefits greatly from it's proximity to Boston. Most of the thriving communities of NH are within commuting distance of Eastern Massachusetts. The thriving parts of Maine are too, but it's harder to commute to Boston from Bangor or Ellsworth than from the bustling garden spots of even, say, Berlin or Claremont. The jobs aren't in NH or Maine, they are in Massachusetts. A big part of NH's success is geographic good fortune.
 
Last edited:
Top