Please help stop the boat tax!
- Thread starter cantdog
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
sardog1
New member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 231
Please help support the boat tax!
New Hampshire Fish and Game is facing a major budget crisis. The "boat tax" is one part of a multi-part effort to put the department on a sounder financial footing.
Why should you care as a paddler? Here's the 2003-05 Biennial Report. I encourage everyone interested in this subject to read the report and then ask yourself these questions:
1. What does Fish & Game do that is of importance to me as a paddler/hiker/skier/angler/hunter/parent of lost child/outdoor photographer/birder/amateur naturalist/consumer of clean water?
2. What's that worth to me annually?
3. If I don't want to help pay for it, should I continue to enjoy its benefits?
If you want to understand the financial situation, a good place to start is Sustaining New Hampshire's Fish and Wildlife Legacy
New Hampshire Fish and Game is facing a major budget crisis. The "boat tax" is one part of a multi-part effort to put the department on a sounder financial footing.
Why should you care as a paddler? Here's the 2003-05 Biennial Report. I encourage everyone interested in this subject to read the report and then ask yourself these questions:
1. What does Fish & Game do that is of importance to me as a paddler/hiker/skier/angler/hunter/parent of lost child/outdoor photographer/birder/amateur naturalist/consumer of clean water?
2. What's that worth to me annually?
3. If I don't want to help pay for it, should I continue to enjoy its benefits?
If you want to understand the financial situation, a good place to start is Sustaining New Hampshire's Fish and Wildlife Legacy
NH_Mtn_Hiker
New member
I agree with Sardog 1.
I was one of the people who gave up fishing a few years back when the cost of a license went from $22.50 to $35.00. (a 55% increase)
I don't see any reason why us kayakers and canoers shouldn't have to pay to use the waterways like everyone else including: the motorboaters, sailboaters, fishermen, waterfowlers, property owners, etc.
I was one of the people who gave up fishing a few years back when the cost of a license went from $22.50 to $35.00. (a 55% increase)
I don't see any reason why us kayakers and canoers shouldn't have to pay to use the waterways like everyone else including: the motorboaters, sailboaters, fishermen, waterfowlers, property owners, etc.
Peakbagr
Well-known member
Just my ideas...
The boat tax money that waterfowlers and hunters contribute is used to maintain habitat, increase waterfowl and game.
I would think that the tax motorboat users contribute provides inspections for pollution and safety.
Those who use canoes and kayaks certainly get an indirect benefit from all of this, but those constituencies are true 'users' of the environment and receive a direct benefit from the tax. Non motorized transport does not take something away and needs little to no regulation for safety or water pollution clean up afterward.
I mean no criticism of hunting, waterfowling or motorboat use, but it seems that the canoe and kayak crowd are just being thrown into the mix to avoid political differentiation.
The boat tax money that waterfowlers and hunters contribute is used to maintain habitat, increase waterfowl and game.
I would think that the tax motorboat users contribute provides inspections for pollution and safety.
Those who use canoes and kayaks certainly get an indirect benefit from all of this, but those constituencies are true 'users' of the environment and receive a direct benefit from the tax. Non motorized transport does not take something away and needs little to no regulation for safety or water pollution clean up afterward.
I mean no criticism of hunting, waterfowling or motorboat use, but it seems that the canoe and kayak crowd are just being thrown into the mix to avoid political differentiation.
sardog1
New member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 231
Paddlers drown annually in this state and have to get fished out by Fish & Game. Been there, seen that.
Paddlers like clean water to paddle in. Fish & Game helps maintain clean water by helping to maintain healthy environments in and around waterbodies.
Paddlers like to look at eagles, moose, mink, beavers, herons, osprey, etc. Fish & Game is the prinicipal agency in the state charged with keeping those populations healthy.
Fish & Game promotes environmental awareness through public events, NH Wildlife Journal magazine, Wildlife Journal TV, workshops for teachers, etc. All these things build a constituency that supports preserving open space and a clean environment.
The notion that paddlers are nonconsumptive and therefore ought to be exempt from taxation would be fine with me, so long as its advocates would be willing to forego all of the benefits they derive from Fish & Game's work. They're not in the mix to avoid political differentiation, they're in the mix because they're beneficiaries.
Paddlers like clean water to paddle in. Fish & Game helps maintain clean water by helping to maintain healthy environments in and around waterbodies.
Paddlers like to look at eagles, moose, mink, beavers, herons, osprey, etc. Fish & Game is the prinicipal agency in the state charged with keeping those populations healthy.
Fish & Game promotes environmental awareness through public events, NH Wildlife Journal magazine, Wildlife Journal TV, workshops for teachers, etc. All these things build a constituency that supports preserving open space and a clean environment.
The notion that paddlers are nonconsumptive and therefore ought to be exempt from taxation would be fine with me, so long as its advocates would be willing to forego all of the benefits they derive from Fish & Game's work. They're not in the mix to avoid political differentiation, they're in the mix because they're beneficiaries.
Last edited:
Peakbagr
Well-known member
We're not far apart. I also hunt and fish. I was just tossing out the idea that paddlers are less consumptive of whats around them and don't contribute to the same upkeep cost as motorized travel, fishing and hunting sports.
spider solo
New member
I'll pay a kayak tax as soon as they start taxing my bicycle... never
funkyfreddy
Well-known member
I'm with Cantdog and Spidersolo on this one....... the rush to tax and regulate is a dangerous and slippery slope.... especially when it's an activity that leaves even less of a footprint than hiking does. Kayakers, paddlers, etc. aren't taking deer from the forest or fish from the river.... they're using public water ways in a non consumptive manner as Peakbagr puts it.
Yes, paddlers don't pollute.... certainly non polluting modes of travel should be encouraged nowadays rather than discouraged, hello? Of course most politicians might not be aware of such a fine distinction, accustomed as they are of traveling on the public purse
What's next for NH? A breathing tax, a walking tax? Isn't the NH state motto "Live Free or Die" ? What a joke! Perhaps this should be changed to "Taxes 1st, Liberty 2nd" or "A Nice Place for Outlet Stores".
As the link Cantdog provides mentions - the ramifications could be horrendous..... what if all the states decide to tax paddlers? I'm sure it would seem "FAIR" to couch potatoes and many others who are conditioned to give up their liberties w/o a second thought..... but to me it's just more political BS.
2 quotes come to my mind.....
" A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither". Thomas Jefferson
" Governments are a cancer and politicians its malignant cells." FF
Peakbagr said:
Yes, paddlers don't pollute.... certainly non polluting modes of travel should be encouraged nowadays rather than discouraged, hello? Of course most politicians might not be aware of such a fine distinction, accustomed as they are of traveling on the public purse
What's next for NH? A breathing tax, a walking tax? Isn't the NH state motto "Live Free or Die" ? What a joke! Perhaps this should be changed to "Taxes 1st, Liberty 2nd" or "A Nice Place for Outlet Stores".
As the link Cantdog provides mentions - the ramifications could be horrendous..... what if all the states decide to tax paddlers? I'm sure it would seem "FAIR" to couch potatoes and many others who are conditioned to give up their liberties w/o a second thought..... but to me it's just more political BS.
2 quotes come to my mind.....
" A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither". Thomas Jefferson
" Governments are a cancer and politicians its malignant cells." FF
Last edited:
funkyfreddy
Well-known member
By the way, I have nothing against NH F+G and greatly appreciate what they do. But I believe there are much better ways to raise revenues other than a coercive tax on paddlers.
As a formal New Hampshire resident I really believe that the state really needs completly re-do their taxing. My property taxes went up 200% in a four year span. At the same time non-property owners get the same benifits put do not pay in. This system may of been somewhat fair when New Hampshire was agriculture state.
How about a hiking tax? NH F&G I bet spends more $ looking for lost hikers then lost paddlers.
I am with Cantdog on this.
How about a hiking tax? NH F&G I bet spends more $ looking for lost hikers then lost paddlers.
I am with Cantdog on this.
NH_Mtn_Hiker
New member
I pay $20.00 a year to park at the trail heads where I hike. That's double what paddlers are being asked to pay.brianW said:
Papa Bear
New member
So ... some folks wouldn't mind using dirty waterways with no wild life, and they can "take care of their own".
Well I want clean water, and eagles (but no bugs please ) and it's nice to know tha SAR people are there if I need them. Being a renter, I will pay anyway as a slight increase in rental fee. But I would no longer go up to Boundary Pond or Umbagog or Azizcohos (oops - that's in Maine) or the NFCT at all if it were dirty and bereft of wildife.
And yes, If there were a hiker fee I would gladly pay. I pay at state parks and for USFS parking already. Not complaining - I end up paying 50 times as much for gasoline.
This is VFTT, as in VIEWS from the top. Thanks for the views. I'm not out there for canister bagging or excercising.
I'm with Sardog.
Well I want clean water, and eagles (but no bugs please
) and it's nice to know tha SAR people are there if I need them. Being a renter, I will pay anyway as a slight increase in rental fee. But I would no longer go up to Boundary Pond or Umbagog or Azizcohos (oops - that's in Maine) or the NFCT at all if it were dirty and bereft of wildife. And yes, If there were a hiker fee I would gladly pay. I pay at state parks and for USFS parking already. Not complaining - I end up paying 50 times as much for gasoline.
This is VFTT, as in VIEWS from the top. Thanks for the views. I'm not out there for canister bagging or excercising.
I'm with Sardog.
Last edited:
sardog1
New member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2,579
- Reaction score
- 231
cantdog said:
Well, actually he's not currently. (And never was in any "search and rescue industry," having never been paid for his 20 years of "employment" in this "industry.") And none of you are "taking care of your own" when it comes to recovering drowning victims, which is the point I actually made above. (I'm still trying to figure out the relevance here of a link to video from a St. Louis, Missouri, television station.)
What he is, is someone who first had a paddle put in his hands when Nixon was running for president . . . the first time. No, not against Hubert -- Jack.
What he is, is someone who happily paid the Minnesota canoe license fee, for the reasons stated above.
What he is, is a NH resident who abhors the regressive nature of NH's tax system but recognizes the immediate need for a funding fix for Fish & Game.
spider solo
New member
Well , I read that link to the Fish & Game report and (2003-2005) and I see that F&G did make 1 Canoe & Kayak ramp on the Pemi.
That nice, thats why we pay taxes. I may never use it ,but it's nice to know it's available. ...then again it might be used by people who go rafting.
Should we also expect them to pay an additional "Rafting Fee" ?
I'm sure they would also enjoy clean water...perhaps thats why we pay Taxes..so that many people can enjoy their recreational opportunities.
The report also mentions the Conservation License Plate program where many of us pay an extra fee to help support F&G..yet still not enough? Apparently.
Of course many people like clean water.. or at least the thought that the water is clean... right up to the time to drink it ...and then what? Well purify it of course, after all it's not fit to drink. Should we blame F&G ? I doubt it since they are trying to help.
When I hike I like clean air...or at least the thought that the air is clean.... but how does that ad go.... If you breathe the Air you become a "Plaintiff". Clean air is a thing of the past.
When I hike and paddle I like to pretend the woods, mnts and waters are brimming with the Wildlife that once was...it isn't.
It's a region devoid of wildlife that once was.. looking up into the sky I see...nothing. Yet I get all excited to see a few birds from time to time.
I think it's generally agreed F&G are the "good guys"...however just throwing more money in their direction is not going to solve their underfunding problems.
They will always be under funded...the more money they raise the less money they will be alloted...and the circle just keeps going around. Kind of sad really.
To think that special fees for non motorized craft will solve their problems...just seems extremely optimistic.
If F&G is not getting the funding they need the problem lies elsewhere.
We all pay taxes so that F&G , among others, will have the monies they need... yet they are always under funded.
I don't think paddlers are going to supply the needed monies... it's a more fundamental problem than that....a very basic view of what is and what is not important in this world and F&G is on the "short end of the stick"
Sad but true.
I'm going for a walk might as well tax my feet.....
That nice, thats why we pay taxes. I may never use it ,but it's nice to know it's available. ...then again it might be used by people who go rafting.
Should we also expect them to pay an additional "Rafting Fee" ?
I'm sure they would also enjoy clean water...perhaps thats why we pay Taxes..so that many people can enjoy their recreational opportunities.
The report also mentions the Conservation License Plate program where many of us pay an extra fee to help support F&G..yet still not enough? Apparently.
Of course many people like clean water.. or at least the thought that the water is clean... right up to the time to drink it ...and then what? Well purify it of course, after all it's not fit to drink. Should we blame F&G ? I doubt it since they are trying to help.
When I hike I like clean air...or at least the thought that the air is clean.... but how does that ad go.... If you breathe the Air you become a "Plaintiff". Clean air is a thing of the past.
When I hike and paddle I like to pretend the woods, mnts and waters are brimming with the Wildlife that once was...it isn't.
It's a region devoid of wildlife that once was.. looking up into the sky I see...nothing. Yet I get all excited to see a few birds from time to time.
I think it's generally agreed F&G are the "good guys"...however just throwing more money in their direction is not going to solve their underfunding problems.
They will always be under funded...the more money they raise the less money they will be alloted...and the circle just keeps going around. Kind of sad really.
To think that special fees for non motorized craft will solve their problems...just seems extremely optimistic.
If F&G is not getting the funding they need the problem lies elsewhere.
We all pay taxes so that F&G , among others, will have the monies they need... yet they are always under funded.
I don't think paddlers are going to supply the needed monies... it's a more fundamental problem than that....a very basic view of what is and what is not important in this world and F&G is on the "short end of the stick"
Sad but true.
I'm going for a walk might as well tax my feet.....
Last edited:
Jay H
New member
The only place around me that we have to pay a fee (other than say a parking fee at a state park with a lake/marina in it) is for paddling Harriman State Park. It's a yearly fee and about $25.
I don't mind fees, so long as they are being spent properly which doesn't seem to always be the case. For those of us who pay state taxes, perhaps the fees and stuff should be tax deductible, because by paying fees, we are basically being taxed for use.
Jay
I don't mind fees, so long as they are being spent properly which doesn't seem to always be the case. For those of us who pay state taxes, perhaps the fees and stuff should be tax deductible, because by paying fees, we are basically being taxed for use.
Jay
AMF
New member
In PA, you only need a boat reg decal if you are using state launch facilities (i.e. in a state park or at a ramp maintained by the fish & game commission). For active boaters, who often maintain a "fleet" (I have two canoes and three kayaks), this could get pretty expensive. Once one state gets this thru, I can see others following suit. In a given year, I may paddle NJ, PA, DE, MD, NY, VT, WV... will I need a separate registration in every state?
dentonfabrics
New member
NH_Mtn_Hiker said:
So this permit would cost us canoeists $10/year? That sounds fair.
spider solo
New member
I believe it is $10 per boat... in my case that would be $50 a year for my wife and I.
If we have company from out of state they would I assume also need a sticker.
We have paid $25 for the parking passes to hike....though I see the big RV's drive by paying nothing...
NH is getting to be pricey to be outdoors...
think I'll have a sit down to think it over...
I suppose they
Better tax my seat...
If we have company from out of state they would I assume also need a sticker.
We have paid $25 for the parking passes to hike....though I see the big RV's drive by paying nothing...
NH is getting to be pricey to be outdoors...
think I'll have a sit down to think it over...
I suppose they
Better tax my seat...
