# Dnr  parks and recreation division 2009 - 2019 strategic plan



## MIfishinGuy (Feb 17, 2005)

sorry don't know if this has been covered,

i clicked the link at the dnr site and was just browsing thru until i saw this, 

page 45
2.2 Acquire balanced, broad-based financial support from Michigan citizens and visitors to the state:
2.2.1 Seek mechanisms to replace or augment existing user fees to achieve sustainable funding:
2.2.1.1 Seek license plate package proposed by CCMSP (Citizen&#8217;s Committee for Michigan State Parks).
*2.2.1.2 Register all watercraft (e.g. kayaks).*
2.2.1.3 Identify and explore feasibility of other revenue sources. (e.g. taxes to support protection of natural resource values protected by public lands).

so far this is all i've seen that bothers me, but i have been heavily skipping. when i get more time i'm going to print it out and read it.

we have until jan 30th to send comments to the DNR.

here's the link 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/FINAL_DRAFT12.18.08_FOR__PUBLIC_NOTICE_260515_7.pdf

if that doesn't work, heres the page where its located,
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10365_45524---,00.html


i was just wondering what you guys had to say about this issue, and any others you find in the plan.

personally i don't like this, as this was sort of a backup, a sure way to get out without worrying about registation. i mean this could open up a can of worms, what defines a watercraft and not a pool toy, if its a private lake, etc. i don't know it just seems wrong. if you think differently, persuade me!

ps, im pretty sure this is the right topic to post this under, sorry if its not


----------



## Chromedoggy (Mar 25, 2007)

I like the registering of all watercraft. All users should pay for use of the resource. This has been long ignored in many areas. Hunters and Fishers have carried a heavier burden compared to other users in many circumstances.


----------



## applejack (Mar 25, 2005)

When we consider "sharing the burden" we need to consider the nature of the burden. Hunters and fishermen harvest a managed resource which requires regulation to maintain balance and fairness. They don't have to pay for parking unless they are in a maintained park. Power and sail boaters need to utilize boat launches, harbors and docking facilities which involve capital investment, maintenance and patrol.

Private owners of canoes and kayaks only need a place to park and access (any access) to the body of water they will paddle. River fishermen know private paddlers are typically very different from rental paddlers. 

A family of four in kayaks on the Piere Marquette is little different than the same family picking mushrooms on public land near Mesick. Why would we require one to register and the other not to. If we need to use a maintained park both will already pay for day or overnight use. If it is about equipment, should we require registrations for kites flown on Lake Michigan beaches. (Ok, this one might be a stretch)

With that said, I don't mind sharing the burden. They don't make hunters put numbers on their guns or fishermen put numbers on their rods and reels. Can we do this so we don't have to put eight 3" stickers on our kayaks and canoes. That really distracts from their good looks. I think a tag like is required on the Pine or a license on a pfd is a better plan. Better yet is another small license we carry "on our person" should suffice.

In any event, let's just make certain that any funds our natural resources generate are used to preserve and enhance those resources.


----------



## hungry hunter (Jan 11, 2005)

well it would be like putting a liscense plate on a bicycle. pretty ridicuous. I was considering getting kyaks for the family but this would certainly put a stop to that. think about it usually you have one motor boat that you take the whole family out in and there is on registration fee. consider now having to register four or five kyaks and the cost is just too much. this will jus reduce the number of participants even more and have just the opposite effect.less people means overall less money. they are so greedy that they have lost sight of reality.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Keep in mind that any future budget solution will never please everyone. All departments are facing cuts and the burdens will be shared with more user groups.


----------



## MIfishinGuy (Feb 17, 2005)

great points everyone. i really seem to agree with the person who made the point that impact of someone dropping in a canoe at a river access site compared to putting in a boat at an access ramp. i wouldn't mind registering my small craft if the fees were reasonable.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

hungry hunter said:


> consider now having to register four or five kyaks and the cost is just too much.


I think, if memory serves the costs for 5 kyaks would be a total of $45.00 for 3 years. Too much?

Actually at one time (short period of time) it was required but it got changed back. I always registered my canoe even though I never put a motor on it anyway just in case it was stolen and it was easier to sell to because all I had to do was sign off on the paper registration. It cost a total of $9 for three years. Heck, I use to smoke then and spent more than that on cigs in 2 days. I still spend more then that on pop in a week.


----------



## ausable_steelhead (Sep 30, 2002)

I work in the Parks and Recreation Department, but just started last summer when I moved up here. It takes alot more then you would think to run and maintain State Parks and Recreation areas. Since working there, my eyes have been opened to what it takes to do so. Seems the DNR gets less and less money every year, but people still want the same quality and opportunity they had before. They gotta come up with something, the State isn't much help. These are tough, frustrating times for our great State, it's gotta end eventually, and those who choose to stay need to ride it out. The DNR does make bad choices sometimes, but so does everyone else, live and learn.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

ausable_steelhead said:


> I work in the Parks and Recreation Department..........


I understand well what you are describing and you are correct. One of my MSU degrees was in Parks & Rec and I was also a park ranger at Muskegon State Park. The state parks have always been a financial challenge and we often did not have the freedom to do the projects as we wanted, but we tried to make do with what we had to work with. The public is not aware of all the challenges the park staff is faced with. Hang in there.


----------



## hungry hunter (Jan 11, 2005)

the 45$ might not seem like,much even I would agree it's not that much, but combine that with all the other fee's being attached to just about everything in life and it really adds up quickly. They are attaching new fee's to just about everything possible,how is a person supposed to keep up with it all? especially when it starts to infringe on just the most basic of life necessities.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

hungry hunter said:


> .....with all the other fee's being attached to just about everything in life and it really adds up quickly. .....how is a person supposed to keep up with it all? especially when it starts to infringe on just the most basic of life necessities.


This is called economic reality and sometimes we cannot keep up with everything. For some the state parks may become a luxury we have to give up. I did not buy a state park sticker this year. I am pushing for the more stable funding proposal of the license plate fee increase for parks and boat launches which would be much cheaper for me.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

hungry hunter said:


> the 45$ might not seem like,much even I would agree it's not that much, but combine that with all the other fee's being attached to just about everything in life and it really adds up quickly. They are attaching new fee's to just about everything possible,how is a person supposed to keep up with it all? especially when it starts to infringe on just the most basic of life necessities.


I can understand what you are saying but it comes down to this. A normal thinking person doing the same thing today as they did, say 5 years ago knows it costs more to do those same things today. Unfortunately, the greed and selfishness in all of us wants to be able to do those same things we did 5 years ago at the same price we did back then regardless it takes more money for that activity to be supplied for the public. Those costs have to be passed on. We could say that there would be no oversight on some activities but unfortunately there are too many people out there that would not tread lightly and actually destroy resources intentionally and unintentionally through use alone.

Too many times any fees to use the natural resources in any state are thought of the state just wanting more money. What too many forget is that "more" money is not for profit but to keep providing the service that the people demand. If people don't get the service then they complain about that too. It has to be a pay to play, it will not work any other way. Free is nice but free will destroy. Sometimes if the fee can't be paid it must be given up, setting priorities is part of life.


----------



## Kevin_D (Dec 3, 2005)

the cost of everything has gone up, except for wages, Recession or depression? Maybe we can get more made in (?????????????) hired help.
NAFTA
Sorry just venting.
Kev


----------



## MIfishinGuy (Feb 17, 2005)

thanks for all the input, after thinking about it i decided it wouldn't be SO bad. but i guess i just had to vent about like someone said, fee on top of fee on top of fee. seems easier to just make the one fee more, but i guess they do need to be spread out among all the users of the resource.

i definately want a liscense plate, would make the sticker situation a lot simpler.


----------



## ART (Jul 7, 2004)

In this day of a democrat governor that would tax us to death, and now a democratic president who is stealing from us and our kids, WHY is everyone so eager to throw their money to the government.
User fee, registration, license, it is all just another tax.
Enough is enough.


----------



## applejack (Mar 25, 2005)

I don't see this as a political bandwagon on either side. This is a real issue of revenue needs and user requirements. As the auto industry collapses and pressure is placed on the state budgets it wouldn't matter if our governor was named Engler, Romney, Milliken or Williams. The state needs dough to keep services like these available. There are a lot of urban dwellers that could give two hoots about national and state forest access. We need to stay focused on the issue. If we don't pay attention to public resources we will lose them.

Owners of kayaks and canoes will be found to be willing participants. The issue is a little tricky. I own 4 kayaks and a canoe. Five registrations. I rarely use more than 2 boats at a time. One boat, one passenger. If I owned one pontoon boat I could bring a dozen friends. One registration.

All Five of my boats probably cost less than the motor on the pontoon boat. I don't need a boat ramp. Howard Meyerson writes an informed essay about the misunderstanding of the DNR about the needs of paddlers. We're happy to participate in the needs of our resources. We just need a little understanding. 

Howard Meyerson of the Grand Rapids Press writes an informed essay on the subject. I'm not yet allowed to post a link.

Go to Mlive.com and look for:

Michigan DNR needs to better service paddlers


----------



## leesecw (Jul 15, 2006)

Ive read alot of blogging lately about some of the people that jennifer has appointed to the NRC and funds that have been diverted elsewhere such as grants to the wave pool here in saginaw. Anyone know where I can check up and see if these bloggers are just harping or is there some reality to the fact?


----------



## hungry hunter (Jan 11, 2005)

they are always short on funds so they just keep raising and adding fees that in reality cause even less participation because people can no longer afford it. along with less participation comes less revenue. I find there are a lot of things that I pass on because of the fee's involved. no sense even trying something new because I know that it will be too expensive in the long run. if someone is detered from even trying out new activities they will never get hooked on it and continue to participate.


----------



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

That was tried on canoes 15 yrs ago or so. 

The poor argument that it is only $xxx and it is a good deal is BS.


----------



## Spartan88 (Nov 14, 2008)

I'm not against the kayak registration but let me play devils advocate for a second.

Once kayak owners pay the state they have an interest in what goes on. They might not like dodging all the trout fishers on the major streams. This is a stretch of my imagination but if my favorite fishing hole gets closed due to kayakers I'm not going to be happy.

Same goes for state land use permits for fungi hunters and bird watchers. They have to pay for use, they'll get a say in what goes on.


----------

