# Fee increase bill presented this week



## hoythunter (Feb 23, 2005)

HUNTING, FISHING LICENSE PACKAGE OUT THIS WEEK

Bills to increase hunting and fishing fees in the state will be introduced this week. The bills, according to recent presentation to the Natural Resources Commission, will adopt the recommendations made by a an NRC task force on the issue, but will phase the increases in over four years.

The six-year package would increase most license fees 25 percent each year for the first four years, then allow another 5 percent in years five and six, officials said.

Beginning in year three, the package would also begin reducing senior discounts, now 60 percent, to the 40 percent recommended.

The age for an adult fishing license would be decreased to 16, and children who do not purchase the optional $2 youth license would have their catch counted against the daily limits of any adult they were with.


----------



## Ninja (Feb 20, 2005)

My understanding is that the Proposal will be introduced....it has not been sponsored yet.

Is this correct, or has the Proposal been sponsored and is already a Bill???


----------



## hoythunter (Feb 23, 2005)

It appears Liz Bater and Matthew Gillard are carrying the water. I will keep you informed when it is introduced.

"Legislation to gradually increase hunting and fishing license fees in Michigan will be introduced within the next couple of weeks with Sen. Liz BRATER (D-Ann Arbor) introducing the fishing license fee increase in the Senate and Rep. Matthew GILLARD (D-Alpena) handling the hunting license fee increase in the House."


----------



## cliffd (Jun 25, 2006)

hoythunter said:


> The age for an adult fishing license would be decreased to 16, and children who do not purchase the optional $2 youth license would have their catch counted against the daily limits of any adult they were with.


I am not going to debate the merit of the increases as a whole but what's up with this statement? Either the youth license is optional or it is not. Is this a new thing where the kids catch will count in the adult's limit?

Personally, I think the kids SHOULD purchase a license, optional or not. It is a good way to teach responsibility and accountability.


----------



## theeyes (Mar 20, 2004)

hoythunter said:


> HUNTING, FISHING LICENSE PACKAGE OUT THIS WEEK
> The age for an adult fishing license would be decreased to 16, and children who do not purchase the optional $2 youth license would have their catch counted against the daily limits of any adult they were with.


This will help getting kids involved in fishing. Its all about the kids you know.

I wonder how it will go if the kids don't buy their optional license and go fishing without an adult?


----------



## Blueump (Aug 20, 2005)

theeyes said:


> This will help getting kids involved in fishing. Its all about the kids you know.
> 
> I wonder how it will go if the kids don't buy their optional license and go fishing without an adult?


Then they would apparently be able to have their own limit??? Doesn't seem logical to me. They can't restrict a 15 year old to fishing only with an adult!

I can just se it now. The Co comes up upon an adult and a kid fishing. They are over the adult's limit (combined). "Is he fishing with you?" "Nope, on his own!" Like that's gonna happen!


----------



## FixedBlade (Oct 14, 2002)

The dnr short funding issue is because of the dnr's own short sightedness as shown in this youth angeling license. They only have the ability to think 2 years out. They hurt themselves with poorly thought out ideas. The only reason they are doing this is to force you to buy another license also they can get 3 extra dollars from the feds from each license sold. They are only thinking of the money and not thinking of all the possibilities of the crazy rules they set up. $14 for a license this year and if the proposals go through you and your childern will pay $28 in 4 years, but the dnr will still get $3 from the feds for each license sold. These are not long term solutions. The dnr will tell you that even with these increases in licenses they will still be in a deficit situation in 3 years. We need to find long term solutions that draw money from every person in the state of michigan. How about slapping the nestle ice mountain water bottling plant with a 1.00 tax on every gallon of water they pipe into their plant. Designate thos tax dollars to the DNR.


----------



## twodogsphil (Apr 16, 2002)

The legislative increase/expansion in youth fishing license fees and in youth hunting license fees is in direct contradiction of the MDNR's goal of increasing youth involvement in outdoor activities.

Consider that in 1986 MDNR's Hunting and Fishing Heritage Task Force reported:

"Studies have proven that there is a noticeable decline in the percentage of the population taking part in hunting and fishing in this state and that similar trends are mirrored in other parts of the country. ...today, large segments of Michigan's citizenry are "missing out" on opportunities to develop long-term involvement with our state's hunting and fishing resources and heritage."

The Task Force went on to report that:

"Researchers at Michigan State University and elsewhere have observed just how important early exposure is in motivating people toward involvement with the resource. For example, 45 percent of Michigan's most involved, most active anglers reported that their first fishing experience occurred before age 5! Most of these anglers had their initial exposure to fishing with family members serving as mentors."

The Task Force went on to make many and various recommendations to increase and/or maintain youth involvement including that:

"The MDNR should retain the current age for fishing licenses."

So why is MDNR now giving tacit approval of a measure that changes the licensing age structure in a way that is detrimental to the promotion of youth fishing activities? 

$! $! $! $$! $$$!


----------

