# No more freebies on state land



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

No more freebies on state land 

http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/grpress/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1110555941220540.xml

Friday, March 11, 2005, By Howard Meyerson, The Grand Rapids Press

After 32 years of patchwork enforcement, the DNR finally is moving to reel in fishing guides, rein in horseback operations and to get a line on canoe liveries -- basically any commercial operator who does business on state land. 

Call it a long-overdue idea whose time has come. 

"The idea is to retain and regain control of state land," said Dave Spalding, speaking to a recent gathering of the Michigan River Guides Association in Baldwin. "We've lost control and there are people going out and starting businesses where the entire basis for their operation is state land."



Spalding, the land-use program leader in the DNR's Forest Mineral and Fire Management Division, was explaining that the DNR plans to enforce the 1973 law more uniformly and has been working out the internal bugs on how to do it. 

The law says it is illegal to conduct a commercial business on state land without a permit. That is the same law that requires a film producer to get a permit to shoot a movie on state land. It is a law that requires big money pro fishing tournaments to do likewise. 

But until now, it has been enforced only in an irregular fashion. For instance, an ice cream truck vendor can't just drive into a state park and sell popsicles. There are concession agreements. It would be stopped at the gate. 

But the same driver might head into a state forest, hoping to hawk pops to hot-and-sweaty campers. Technically, he couldn't without a permit, but chances are he'd get away with it. 

"The idea behind the permit is not to put anyone out of business," said Scott Whitcomb, the DNR wildlife division staffer who chairs the committee working on the program it hopes to implement this fall. 

"The fees for the permits will be pretty reasonable, but requiring a permit will allow us to keep track of what is going on," Whitcomb said. "For instance, if a bass tournament shouldn't happen at a particular site on opening day, or a canoe livery shouldn't be there, we will have a handle on things. We have a responsibility to monitor these uses and put conditions on them if necessary." 

Permits will be required for any commercial operation on state land or for any non-commercial operation like club events where more than 20 people will participate. That means mushers and snowmobilers, mountain bikers and the rest -- some who already have to get permits. 

Now one might think that river guides, a notoriously independent bunch, might uniformly balk at the idea of a permit. But that wasn't the case. 

There were those whose caterwaul could be heard in the next county, who demanded to know what they would get for their money. They didn't quite get that they had already gotten it -- a free ride for the last 32 years because the law had not been enforced. 

But more were like John Ray, 31, the new MRGA president, who had thought through the merits of the program. It has both positives and negatives. 

The negative, he said, is the paperwork and fee, somewhere between $50 and $450 a year, based on the size of the operation, the number of guides and the impact it might have on state launch sites. It's a fee that would get passed on to customers. 

The priceless upside, however, is legitimacy. 

"As a guide I see it as a positive thing," said Ray. "There are guides out there, guys who don't have insurance and don't have an inland pilot's license, who will need to get a permit. 

"These guys take business away from legitimate guides. The permit program will make things more uniform. You will either be legitimate or you will be illegal." 

Spalding made it clear that the program would not be a money-maker for the state. But staff were moving ahead with urging from the legislature and the Natural Resources Commission. 

"We are going to lose money on the program," he said. "We can't get more money from the general fund and we don't have the capability to hire more staff. 

"Monitoring is going to take time away from timber sales and forest-recreation programs. But staff have said they are willing to do this." 

That said, one might ask why do it. The answer is simple. It's the right thing to do. The state should have a reasonable handle on parties who run commercial operations on state land. 

We wouldn't allow an oil driller to just come in and set up shop, so why should a Northern Michigan riding stable simply expect to use and erode a state forest trail without some oversight. 

At the same time, there are further considerations. This program easily could become a waste of time and money if adequate follow-up, monitoring and enforcement isn't present. That would be an insult to legitimate guides and other regulated parties. 

The other issue appears to be one of fairness. DNR staffers all start mumbling when asked if hunting guides will be exempt or not. The right answer is: No, they are not exempt. 

If the state can rein in commercial riding stables and reel in commercial fishing guides, it most certainly should target commercial hunting guides too.


----------



## Adam Waszak (Apr 12, 2004)

Always new ways to punish the small business guys aren't there. Targeting river guides  C'mon this is ridiculous canaoe liveries etc. These are people who pay taxes already why go after them even more to make a few bucks? I think it is a shame.

AW


----------



## EdB (Feb 28, 2002)

Canoe liveries have always been destructive forces causing ton's of sand erosion into streams, they are especially damaging to the ecosystem on trout streams. They should be paying some fee's to use our state river and land resources. Some of the money collected should be earmarked to correct the damage done by commercial canoes operations. We as fisherman and hunters have to pay license fees to enjoy our sports and we fund the majority of all habitat improvements and purchases. Canoe liveries should pay some fees to contribute as well. I agree with this for any commercial operation on public lands. Commercial horseback operations can cause a lot of damage to trails.


----------

