Would You Support This Legislation?

[Al Agnew]

I think a lot of you have a skewed idea of where the money comes from and where it goes. Jerry, by law the state government CANNOT dictate where the money that comes into MDC goes. The state government itself allocates zero money to MDC, nearly all of MDC's money comes directly from the 1/8th cent sales tax, which is earmarked to go to MDC and nowhere else, from license sales which MDC collects itself, and from federal funds derived from sales of sporting goods.

It's only on the Current and Jacks Fork that the canoe rentals have to pay to the Park Service (not the Forest Service--the National Scenic Riverways is in the national park system, not the national forest system). Rental people like Justin have to pay, if I understand it, to use Forest Service accesses on streams that have them. Not many streams actually have Forest Service accesses, including some of the most popular streams. There are no Forest Service accesses on the Meramec, Huzzah, Courtois, Big Piney, Niangua, James, Elk/Big Sugar. I don't think the canoe rentals have to pay anything to use MDC accesses. And if a canoe rental only uses private accesses or state accesses, I don't think they have to pay anything, and most of the big ones on the Meramec and tributaries are in that situation.

Given the price of rentals per person, which has gradually gone up as transportation costs and insurance and other overhead has gone up for the rental businesses, I've seen no evidence that high prices are depressing the numbers of renters. If somebody is willing to pay $30 to rent a canoe for the day, I highly doubt that many of them would balk at paying $32 or $33. It's a luxury expenditure anyway. I believe there is a fundamental difference between raising income taxes or sales taxes in general, which the taxpayer has no say in where the money goes, and paying an earmarked tax that goes to something specific, and something that directly benefits the resource which is being taxed. Right now, MDC has relatively little to do with controlling the hordes of mostly non-fishing rentees, so our pittance of sales tax money isn't going to it. County sheriff's departments and the state water patrol are who are responsible for policing the river rentees, and as we all know, the county police have other jobs and the water patrol IS dependent upon state appropriations, and the state doesn't have a lot of extra money lying around these days.

This knee jerk anti-tax thing just seems to me to be short-sighted. Things cost money, and if you enjoy it, you should be willing to pay a little to keep it. So yeah, I'd be all for this idea. I don't think it would hurt the "small business" liveries one bit, other than maybe a little paperwork, because I don't think it would cut down the numbers of rentees in the least. But it would have to be an ironclad law that designates exactly where the money would go, and also specifically limits the bureaucracy that would be administering it to the minimum necessary.

Oh, and I'll say this again as I pointed out in another thread...horrors, we're all paying that awful 1/8th percent sales tax to MDC! Gee, for every $10,000 we spend that's subject to MO sales taxes, it's costing us a whopping $12.50. I don't know how we can afford that.

[jdmidwest]

I was not aware there was already a use tax in place JD, does that apply only to the designated national riverways, or to others such as the Meramec as well? Huzzah Valley Resort's web site advertises no sales tax on canoe rentals.

I would think that applies only to rivers like the Current and maybe Eleven Point, but I've never seen law enforcement down there either, NFS or otherwise.

The reason I know about the fees on the Scenic Riverway System, I did some research when I was tossing around the idea of buying an established campground on the 11pt. I am sure it applies to the North Fork River also. I really don't know about the others, you could always contact the owners of any of the establishments and find out.

Eleven Point has multiple enforcement agents, county, MDC, and NFS agents. I have encountered all of them on the river. They make their presence known on the weekends. The county has a sheriff deputy that runs the river in a jet boat alot.

The problems that most complain about really can't be fixed with more taxes. It takes a higher moral standard which unfortunately the entire country has seemed to forget. There are not a bunch of thugs and criminals roaming the streams of the ozarks. You do not need an armed force patrolling to ensure your safety on any stream in MO. It is not that bad. If you go during a weekday, you may come across a mobile meth lab because that group of people seek solitude and seem to get away from the crowds.

What you may see is drunks, some nudity, and loud unruly groups. But most will not bother you, and they don't affect the fishing till they start banging the paddles on the boats or waters.

And if you feel like you may be threatened, you can always carry protection. Because, no matter where you are, you are really the only one responsible for you and your family's safety.

[Midwest troutbum]

I would support a moratorium or limit on the number of boatcraft including boats kayaks rafts canoes etc on any mo river creek or stream. Sorry to those who make their living on the rentals but they obvoiusly have proven over the course of many years they cant handle the large crouds or police the exceedingly large capacities anymore. A daily use fee should be put in place similar to proven sucess stories of the national parks and many other states recreational sites. Afterall it is for the preservation and the future of the natural resource and for future generations. Most can at least afford a few dollars for beers on the trip why cant they chip in a few dollars to pay for their party cleanup and pollution.

Has elliot davis planted a bad seed in our brains that we may have everything for free?

[jdmidwest]

Instead of fees and taxes, how about a volunteer group of concerned citizens cleaning up the river and stream banks.

[Chief Grey Bear]

This knee jerk anti-tax thing just seems to me to be short-sighted. Things cost money, and if you enjoy it, you should be willing to pay a little to keep it. So yeah, I'd be all for this idea.

Quite frankly I think it is a knee jerk idea to think that a tax will be the cure all. It is not going to fix a thing. People will not stop drinking and hooting and hollering just because some of some tax. How many LEO's will it take per river to get them into a single file line and keep all arms and legs in the craft while in motion? One every 2-3 or 4 hundred yards?? How many will that be per 10 mile float???

[ness]

Instead of fees and taxes, how about a volunteer group of concerned citizens cleaning up the river and stream banks.

Pshaw! Don't we have people to do that for us?

[Justin Spencer]

I would support a moratorium or limit on the number of boatcraft including boats kayaks rafts canoes etc on any mo river creek or stream. Sorry to those who make their living on the rentals but they obvoiusly have proven over the course of many years they cant handle the large crouds or police the exceedingly large capacities anymore. A daily use fee should be put in place similar to proven sucess stories of the national parks and many other states recreational sites. Afterall it is for the preservation and the future of the natural resource and for future generations. Most can at least afford a few dollars for beers on the trip why cant they chip in a few dollars to pay for their party cleanup and pollution.

Has elliot davis planted a bad seed in our brains that we may have everything for free?

Most of the customers using outfitters book months in advance so if we limit the numbers of boats on rivers the days of getting up and going floating on the spur of the moment is over. This would affect local people and fishermen much more than it would the knuckleheads. If there is not enough enforcement to stop the illegal behavior, who will be counting boats as they go on the river.

[kevthebassman]

I've contacted my State Senator, and in his words, this is one of the only tax proposals he has seen that he could get behind.

Al, you've laid out an excellent argument, and Midwest Troutbum gets it.

I don't think anyone expects this to be a cure-all, and I know I don't expect the rivers to be a Sunday school. But if we could get some money raised by users of the river who heretofore have been riding for free, and get that money spent exclusively on enforcement of the laws on the river, we could hopefully check some of the worst of the nonsense.

[zander]

I would be for it. If a lot of these people will spend $30 on a rental another $30 on beer and liquor (per person), I don't see how a small fee/tax on the canoe rental would hurt. These Ozark rivers and streams are a true treasure that we have. The fact is just like anything else they need to be kept up. It would be nice if volunteers would keep them clean but they don't. Volunteers surely don't have any enforcement abilities. As far as the right to protect oneself and carry a gun, you are right. But do we really want to take our families out to a place where we have opted to do without law enforcement where the concentration of drunk young males (and all of their hormones and wonderful decision making abilities) is so high. We can all be Quick Draw McGraw's or we can use some of this money to hire professionals who will help keep the peace and the right kind of atmosphere on the rivers. My two cents.

[Daryk Campbell Sr]

How about designating some monies towards billboards in the areas showing the clean vs the trashed rivers. This may help to stimulate the brain to remind people why they should not litter. I am not happy about a tax/fee/charge, but understand it may be necessary. In the event that one may be started, I agree with Al's statement that it should be deemed to a specific purpose.

This knee jerk anti-tax thing just seems to me to be short-sighted. Things cost money, and if you enjoy it, you should be willing to pay a little to keep it. So yeah, I'd be all for this idea. I don't think it would hurt the "small business" liveries one bit, other than maybe a little paperwork, because I don't think it would cut down the numbers of rentees in the least. But it would have to be an ironclad law that designates exactly where the money would go, and also specifically limits the bureaucracy that would be administering it to the minimum necessary.