Would You Support This Legislation?

[Wayne SW/MO]

I am paying the 1/8th sales tax too as well as the the fishing license. I don't see why some should pay for a license and some should not. That seems very illogical to me.

The money generated can be used in many different ways, if enforcement and regulation of floaters is on your agenda i am ok with that being encorporated as well. Whatever ever the final apporach would be it does need to be an approach accross several disciplines.

But you said anyone who buys a fishing license would slide, so fishermen get a by. I suspect that fishermen and kids, fishermen defined as someone with a license, would make up the majority of floaters.

I agree with the multiple approaches. You have at least 3 agencies in charge of some aspect of the rivers, the DNR, MDC, and MOHP. You could even slide MODOT in there also. So who get s the money and for what?

I see and have seen for decades 3 serious threats. The largest is is riparian damages and destruction and that would be in the hands of lawmakers at this point because it is mostly on private land. Pollution and overuse which is the DNR's responsibility. The MDC's responsibilities don't go much beyond the fisheries and protection of the natural resource. They are minor players in overall scheme of protecting the rivers.

I lived very close to a popular float river and watched it go from overcrowded at times to a circus. I wish someone could film the launch at the 64 access on the Niangua around 10 AM Saturday morning, mid summer. I guarantee most on here would be very surprised at what they saw.

The real problem is in getting enough interested people to campaign long enough and hard enough to make changes in a few laws and heavy enforcement of others. If that requires more money then the legislature will have to hash that out.

If you're not familiar with the battle over gravel mining and the beating down that our side took on that one, take a look and you'll see how monumental the fight will be to protect the rivers.

The unruly individuals that plague some rivers could care less about them, they see them in simple terms, an isolated place where they can be a moving target with virtually no law enforcement able to catch them as it now stands. Law enforcement can help by cutting down on litter and making the rivers a comfortable place for those that do care, and would support protection a place to float and a reason to care.

[Al Agnew]

I'm sure Fins and Feathers is right and any kind of new fees doesn't stand a chance in this political climate--which really burns my toast, because basically you're saying that you don't want to pay any more for something that you like to do, even if it could be shown that it needs more.

On a related note...as the journalists say, "an unnamed but credible source" tells me that the Highway Patrol is de-emphasizing the Water Patrol, believing that it's more important to patrol highways. There are fewer Water Patrol than there were two years ago, and there will be fewer still in another two years. Which is exactly what I've been saying, and fearing. In a down economy, the rivers will get put a lot farther down on the list in those agencies charged with protecting them. It's no surprise that the Highway Patrol is taking that stance, given that the Water Patrol is already a tiny part of their responsibilities.

[KCRIVERRAT]

Welp... seems now we're at the point where the first place we can start (and I know it's happened) is to POLITELY educate the nimrods if we see them either do any of the following... urinate in the river, crap within a 100 feet of the river and not bury their waste, leave a smoldering fire or trash on the bank, attempt to pick up anything that you've lost from a canoe from a tip over (within reason), ask the horseback riders to not let their ponies poop or pee, ask Farmer John if ya see him not to let his cattle have river access, or ask an unruly jet boater to slow down because he's either eroding the bank, screwing up spawning habitat, or just making it miserable for us fisherman.

.

You all get the picture... and just a disclaimer... being POLITE doesn't mean you will not be coming home without your jaw wired shut.

That's the sad reality. Feel for you guys who can't hit your favorite river during the week. I'm in a position I can and it makes a huge difference in the experience. Meaning you probably won't witness much wrong doings on the river, only the aftermath.

[Justin Spencer]

On a related note...as the journalists say, "an unnamed but credible source" tells me that the Highway Patrol is de-emphasizing the Water Patrol, believing that it's more important to patrol highways. There are fewer Water Patrol than there were two years ago, and there will be fewer still in another two years. Which is exactly what I've been saying, and fearing. In a down economy, the rivers will get put a lot farther down on the list in those agencies charged with protecting them. It's no surprise that the Highway Patrol is taking that stance, given that the Water Patrol is already a tiny part of their responsibilities.

That is the unfortunate truth, MDC doesn't seem to deal much in stuff other than fishing violations, and sheriff's depts. are also under funded. Time for vigilantees!

[Jerry Rapp]

no Justin. It is time to elect people who will do what make's sense.

[Justin Spencer]

no Justin. It is time to elect people who will do what make's sense.

Maybe some local politicians will do what makes sense, but anyone running for any of the big offices are doing it as a career move, not to serve the people. Time to cut pay and have them serving us for the right reasons.

[jdmidwest]

I'm sure Fins and Feathers is right and any kind of new fees doesn't stand a chance in this political climate--which really burns my toast, because basically you're saying that you don't want to pay any more for something that you like to do, even if it could be shown that it needs more.

On a related note...as the journalists say, "an unnamed but credible source" tells me that the Highway Patrol is de-emphasizing the Water Patrol, believing that it's more important to patrol highways. There are fewer Water Patrol than there were two years ago, and there will be fewer still in another two years. Which is exactly what I've been saying, and fearing. In a down economy, the rivers will get put a lot farther down on the list in those agencies charged with protecting them. It's no surprise that the Highway Patrol is taking that stance, given that the Water Patrol is already a tiny part of their responsibilities.

Alaska Game and Fish consilidated with the Alaska State Troopers a few years back and it made for a good show...

Government Agencies and spending has been out of hand for a long time. The first thing any politician wants to cut out is the enforcement or protection to play on civilian fears. If you don't pay your taxes, the fire dept and the police force will suffer. They will never cut out the library, court staff, assessor's office, etc to make ends meet.

The amount of force out on patrol did not change, just the superior forces that control both agencies merged to command them from what I understand with the MHP and the MWP merger. I don't know of any local MHP agents donning a life vest and a boat unless there is an emergency that requires more force on either land or sea.

[Feathers and Fins]

Term limits were part of my conversation last night, many people feel not only the enviroment but so many other things are getting the shaft from politicians who make it a career, they loose sight of why they got elected and by whom. For every politician they have a staff that is very large even if not directly on their payroll they have others they pay to do research polls and so on. If we could get a handle on the politicians I BELEIVE WE WOULD QUICKLY FIND MORE THAN ENOUGH FUNDS for so many things that need attention. I hate getting to politics but if this has a chance at all we will be dealing with them at some point.

How could this be presented and to a politician that can be trusted to help write the law to ensure the money and manpower will only be for this?

[Chief Grey Bear]

I am paying the 1/8th sales tax too as well as the the fishing license. I don't see why some should pay for a license and some should not. That seems very illogical to me.

With that train of thought, those that enjoy watching butterflies from an MDC area or other natural should have to purchase a hunting license?? Aren't also using the resource??? So they should have to pay extra.

Isn't that really what we are saying here. We are all paying for it but if we want to use it we need to pay extra???

Meanwhile, if MDC, for instance, is the license provider, then they will insist upon the money all going to them and not part of it to DNR, Water Patrol, etc. And even if they are required to divvy up the money with the other agencies, that will mean they need to allocate manpower to do the collecting, accounting, etc.

That is what I was smelling too. You will have to have easy access to purchasing the license, such as MDC vendors. But since MDC is charged with game laws, it will become trouble some to get the money to who should be using it, the DNR.

[Feathers and Fins]

With that train of thought, those that enjoy watching butterflies from an MDC area or other natural should have to purchase a hunting license?? Aren't also using the resource??? So they should have to pay extra. Isn't that really what we are saying here. We are all paying for it but if we want to use it we need to pay extra???

Pretty much sounds like it, and a big part of the reason I doubt this will ever happen. People will say we are already paying to use the resource and as part of the TAX it pays for officers to enforce the laws and protect the resource. Again comming back to the manpower to enforce the laws. Some states also require people using state lands and managed areas to pay a fee in a drop box prior to entering the land. I have a hunting and fishing license but still have to pay to use corps boat launches or parks. But can still launch on private or public for free. Institute the same policy at State owned facilities or ramps as a maintenance fee.