Require canoes and kayaks to be registered

[COWISLAND NH]

Does any one know if there is a proposed bill to get canoes and kayaks to start paying for their use of the lake? MP will need more $ to enforce some new laws. I thought I heard of some sort of bill a while back....I think it's a great idea. More laws = more money needed.

[Kamper]

I havent heard of any bills for it. The idea has been discussed here a few times.

Most people who own them seem to have come out against the idea. Those of us who only own boats that do need to be registerred, have expressed less than universal opposition.

[WeirsBeachBoater]

There is something in the works, I know with the increased number of rescues this year with paddlers in the swollen rivers. The F+G would like a way to pay for all the rescues.

[Seaplane Pilot]

I'm all for it. If you have to register your sunfish, then why do canoes, kayaks and rowboats get a free ride?

[SIKSUKR]

I'm all for it. If you have to register your sunfish, then why do canoes, kayaks and rowboats get a free ride?

Sunfish?Like kibbys?My goldfish will not be happy to know he needs a sticker !

[Evenstar]

SENATE BILL 255-FN-A
“AN ACT requiring non-motorized vessels to display conservation decals issued by the fish and game department.”
The bill was voted INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE on March 22, 2007.

Personally I would support registration of all non-motorized boats - if the funds collected were used to help fund the marine patrol, or targeted toward public access - rather than toward the Fish and Game Department's general fund.

I feel that rescues need to be treated separately. People who require rescuing (whether they are hikers or boaters), due to their own negligence, should be billed for the cost of their rescues.

But this gets complicated by the fact that there are volunteer groups that make up a large portion of the personnel who are involved in rescues in NH. Because of all the volunteer manpower, NH actually has one of the lowest costs for rescues of any state.

[AC2717]

Would this include our little inflatable 2 to 4 person rafts/row boat that we use to get out to moorings? Because that would be a nice way for them to stick it to us? They need to better define what they are talking about and aiming for. I have a 2 person Seylor inflatable that you would put a tiny trolling motor on made by them, I do not want to have to register that, it is about 8 feet long I think, I left if up with one arm. That would be rediculous,
now canoes and others yes, but honestly I think having to register a kayak is just crazy if it is just a one person or two person thing, that is way over board, there should just be a fee associated with the rescue after everyone is safe.
there is no way someone in danager ios going ot pass up being saved because they will have to pay a $10, $20, or any amount for thier life after the rescue.
Me thinks this is the better way to go

[Orion]

Do we register all kayaks?
What about sit-upon types?
What about surf boards?
What about swim boards?
What about swim fins?
Your bathing suit?

[GWC...]

Does any one know if there is a proposed bill to get canoes and kayaks to start paying for their use of the lake? MP will need more $ to enforce some new laws. I thought I heard of some sort of bill a while back....I think it's a great idea. More laws = more money needed.
Please answer sincerely to the following poll. Thank you in advance.

[Seaplane Pilot]

Sunfish?Like kibbys?My goldfish will not be happy to know he needs a sticker !

Neither will your "catfish" :laugh:

[fatlazyless]

It is my understanding that small boats like canoes, kayaks, small sailboats, rowboats, and the like are covered for liability by the standard NH home owners insurance policy. If it has a motor, then it is no longer covered and needs its' own policy.

It would seem that a boat that needs its own insurance should also need its own registration. Seems to make some type of legal sense.

Just the same, a ten or twenty dollar annual sticker for a used Grumman canoe costing 100 dollars would be fine as long as the money goes to canoe support services.

[VtSteve]

There is something in the works, I know with the increased number of rescues this year with paddlers in the swollen rivers. The F+G would like a way to pay for all the rescues.

Been a lot over here as well. How about a very bright registration plaque that could be seen for miles?

[jrc]

When I register my boat there is a fee and a tax, plus there are these extras:

$5 to the lake restoration and preservation fund
$1 to the search and rescue fund
$5 to the public boat access fund

I think all boats should pay these fees, it's only fair. It really isn't that hard, just require a sticker attached to the hull. No need for numbers etc. The fee is fixed so you don't need VIN numbers or any paperwork. You walk into a boat dealer or a town office you give them $11, they give you a sticker. You stick it on any boat you want. Obviously boats covered by the current laws would still need the current sticker and numbers and the new stickers would need to be different from the current stickers.

As to what needs a sticker, the MP already has a rule. If you use it inside the swim lines (or where there could be swim lines) it's a beach toy. If you use it outside the lines or far from shore it's a boat and today you need a PFD. You would also need the sticker.

For full disclosure, I have canoe and I would be willing to pay the fee. This really has nothing to do with the new law. People should pay their own way.

[RLW]

There is something in the works, I know with the increased number of rescues this year with paddlers in the swollen rivers. The F+G would like a way to pay for all the rescues.

Don't they have monies unused from the years that they didn't have to do all the rescues????:)

[VitaBene]

When I register my boat there is a fee and a tax, plus there are these extras:

$5 to the lake restoration and preservation fund
$1 to the search and rescue fund
$5 to the public boat access fund

I think all boats should pay these fees, it's only fair. It really isn't that hard, just require a sticker attached to the hull. No need for numbers etc. The fee is fixed so you don't need VIN numbers or any paperwork. You walk into a boat dealer or a town office you give them $11, they give you a sticker. You stick it on any boat you want. Obviously boats covered by the current laws would still need the current sticker and numbers and the new stickers would need to be different from the current stickers.

As to what needs a sticker, the MP already has a rule. If you use it inside the swim lines (or where there could be swim lines) it's a beach toy. If you use it outside the lines or far from shore it's a boat and today you need a PFD. You would also need the sticker.

For full disclosure, I have canoe and I would be willing to pay the fee. This really has nothing to do with the new law. People should pay their own way.

Good idea- that also solves a bigger problem in my estimation- how to identify the owners of canoes or kayaks found floating in the water (did someone fall off needing rescue or did the vessel just float away in a storm).

[RI Swamp Yankee]

.....
Your bathing suit?
Some that I have seen would require that the stickers be very small :eek:

[Acres per Second]

Clarifications edited in red.

"...I feel that rescues need to be treated separately. People who require rescuing...should be billed for the cost of their rescues...NH actually has one of the lowest costs for rescues of any state..."

Some of the most expen$ive boating rescues may already be billed to insurance companies, but I read too seldom of billings that get paid by individuals.

Does any one know if there is a proposed bill to get canoes and kayaks to start paying for their use of the lake? MP will need more $ to enforce some new laws. I thought I heard of some sort of bill a while back....I think it's a great idea.
1) We'd previously covered (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6268)this topic. It's a bit mean-spirited to bring it up again to penalize against many who cannot afford more gasoline or "more boat", and try to enjoy this scenic lake gently. It's showing even more "sour grapes" to demand that I sell a taxed house to pay another tax on an insignificant boat that in many other states doesn't require any addition tax for registration. Maine—already losing population—is hardly the state to start copying their regulations and registrations. :confused:

Youngsters who have read the book First You Must Row a Little Boat by Bode, would be discouraged from boating by having to register their exempt rowboat.

First You Must Row a Little Boat was written to show why countless aspects of operating lesser boats avoids the future confusions that larger cruisers feel at the dock—and beyond. (At just $9, it could be a stocking-stuffer for the aspiring young boater).

2) Why penalize the many paddlers who peaceably boat on NH's quieter lakes, ponds and streams to benefit some perceived increase of rescues on "the lake"?

There are many more non-powered craft in garages, lofts, barns, backyards or stored on automobile racks.

A rack of six rowing sculls near me would have to pay $66 for the privilege of rowing between 6AM and 8AM only on the days that were calm enough! :fire:

My own eclectic flotilla would be $55—money that would be better spent at area restaurants and other Lakes Region businesses.

3) Vermont (http://www.dmv.org/vt-vermont/boat-registration.php), which has many more raging rivers and streams than NH (and many-more rescues), doesn't require registration for paddlers.

DART helicopters evacuate injured Vermont paddlers by air to Dartmouth/Hitchcock Hospital in New Hampshire. Are Vermont individuals assessed for their rescues by New Hampshire entities? :confused:

4) What happens to the frequently-cited Coast Guard statistics when the number of "registered boats" in NH doubles or triples? :confused:

There are many more unpowered boats than powered boats in New Hampshire. They're just not on all NH lakes, not on all NH lakes all at once, or not every day. Rentals would understandably raise their fees to compensate.

NH didn't require "no-engine" sailboats to be registered until about 1985: were Legislators "thinking clean" back then, or just giving a fair shake to lesser boaters?

With a new requirement adding 200,00+ new registrations, there's at least one category of CG statistics that would become swollen by imponderables: "Falls From Boat". :confused:

Those returning to "the lake"—or those distant from "the lake"—shouldn't be hampered.

5) Canoes with a trolling motor require registration! I think that's wrong as well—if for no other reason than the dirtier environment that petroleum-fueled craft leave behind.

A government can tax to discourage, or not-tax to encourage. Lake Winnipesaukee shores and waters can be benefited by environmentally-clean boats. As I wrote years ago on these pages: double registration fees for the most excessive boats—later—double them again.

A 45 MPH solar/hybrid/wind turbine powered 50' boat should not be taxed, although anyone who can afford one today shouldn't be bothered by the present tax. (Especially when the energy required for it is inexhaustible).

BTW, an 8-foot Sevylor with a trolling motor requires registration today.

"...More laws = more money needed...."
What laws would those be? :confused: :rolleye2:

Please don't answer. :rolleye1:
"...I think all boats should pay these fees, it's only fair...For full disclosure, I have canoe and I would be willing to pay the fee...."
Y'know, that's not quite full disclosure when your other boat can't possibly fit beneath Wolfeboro's bridge. :rolleye1:

You're OK with the "There-are-Two-Americas" meme? :(

All my seven boats will fit under the Wolfeboro bridge, and do most of my summer-boating on Lake Winnipesaukee.

Good idea- that also solves a bigger problem in my estimation- how to identify the owners of canoes or kayaks found floating in the water (did someone fall off needing rescue or did the vessel just float away in a storm).
1) My canoe/kayak registrations would have an answering machine at the listed number in a distant state, and I doubt NH would send a postcard about a found kayak anyway.

2) With 45-minute NHMP response times considered reasonable, any "rescue" should be taken out of the issue.
I'm all for it. If you have to register your sunfish, then why do canoes, kayaks and rowboats get a free ride?
To expand on a previous kayaking quote by jrc: "Because two wrongs don't make a right?"

BTW I: Some "sunfish" and their clones are made in lengths that are exempt from registration. I don't think businesses should be hampered additionally in any way.

BTW II: We don't use the same 150-foot-passage "at any given time".

BTW III: Selecting text for answering is "parsing text".

[Audiofn]

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand I think that since a person in a canoe or kayak can cost the state tons of money in search and rescue dollars they should pay for registration. They want to be able to use the services then they need to help pay the bill. On the other hand as far as I am concerned it is just a tax and I think that we have enough of those already!!!

[Orion]

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand I think that since a person in a canoe or kayak can cost the state tons of money in search and rescue dollars they should pay for registration.

How much money are we really talking about? I don't recall too many stories each year with regard to such craft. I'm confident the current fees cover it.

On the other hand as far as I am concerned it is just a tax and I think that we have enough of those already!!!

Amen!

I wouldn't be opposed to registering canoes and kayaks as long as we simultaneously reduce the fees to existing registered craft. Don't ever give the government more paths to your wallet.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have equal numbers of watercraft that require registration as those that currently do not require it.

[BroadHopper]

My family lives on the Broads since 1898. My grandfather, father and I can tell you countless stories about rescuing paddlers. Lately it seems like I rescue a paddler every weekend. Usually happens when the lake starts to get rough when the winds pick up or boat traffic increases.
I don't charge for my service. Most that are rescued are not familiar with the lake. Nor are they experience paddlers.
I have certificates in white water kayaking and I think everyone should take the basic course. Just as powerboaters have to take a course.
Paddlers safety course and some kind of water use sticker can go a long way in adding to the enjoyment and safety of paddlers.

[Audiofn]

Orion: I have no idea what the actuall costs are associated with a search and rescue but there have been a few this year. I posted about the two that happened in Maine just a few weeks ago, one ladie saved the other gentleman unfortunately did not survive. Coast guard spent I think it was two days searching. I am sure it was not cheap.

I feel that the person that needs to be rescued should never be saddled up with the fee for that. People make mistakes some times honest ones, some times mechanical failures, some times thier own stupidity. My friend was out Kayaking on the Charles river this weekend and a girl in a skull ran into him and hurt his back bad, flipped him over and he had to get pulled in because it hurt him to paddle. Certainly he or her should not be paying any rescue fee it was a honest yet easily avoidable collision.

[Woodsy]

Contentious issue to be sure!! Some of you guys & gals are looking at this proposal in a very narrow scope....

NH Fish & Game is the go to agency in charge of most search & rescue missions here in NH. If your lost in the woods, up in the mountains or the water they will come look for you. They do a tremendous amount of work with an ever shrinking budget. NH Fish & Game had until recently relied soley on fishing & hunting licenses for funding. This year they asked for 1.6 Million form the General Fund for stopgap funding as there are less hunting & fishing licenses issued every year, coupled with the additional burden of having to to foot the bill for Search & Rescue. Hence the new law looking to recoup some of those funds from the rescued people....

I have no problem affixing a $5 or $10 NH Water Access sticker per year to canoes, kayaks and other human powered watercraft if the monies go to fund NH Fish & Game. The canoeists & kayakers who have access to ALL the state waterways are the ones who see the benefit.

NH Marine Patrol is funded by motorboat registrations... they patrol the bigger waterways, dealing primarily with motorized watercraft. The NHMP source of funding should not change! If the NHMP need more $$$, petition for an increase in registration fees...

Woodsy

[jrc]

APS, my post clearly says "when I register my boat..." and later I disclose the canoe. I'd say it's pretty clear I own both a register-able boat and a paddle boat. I already pay the $11 as part of the powerboat registration, I'd be willing to pay it again to register the canoe, if that was the law.

I'm not sure what going under bridges has to do with this discussion, are you just saying you liked the video I posted? :laugh::laugh:

Audiofn, I agree with you whole heartedly about not increasing taxes. But we have to fund the Search and Rescue somehow. If we take it from the general fund it's a broad based tax, if we take it as a fee from the people who need the service, it's more palatable to me.

We've discussed billing people for their rescue. I think it makes sense in the case of careless and reckless behavior. But if we bill everyone, and our insurance companies pay the bill, then we will have to pay higher insurance rates. So we still pay. Maybe there should be private rescue companies that we pay a for as needed or on retainer. Sounds like a good business venture...

[Airwaves]

I would support a sticker with an identification number on it.

This would accomplish two things;

1. There would be a record in a database of the owner so that if the canoe, kayak or other currently unregistered vessel is found floating the NHMP or Coast Guard (I would not limit this regulation to inland waters) would be able to contact the owner to see if there is reason to launch a search and rescue or if the vessel just got loose.

2. It would help pay for the above search and rescue operations. As the popularity of these kinds of boats grow so does the accident and rescue rate.

[Audiofn]

APS, my post clearly says "when I register my boat..." and later I disclose the canoe. I'd say it's pretty clear I own both a register-able boat and a paddle boat. I already pay the $11 as part of the powerboat registration, I'd be willing to pay it again to register the canoe, if that was the law.

I'm not sure what going under bridges has to do with this discussion, are you just saying you liked the video I posted? :laugh::laugh:

Audiofn, I agree with you whole heartedly about not increasing taxes. But we have to fund the Search and Rescue somehow. If we take it from the general fund it's a broad based tax, if we take it as a fee from the people who need the service, it's more palatable to me.

We've discussed billing people for their rescue. I think it makes sense in the case of careless and reckless behavior. But if we bill everyone, and our insurance companies pay the bill, then we will have to pay higher insurance rates. So we still pay. Maybe there should be private rescue companies that we pay a for as needed or on retainer. Sounds like a good business venture...

Yes I agree a use tax has always been more "palatable" to me. The problem always seems to be that they find some way to redirect the "tax" to some other group. For example they found that the monies that was to be collected for Milfoil research and control in Maine was going all over the place and only a percentage to the intended cause! That to me is very upsetting. If you are going to charge me 5 bucks for milfoil stickers then please make sure that it all goes to fighting milfoil. In this case please make sure that the monies that would be collected as a boat registration went to the NH wild life and or the NHMP's.

[VitaBene]

Some of the most expen$ive boating rescues may already be billed to insurance companies, but I read too seldom of billings that get paid by individuals.


1) We'd previously covered (http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6268)this topic. It's a bit mean-spirited to bring it up again to penalize against many who cannot afford more gasoline or "more boat". Why penalize the many paddlers who peaceably boat on NH's quieter lakes, ponds and streams to benefit some perceived increase of rescues on "the lake"?

3) Vermont (http://www.dmv.org/vt-vermont/boat-registration.php), which has many more raging rivers and streams than NH (and many-more rescues), doesn't require registration for paddlers.

4) What happens to the frequently-cited Coast Guard statistics when the number of "registered boats" in NH doubles or triples? :confused:

Those returning to "the lake"—or those distant from "the lake"—shouldn't be penalized.

5) Canoes with a trolling motor require registration! I think that's wrong as well—if for no other reason than the dirtier environment that petroleum-fueled craft leave behind.


What laws would those be? :confused: :rolleye2:

Please don't answer. :rolleye1:


Y'know, that's not quite full disclosure when your other boat can't possibly fit beneath Wolfeboro's bridge. :rolleye1:

You're OK with the "There-are-Two-Americas" meme? :(


1) My canoe/kayak registrations would have an answering machine at the listed number in a distant state, and I doubt NH would send a postcard about a found kayak anyway.

2) With 45-minute NHMP response times considered reasonable, any "rescue" should be taken out of the issue.

To expand on a previous kayaking quote by jrc: "Because two wrongs don't make a right?"

You are a piece of work, APS- you cobble together posts and respond to little bits as you see fit. Well two can play your game:

1. How it is mean spirited to ask you to contribute to the patrolling of this great lake we all love- you are using the same 150' diameter at any given time that I am. I am sorry if you can't scrape together $11 to register your boat, you may need to give up one of your homes. Do you really believe that the only rescues that occur in this state are for powerboats and on lakes?

3. you skipped 2 so I will as well. Vermont?? - well 2 wrongs don't make a right:)

4. What are you talking about, this statement makes no sense and I guarantee if you re-read you can't make sense of it either. Confused- yes I am.

5. This is a classic- so basically you are calling a boat registration an environmental impact fee. So when I build my 45 MPH solar/hybrid/wind turbine powered 50' boat I will not need to register it because I am creating no emmissions? Yeah, that makes sense.

More laws?, no only one more virtually enenforceable law that will take away from the enforcement of better thought out rules such as the 150' rule.

Can your boat fit under the Wolfeboro Bridge?:rolleye1:

What is a meme? I certainly have no issue with 2 Americas theme- those that have worked their a@@ off to achieve what they have and those who free-load off of them. Kind of like the unregistered boats on this lake freeloading off the polluting powerboats. If you are so concerned about carbon footprints, you can do your share in reducing them by stopping your treks between here and Florida.

Regarding the NHMP and rescues:
1. My boat is registered in NH, with an NH address. The point was to know who to look for. You think if a kayak is found floating in the middle of the broads with any gear on board that the MP will send a postcard. Thankfully they will expend the same hard work and manpower trying to rescue an unappreciative ahem "person" such as you as they would any one else.

2. I will take a 45 minute response time over no response. We boat on a 44000 acre lake, not your bath tub. But of course with more boats registered, perhaps we could hire 2 or 3 times as many MP officers (please see your #4 below they are you surmised #s). If you are wearing the PFD you should be, 45 minutes most certainly be timely enough for a rescue.

Finally, I apologize to our webmaster Don for getting sucked in here because again 2 wrongs don't make a right (yes I am admitting I am wrong APS, have you ever??)

[Kamper]

Meme

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme

A meme (pronounced /miːm/)[1] is any thought or behavior that can be passed from one person to another by learning or imitation. Examples include thoughts, ideas, theories, gestures, practices, fashions, habits, songs and dances. Memes propagate themselves and can move through the cultural sociosphere in a manner similar to the contagious behavior of a virus. ...


This word is so obscure it would not likely be used even by an intelligent person, in normal conversation since you would not realisticlly expect it to be comprehended. This is only the second time I have encounterred it. The other time was a Sci-fi book with some bizarre alternate levels of reality.

It can be stretched to apply here but the simpler term "theme," would have been close enough to get the point across. Probably just a typo.

[Acres per Second]

1) Google returns 50,600 (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-04,GGLD:en&q=meme+%28pronounced+%2Fmi%2Am%2F%29) references for the pronouncement of the word—nearly 3 million for the definition. The "Two Americas meme" returns 163 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=GGLD%2CGGLD%3A2005-04%2CGGLD%3Aen&q=two-americas-meme&btnG=Search) references, at least one of which resides at a brief and good-reading New Hampshire website (http://www.nhinsider.com/bill-gnade/2008/8/26/logic-lesson.html).

2) To tax kayaks at this time is a mean-spirited goal: cobbled with with weak justifications and poorly-conceived poll questions, we'll be seeing this brought up for a third time later. :rolleye1:

[Winnipesaukee]

...death and taxes.

I don't dump oil and gas into the lake, or leave any "footprint." Why should I have to register my sailboat? What's next? Mandatory registration of foam noodles and waterskis?

If I have a kayak that I take out once a year, I have to pay at least $11 just for that one trip, or I risk being cited for operating an unregistered vessel? Give me a break, New Hampshire.

So when these boaters decide to go to Champlain instead of paying to boat on NH lakes, where will NH find the money to pay for the extra [insert wasteful spending program here]?

Not in favor of more restrictions and taxes. I don't like the government telling me how to spend my money. Boat ramps should be private and charge boaters a fee to launch, for example.

I'll keep my money, thanks.

http://img26.picoodle.com/data/img26/3/9/1/f_swimmiesm_05789ce.jpg

Also, any kayaker worth his salt will know that you NEVER go out solo. You ALWAYS a) row with a buddy, in b) safe conditions for one's ability, AND c) with a PFD securely on. Or at least 2 out of the 3. If everyone followed these rules of common sense, we wouldn't have these problems. Unfortunately, too many don't. In our politically correct world, we call these people "Captain Boneheads."

And homeowners should not leave anything that can be blown into the water near the water, for if it gets away it can cause navigational hazards, as well as false rescues.

[GWC...]

It sure is nice of this organization to influence the vote on SENATE BILL 255-FN-A.

It would also be nice if they pay the F&G’s S&R costs related to paddlers.

http://www.paddlesportsindustry.org/Release-ppatopia10807.htm

matt@paddlesportsindustry.org[/email]]
NEWS RELEASE
March 16, 2007

Contact: Matt Menashes, Executive Director
Paddlesports Industry Association
Ph: 703-451-3864 x 26
E-mail: matt@paddlesportsindustry.org

Paddlesports Industry Association Warns Paddlesports Businesses and Enthusiasts in New Hampshire about a State Bill that Would Impose an Annual Registration Fee on Paddlers

SB 255 would require an annual $10 fee per boat to assist the state in raising $1.8 million for the New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game on the backs of paddlers and paddlesports businesses.

(Springfield, VA.) – The Paddlesports Industry Association is encouraging paddlesports business owners and paddling enthusiasts in New Hampshire to contact their state legislators to let them know they oppose an annual $10 per boat registration fee and how Senate Bill 255 will hurt the state’s paddlesports industry.
The bill, sponsored by Senators John S. Barnes, John T. Gallus, and Lou D'Allesandro, seeks to raise $1.8 million for the New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game on the backs of paddlers and paddlesports businesses by adding a $10 annual registration fee for canoes and kayaks (and other non-motorized vessels). The bill has passed a senate committee; a full senate vote is expected on March 22, 2007.

“Our association is very concerned with attempts like this to fund general government programs with taxes on canoes and kayaks. This tax provides no direct benefit to paddlers or paddlesports businesses in the state. All funds go directly to the Department of Fish and Game's operating fund,” said Paddlesports Industry Association Executive Director, Matt Menashes. "I know the pressures on New Hampshire's Department of Fish and Game. Their employees haven't had regular pay raises in years. But it's time for all of the citizens of New Hampshire to agree that New Hampshire Fish and Game is a priority. Funding increases should come from other state-wide taxes, not by hurting small business in the state." Menashes added, “There is nothing in the bill to support use of the money to expand paddling access in the state nor to improve boater education. All paddlers in New Hampshire need to fight this bill.”

As currently written, this bill will be particularly hard on paddlesports rental and outfitting operations in the state. Rental and outfitting businesses will be required to pay an annual $10 fee per boat and put two registration decals on each vessel. Many rental businesses in the state have dozens, if not hundreds, of canoes and kayaks. Just the paperwork alone for these businesses will have a significant impact on their bottom lines.

For more information contact Matt Menashes (703) 451-3864 x 26, matt@paddlesportsindustry.org.
To download a copy of the bill, visit http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2007/SB0255.html
A list of the Wildlife, Fish and Game Committee of New Hampshire is available online at:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/ie/billstatus/commmail.asp?commcode=S35

The Paddlesport Industry Association encourages New Hampshire paddlesports businesses and enthusiasts to tell their legislators how Senate Bill 255 will affect them. To contribute to the Paddlesports Industry Association's government affairs fund, please contact Matt Menashes as well.

The Paddlesports Industry Association is a 501(c)(6) trade association dedicated to the growth of paddlesports. The association represents the interests of outfitters, manufacturers, retailers, instruction centers, sales representatives, and outside suppliers of the paddlesports industry throughout North America. The organization supports industry growth and its membership through programs that include representation in government/legislative affairs, consumer education, outreach/marketing initiatives, membership cost saving benefits, and professional development programs. For more information about the Paddlesports Industry Association, visit http://www.paddlesportsindustry.org/paddlepro.htm.

[Lakegeezer]

Not in favor of more restrictions and taxes. I don't like the government telling me how to spend my money. Boat ramps should be private and charge boaters a fee to launch, for example.
I agree with you that small unpowered craft should not need to be registered, but not with your view on public ramps. The government takes my money anyway, so I like to be able to tell them where to spend it. Public ramps allows the public to use a public resource. Forcing day-trippers to spend $10 to launch would just make the lake more exclusive. The rule in NH, I believe, is that every body of water over 5 acres has to have a public access. That's one of those "for the people" rules that makes NH special, and worth the (few) taxes we pay.

[Audiofn]

It sure is nice of this organization to influence the vote on SENATE BILL 255-FN-A.

It would also be nice if they pay the F&G’s S&R costs related to paddlers.

http://www.paddlesportsindustry.org/Release-ppatopia10807.htm

They do seem to want to have their cake and eat it don't they. I have not had time to use my boat once this year. Under Winni's reasoning I should get a credit back for the money that I spent on registration and insurance? This would be a use tax. I think that a use tax is more appropiate then say taking my money to give to people that don't want to work.... :rolleye2: Is 10 bucks or what ever they come up with (even 30) really that big of a deal?

As for the knowing if some one needs to be searched for or not there is a much easier way to do this. Require owners of these boats to put a name plaque on it with contact information.

[lfm]

I agree with you that small unpowered craft should not need to be registered, but not with your view on public ramps. The government takes my money anyway, so I like to be able to tell them where to spend it. Public ramps allows the public to use a public resource. Forcing day-trippers to spend $10 to launch would just make the lake more exclusive. The rule in NH, I believe, is that every body of water over 5 acres has to have a public access. That's one of those "for the people" rules that makes NH special, and worth the (few) taxes we pay.

I agree with you lg, I am loathe to give the government any more of my money. As for public ramps, does the state fund any on Winni? It seems to me that the individual towns set the fees/parking restrictions for non-residents. See Bizer's list of launch sites on bizer.com