Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > Boating
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Links Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-29-2019, 09:14 AM   #1
rick35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bear Island/Merrimack
Posts: 582
Thanks: 31
Thanked 128 Times in 78 Posts
Default Kayak Legislation

I read in today’s NH Sunday News that there are two bills in the works related to kayaks. Kayak fees are on the docket as are required visibility flags.

I do not support fees as I don’t see how it can be administered or enforced. That would add another responsibility to law enforcement and they already have plenty on their plates. And we would need a way for people to easily get a sticker. I think the $10 fee could be used up with administration and enforcement leaving little or nothing for safety and ramp improvement.

As for visibility flags I’m not sure. I have bright orange kayaks and wear an orange PFD and I have had a few close calls. Is a small flag going to help? Probably not if a boater is distracted. But there are a lot of dark kayaks on the lake and a flag may help in those cases.
rick35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 09:27 AM   #2
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

This would be a lot more safer if she was using a visibility flag.


Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 09:42 AM   #3
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,777
Thanks: 737
Thanked 780 Times in 466 Posts
Default

No on fees and flags. Unnecessary burdens and the $10 cost will be eaten by administrative costs with close to zero percent chance of enforcement.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to thinkxingu For This Useful Post:
ApS (12-29-2019), Lin (12-30-2019), Mooseyme (12-30-2019)
Old 12-29-2019, 10:06 AM   #4
radar4401
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 44
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Angry Kayak Legistration

I agree with the wasted administration costs. I put it with all the other loony laws they want to put into law. What are you going to do with visitors? A big disincentive to come to NH.
radar4401 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 10:22 AM   #5
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

Link to some of the bills under consideration including the aforementioned.

https://www.unionleader.com/news/pol...152e0fb16.html


As I read some of this stuff I often times wonder why this stuff gets serious consideration when you look at some of the actual challenges that are of ongoing concern to the citizens of this state. Keep that in mind as you read some of this nonsense, and I guarantee you that when these sponsors are running for election they never mention the stuff they actually are spending their time on. Both political parties are guilty of this and it's pretty disgusting.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 12-29-2019, 10:30 AM   #6
joey2665
Senior Member
 
joey2665's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Meredith Bay & LI, NY
Posts: 2,407
Thanks: 541
Thanked 640 Times in 431 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
Link to some of the bills under consideration including the aforementioned.

https://www.unionleader.com/news/pol...152e0fb16.html


As I read some of this stuff I often times wonder why this stuff gets serious consideration when you look at some of the actual challenges that are of ongoing concern to the citizens of this state. Keep that in mind as you read some of this nonsense, and I guarantee you that when these sponsors are running for election they never mention the stuff they actually are spending their time on. Both political parties are guilty of this and it's pretty disgusting.
What an incredible waste of time money and resources.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
joey2665 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 10:35 AM   #7
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post

I often times wonder why this stuff gets serious consideration

.................Both political parties are guilty of this and it's pretty disgusting.
Good grief god help us all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by radar4401 View Post
I agree with the wasted administration costs. I put it with all the other loony laws they want to put into law. What are you going to do with visitors? A big disincentive to come to NH.
Remember this is New Hampshire we don't have to provide a service....... we just have to collect a fee.

A lot of this stuff is feel good legislation.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 10:44 AM   #8
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

It makes you wonder if they don't have something better to do than sit and think up more laws, rules and regulations.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 10:51 AM   #9
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

I'd like to see a bill making it a Class A felony to waste the state's resources introducing useless legislation. Most of that short list would qualify.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
Top-Water (12-29-2019)
Old 12-29-2019, 11:07 AM   #10
Kamper
Senior Member
 
Kamper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Thornton's Ferry
Posts: 1,207
Thanks: 65
Thanked 145 Times in 109 Posts
Default

Two talking points on fees...

$10 is the camel's nose under the tent. More to come.

If more folks put ID stickers on their kayaks, the MP would know where to start looking, and for whom, the dozen or so times a year they find empties in the water. This may have muted the calls for formal registration.

I know several people who have multiple kayaks because 2nd 3rd 4th... hand they are cheap. The will moan about registering all of them. I would too but since I don't have one, I would like them to pay something for the services they are using IE state ramps and access points, parks, rescue and patrol services. Especially the MP chasing down the GoFast that wake-washed their kid in violation of no-wake laws and common sense.
Kamper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 12:05 PM   #11
Winilyme
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Ice in = CT / Ice out = Winnipesaukee
Posts: 34
Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Default Seriously?

I've got three bright kayaks that we've been using on the lake for five years with no issues. As for taxing yakkers for using ramps, parks, rescue and patrol services, seriously, what percentage of those costs could possibly be attributable to kayaks? Mind you, I have no problems with my motorboaters registration.

Yet, there are irresponsible kayakers out there just as there are irresponsible motorboaters. And in both cases they are the primary drivers of a need to enforce. Because enforcing requires resources, if anything, increase fines for irresponsible behavior to cover any funding needs. Don't tax folks that are using the lake in a low impact, environmentally sensitive manner and in my experience are nearly always respectful to their surroundings.

By the way, I can't say I know the stats so maybe I'm missing something here. But I would wager that there are a lot more bike (the peddle version) related accidents than there are with kayaks. Are they going to require annual bike registration now too?

Ridiculous.
Winilyme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 12:51 PM   #12
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 595
Thanks: 348
Thanked 180 Times in 111 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winilyme View Post
I've got three bright kayaks that we've been using on the lake for five years with no issues. As for taxing yakkers for using ramps, parks, rescue and patrol services, seriously, what percentage of those costs could possibly be attributable to kayaks? Mind you, I have no problems with my motorboaters registration.

Yet, there are irresponsible kayakers out there just as there are irresponsible motorboaters. And in both cases they are the primary drivers of a need to enforce. Because enforcing requires resources, if anything, increase fines for irresponsible behavior to cover any funding needs. Don't tax folks that are using the lake in a low impact, environmentally sensitive manner and in my experience are nearly always respectful to their surroundings.

By the way, I can't say I know the stats so maybe I'm missing something here. But I would wager that there are a lot more bike (the peddle version) related accidents than there are with kayaks. Are they going to require annual bike registration now too?

Ridiculous.
Agreed. If they're short on cash, I'd have no problem with an increased registration on my sailboat. But a kayak fee of $10 is just ridiculous--they have virtually zero environmental or enforcement expenses
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 01:00 PM   #13
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

I was just reminded that people whose boats are not registered in NH don't contribute to the costs of using the lake. Excellent point don't you think?
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 01:44 PM   #14
upthesaukee
Senior Member
 
upthesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Alton Bay
Posts: 4,840
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 1,540
Thanked 1,511 Times in 828 Posts
Default Reciprocity

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
I was just reminded that people whose boats are not registered in NH don't contribute to the costs of using the lake. Excellent point don't you think?
Don't forget NH boats don't pay a fee in other states, except most notably Lake George NY.

Dave
__________________
I Live Here... I am always UPTHESAUKEE !!!!
upthesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to upthesaukee For This Useful Post:
Top-Water (12-29-2019)
Old 12-29-2019, 02:44 PM   #15
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by upthesaukee View Post
Don't forget NH boats don't pay a fee in other states, except most notably Lake George NY.

Dave
But if we are going to argue that kayaks need to pay a fee to contribute to the services their owners use, then we must argue that boats the come in from another state should contribute, don't you agree?
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 02:52 PM   #16
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Reciprocity

Not arguing with you ......... but what if everyone who works in Massachusetts who lives up here had to purchase a car registration for down there.

Some things in life just don't seem to be fair. But they kinda are. There are a lot more cars crossing the border towards mass 5 days a week than there are boats
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 03:24 PM   #17
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default Going nowhere

This bill has been brought up in the past, or something similar, and has always died. However, there is some validity to the issues brought up by more and more kayaks. Not on the lakes so much, but the ones who test themselves on spring river rapids and don't pass the test. Fish and Game and MP still have to do search and rescue or recovery.
As someone who pays power boat registration fees that benefit ramps and access that I don't use, I'm happy to have yakkers contribute to these facilities. However, it looks like, after $3 overhead, the money goes 50% to Navigation safety fund (MP) and the other 50% of this fee goes to lake restoration and preservation (e.g. milfoil control). Nothing for ramps?

The big hangup is, nobody has any idea how many kayaks are out there. It's hard to justify a new fee when you don't have any idea how much money it will generate, unless you just like new fees. If it doesn't bring in enough, just raise it next year.
Here's the bill: http://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_sta...txtFormat=html
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 03:53 PM   #18
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top-Water View Post
Reciprocity

Not arguing with you ......... but what if everyone who works in Massachusetts who lives up here had to purchase a car registration for down there.

Some things in life just don't seem to be fair. But they kinda are. There are a lot more cars crossing the border towards mass 5 days a week than there are boats
Don't forget...for those of us that have the pleasure of working in MA and living in NH we still pay MA state income tax. That's not nothing!
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 03:59 PM   #19
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
Don't forget...for those of us that have the pleasure of working in MA and living in NH we still pay MA state income tax. That's not nothing!
I was hoping to avoid that can of worms. But I completely agree with you.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 04:10 PM   #20
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
This bill has been brought up in the past, or something similar, and has always died. However, there is some validity to the issues brought up by more and more kayaks. Not on the lakes so much, but the ones who test themselves on spring river rapids and don't pass the test. Fish and Game and MP still have to do search and rescue or recovery.
As someone who pays power boat registration fees that benefit ramps and access that I don't use, I'm happy to have yakkers contribute to these facilities. However, it looks like, after $3 overhead, the money goes 50% to Navigation safety fund (MP) and the other 50% of this fee goes to lake restoration and preservation (e.g. milfoil control). Nothing for ramps?

The big hangup is, nobody has any idea how many kayaks are out there. It's hard to justify a new fee when you don't have any idea how much money it will generate, unless you just like new fees. If it doesn't bring in enough, just raise it next year.
Here's the bill: http://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_sta...txtFormat=html

I'm being facetious now: but you have to start collecting a few dollars for sticker fess. Even if it loses a few dollars the first few years in service. (were not going to do anything for the money any way) Once they start getting some real numbers and they figure out that they wont be screwing residents everybody will jump on board. That's how this state works , make it cheaper than your home state and no one cares. In fact at first give them the (outer stater's) a discount.

After all it's how we sell our cigarettes and beer. Create the illusion that some one else is paying for it and you pass all the user fees and taxes you want.

Last edited by Top-Water; 12-29-2019 at 04:49 PM. Reason: fix missing (R)
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 04:42 PM   #21
Barney Bear
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 761
Thanks: 368
Thanked 209 Times in 131 Posts
Default Paddleboards Next?

Perhaps the next watercraft to require registration will be paddleboards. OUCH!
Barney Bear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 05:08 PM   #22
barefootbay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 269
Thanks: 21
Thanked 49 Times in 42 Posts
Default

How about canoes and row boats ?
barefootbay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 05:46 PM   #23
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,682
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 200
Thanked 554 Times in 414 Posts
Default

By paddling, rowing or sailing (a sailboat under 12') you really save a lot on the annual registration, motor, gasoline, and insurance by not having any annual registration, motor, gasoline, or insurance. The cost for annual NH motorboat registration starts at about $50/year.

So, paying $10/year is very small potatoes compared to what you save by going "human power."

In addition, the law says it applies to paddle/row vessels launched from a public launch ramp, and does not apply to paddle/row vessels launched from private property.

.... NH needs to keep on paddling!
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 06:26 PM   #24
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

At one time out of state registered boats could not operate on the lake.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 06:33 PM   #25
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

So this is interesting.... if you read the bill being proposed. This does not appear to be a mandatory "fee". Instead it establishes a "donation" program for operators of non motorized boats. The F&G shall administer it.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill...xtFormat=amend

Not sure where the author of the Union Leader article got his information, clearly didn't he actually read the bill.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 06:38 PM   #26
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
At one time out of state registered boats could not operate on the lake.
Correct, but not any more. Be very careful what you ask for.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 06:42 PM   #27
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
This does not appear to be a mandatory "fee". Instead it establishes a "donation" program
It seems like this is a little like the voluntary (hike safe card).
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 07:32 PM   #28
8gv
Senior Member
 
8gv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,196
Thanks: 27
Thanked 361 Times in 225 Posts
Default

Last month I noticed several leaves floating in the lake.

They had fallen from one of my trees.

This week I got a notice in the mail telling me to register them!

8gv is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 8gv For This Useful Post:
ApS (12-30-2019), Lin (01-01-2020)
Old 12-29-2019, 07:54 PM   #29
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8gv View Post
Last month I noticed several leaves floating in the lake.

They had fallen from one of my trees.

This week I got a notice in the mail telling me to register them!

Was that before or after you got the note from DES telling you that tree cannot be cut down or trimmed?
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2019, 08:50 PM   #30
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default Hope it works

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
So this is interesting.... if you read the bill being proposed. This does not appear to be a mandatory "fee". Instead it establishes a "donation" program for operators of non motorized boats. The F&G shall administer it.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill...xtFormat=amend

Not sure where the author of the Union Leader article got his information, clearly didn't he actually read the bill.
Some years ago the gas tax refund form was changed to allow donations to these same two funds (Navigation safety and Lake preservation). As much as people whined then that these functions (Milfoil and MP) were underfunded, not many people stepped up with a (tax deductible) donation to support these issues. We could still use more MP and less milfoil, right?
As long as these two issues continue to be problematic, there will be attempts to find better funding, mostly from those who benefit, rather than the general taxpayer, which is mostly business taxes since individuals pay little or no state taxes as such (Yeah, Yeah. I know. Interest and dividends. And this year, they tried to add capital gains).
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2019, 06:01 AM   #31
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
Some years ago the gas tax refund form was changed to allow donations to these same two funds (Navigation safety and Lake preservation). As much as people whined then that these functions (Milfoil and MP) were underfunded, not many people stepped up with a (tax deductible) donation to support these issues. We could still use more MP and less milfoil, right?
As long as these two issues continue to be problematic, there will be attempts to find better funding, mostly from those who benefit, rather than the general taxpayer, which is mostly business taxes since individuals pay little or no state taxes as such (Yeah, Yeah. I know. Interest and dividends. And this year, they tried to add capital gains).
I agree, and I don't think any lake related taxes have decrease yet we seem to have less MP coverage on the lake. Money doesn't always get used for what is intended.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2019, 07:34 AM   #32
chaseisland
Senior Member
 
chaseisland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 105
Thanks: 7
Thanked 47 Times in 30 Posts
Default fees

As I've said before, live fee or die.
chaseisland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2019, 08:09 AM   #33
The Real BigGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 610
Thanks: 20
Thanked 175 Times in 114 Posts
Default

I always chuckle when I hear people complaining about new fees, taxes, and tax increases but at the same time want annual pay raises for themselves (but fight over raises for state employees) want more or better recreational services, want better roads, when they complain about RE tax increases but not about the increased market value of their homes, and generally when THEY want but don’t want to pay. Where do they think the $$$ are going to come from? Oh, right, this is NH - it’s THE OTHER GUY’s responsibility to pay.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
The Real BigGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to The Real BigGuy For This Useful Post:
TheRoBoat (12-30-2019)
Old 12-30-2019, 08:16 AM   #34
Merrymeeting
Senior Member
 
Merrymeeting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Merrymeeting Lake, New Durham
Posts: 2,017
Thanks: 255
Thanked 695 Times in 304 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
It makes you wonder if they don't have something better to do than sit and think up more laws, rules and regulations.
That's exactly the problem. Most legislators measure themselves on how much new legislation they introduce, and they promote the bills/laws they created when they run for re-election.

Wouldn't it be great if we started voting for the ones who DON'T create new laws/rules, and even better, repeal many of the useless ones already there.
Merrymeeting is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Merrymeeting For This Useful Post:
ishoot308 (12-30-2019), tis (12-30-2019)
Old 12-30-2019, 08:32 AM   #35
Winnisquamer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Winnisquam
Posts: 386
Thanks: 72
Thanked 104 Times in 68 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseisland View Post
As I've said before, live fee or die.

That ship sailed into the abyss about a decade and a half ago.
Winnisquamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2019, 09:09 AM   #36
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merrymeeting View Post
That's exactly the problem. Most legislators measure themselves on how much new legislation they introduce, and they promote the bills/laws they created when they run for re-election.

Wouldn't it be great if we started voting for the ones who DON'T create new laws/rules, and even better, repeal many of the useless ones already there.
Absolutely. And if they get in and create more laws/rules/taxes, then we vote them out next time. Incumbents seem to keep getting voted back in. Most don't have any idea what they have done. It's all about name recognition I think.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2019, 09:12 AM   #37
chaseisland
Senior Member
 
chaseisland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 105
Thanks: 7
Thanked 47 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Was a state employee for 46 years. Thus I'll claim my right to complain about fees.
chaseisland is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to chaseisland For This Useful Post:
CTYankee (12-30-2019), Lin (12-30-2019), MAXUM (12-30-2019)
Old 12-30-2019, 10:10 PM   #38
Lin
Senior Member
 
Lin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Massachusetts & Moultonborough
Posts: 673
Thanks: 41
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Default If mandatory it would be hard to apply

First off our family owns 7 kayaks and 2 canoes. 7 out of 9 are brightly colored. And all of our life jackets are bright red or yellow. I would not be for a mandatory fee but as the real bill to be introduced offers, I could picture donating a fee but don’t feel it should be required because this bill is not specific to lake Winni but it would be all lakes; rivers and ponds regardless of size across the entire state. That would make enforcement ridiculous. Also that is not a small flag the other bill wants, it is 4’ We don’t have motors (elect/gas) on any of ours but I know in MA you have to have a canoe registered to use an engine and I can see that.

I also think that a lot of people that kayak and canoe give to various non-profit groups like loon preservation; lakes region conservation trust, New Hampshire Lakes Association, lake Winnipesaukee association and similar across the state, I do.

Crazy bill cause I could see bikes next like someone else said. Besides New Hampshire is the live free or die state.
__________________
Lin
Lin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lin For This Useful Post:
Mooseyme (12-30-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 10:02 AM   #39
bigdog
Senior Member
 
bigdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central MA-Gilford
Posts: 1,003
Thanks: 130
Thanked 65 Times in 54 Posts
Default

This Bill and potential law is a total outrage, ridiculous, and just another tax generating fee by the folks in Concord who represent us. I've never heard of a such law in another State ?

Only way to prevent this bill from passing is for everyone to contact their State Representatives in both the House and Senate to voice their objection.
They'll be a LOT of State offices up for re-election in the next election, and they seem to only listen to the voters during this time.

This Bill must be stopped dead in it's tracks, as it's not only bad for NH taxpayers who own and use kayaks/canoes on our lakes, ponds, and rivers, but for all the tourists who use their kayaks on NH waterways.
bigdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 10:14 AM   #40
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,777
Thanks: 737
Thanked 780 Times in 466 Posts
Default

According to one of the links above, the bill is sponsored by Jeff Goley from Manchester. I have emailed him for clarification (voluntary vs. mandatory) and rationale. I will report whatever I hear (or not).

Happy New Year!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to thinkxingu For This Useful Post:
Descant (12-31-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 10:44 AM   #41
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog View Post
This Bill and potential law is a total outrage, ridiculous, and just another tax generating fee by the folks in Concord who represent us. I've never heard of a such law in another State ?

Only way to prevent this bill from passing is for everyone to contact their State Representatives in both the House and Senate to voice their objection.
They'll be a LOT of State offices up for re-election in the next election, and they seem to only listen to the voters during this time.

This Bill must be stopped dead in it's tracks, as it's not only bad for NH taxpayers who own and use kayaks/canoes on our lakes, ponds, and rivers, but for all the tourists who use their kayaks on NH waterways.
agreed

here is an idea, enforce existing safe boater laws that are already in place. They apply to any and all water craft.

our legislators like to law us to death and ignore existing laws. I think they think that if the put a law out there for every possible situation it will work and that just telling people what the law is will stop them from doing something. When the simplest enforcement of existing laws will work and has been proven.

hey you, with the kayak kayaking across boats in the channel, here is a warning and then a ticket, knock it off,
hey you with the motorboat going way to close to swimmers or another watercraft, knock it off or here's a ticket.

does all drunk driving laws prevent drunk driving? No
but enforcement of the law with check points and harsh fines certainly put a dent in it along with creating awareness of not that just drunk driving is bad, but oh crap i better not get caught cause I need my license so I will just not try it.

Repeat offenders are repeat offenders because they do not learn their lesson either from their own choosing or the courts not making them learn their lesson
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 10:47 AM   #42
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,777
Thanks: 737
Thanked 780 Times in 466 Posts
Default

Here is the response I received. The details make the bill make much more sense.

"The original bill was for a $10 registration fee on canoes and kayaks that used state public launches. Currently these access sites are funded through motor boat registration fees. Approximately 43 percent of launches are only accessible to canoes and kayaks while the maintenance for these sites are paid through registration of motor boats. I am not sure why canoe and kayak owners feel they should not have to pay a small fee to maintain and increase access to NH waters. I see it as a matter of fairness to all who enjoy the use of these launch sites.

The bill has been amended to make it a voluntary program similar to the hike safe card. The funds generated will go to the state boat access fund.

I have attached a link to a Union Leader editorial from a few years back regarding this issue.

https://www.unionleader.com/opinion/...d65c3c4e1.html


Rep. Jeff Goley"

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 10:53 AM   #43
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

how will they know when I come off my private land with my kayak that I did not come off of a launch? or a friend was visiting with their kayak and came off private land

that to me is a major flaw here
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to AC2717 For This Useful Post:
Lin (12-31-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 11:20 AM   #44
Lin
Senior Member
 
Lin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Massachusetts & Moultonborough
Posts: 673
Thanks: 41
Thanked 15 Times in 11 Posts
Default How would they know

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
how will they know when I come off my private land with my kayak that I did not come off of a launch? or a friend was visiting with their kayak and came off private land

that to me is a major flaw here
I was going to say the same thing. Not everyone uses a launch. We don’t we use our association beach to launch. There are thousands of private homes and associations and non launch carry ins throughout the state.

Another thought I had after I posted last night was instead of a registration (although now voluntary) would be a say a $5.00 mandatory “tax” placed on the end sale of new canoes and kayaks that would go into maintaining ramps and for services rendered. There are definitely pros and cons to the idea though. but would be the easiest and most consistent program vs a registration. The cons are we already have our kayaks canoes and burden would be placed on new owners and repeat buyers. Also it is another tax but if the state wants fiscal responsibility of canoes and kayaks it is a fairer option vs catching up with all the older ones already on the lakes ponds and rivers statewide.
__________________
Lin
Lin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lin For This Useful Post:
AC2717 (12-31-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 11:59 AM   #45
TiltonBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 1,623
Thanks: 247
Thanked 975 Times in 397 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
how will they know when I come off my private land with my kayak that I did not come off of a launch? or a friend was visiting with their kayak and came off private land

that to me is a major flaw here
Since you are not using the launch ramp you are not affected. Since it is voluntary you can choose whether to participate, or not.

The explanation by the State Representative said the intent was to have users of the ramps pay something towards maintenance. It was felt that the ramps are currently maintained using motorboat registration fees and that was unfair since there are other users of the ramps that do not contribute towards their upkeep.

Although I am not in favor of more government regulations and fees, with the explanation the intent of the legislation makes sense to me.
TiltonBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 12:08 PM   #46
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,777
Thanks: 737
Thanked 780 Times in 466 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltonBB View Post
Since you are not using the launch ramp you are not affected. Since it is voluntary you can choose whether to participate, or not.

The explanation by the State Representative said the intent was to have users of the ramps pay something towards maintenance. It was felt that the ramps are currently maintained using motorboat registration fees and that was unfair since there are other users of the ramps that do not contribute towards their upkeep.

Although I am not in favor of more government regulations and fees, with the explanation the intent of the legislation makes sense to me.
Agreed on all points.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 12:27 PM   #47
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default Cover charge

Looks like: When you go into a club or theater, you buy a ticket or pay a cover charge. When you enter some, not all, state parks, you pay an entrance fee. Sounds like this is similar. You buy a sticker (season pass) to use a ramp provided and maintained by Fish and Game. If you're using a ramp owned by your association, you're paying through HOA fees. No sticker needed. Similar, right?
If Thinkxingu (sp?) has a copy of Rep. Goley's amendment, it would be great to publish it here. One of the quirks of the legislature is that they publish bills on line that have not been passed, but they don't put amendments on line until they pass. As we see in this thread, an amendment can make significant changes even before there is a public hearing.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 12:31 PM   #48
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 955
Thanked 455 Times in 292 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
Looks like: When you go into a club or theater, you buy a ticket or pay a cover charge. When you enter some, not all, state parks, you pay an entrance fee. Sounds like this is similar. You buy a sticker (season pass) to use a ramp provided and maintained by Fish and Game. If you're using a ramp owned by your association, you're paying through HOA fees. No sticker needed. Similar, right?
If Thinkxingu (sp?) has a copy of Rep. Goley's amendment, it would be great to publish it here. One of the quirks of the legislature is that they publish bills on line that have not been passed, but they don't put amendments on line until they pass. As we see in this thread, an amendment can make significant changes even before there is a public hearing.
Fish and game ramps are free to boaters...example, the Wellington state park ramp is a fish and game ramp and in summer when you trailer a boat in to launch there is no “park” fee. Beach users pay a fee. All fish and game ramps are free to boaters/fishermen.
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 01:04 PM   #49
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default broaden the base

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hillcountry View Post
Fish and game ramps are free to boaters...example, the Wellington state park ramp is a fish and game ramp and in summer when you trailer a boat in to launch there is no “park” fee. Beach users pay a fee. All fish and game ramps are free to boaters/fishermen.
I haven't read the amendment, but it sounds like "free, but if you want to help keep it up, buy a sticker": Power boats pay through their registration for as variety of state funds. As noted above, some launches cater only to carry in craft. I believe Rep. Goley is a member of the House F & G Committee and is offering this as a contribution to F & G finances without raising hunting and fishing license fees.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 03:51 PM   #50
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 955
Thanked 455 Times in 292 Posts
Default

If kayaks and other paddle craft use public/state facilities they should pay as they may be taking up precious parking spaces for those that do pay (power boats and fishermen)
I have a tracked UTV vehicle that is not allowed on snowmobile trails (too wide) but I must register it as “other” with a full snowmobile/ATV registration even though all I do is drive into the ice for ice fishing. I maintain that there should be an “ice fishing only” sticker at a reduced rate. Everyone that uses the state’s resources should pay for their privilege.
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 03:55 PM   #51
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default another amendment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hillcountry View Post
If kayaks and other paddle craft use public/state facilities they should pay as they may be taking up precious parking spaces for those that do pay (power boats and fishermen)
I have a tracked UTV vehicle that is not allowed on snowmobile trails (too wide) but I must register it as “other” with a full snowmobile/ATV registration even though all I do is drive into the ice for ice fishing. I maintain that there should be an “ice fishing only” sticker at a reduced rate. Everyone that uses the state’s resources should pay for their privilege.
Interresting idea. Write to Rep. Goley, or others on the F & G Committee. Maybe they'll do more amending?
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post:
Hillcountry (12-31-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 05:10 PM   #52
bigdog
Senior Member
 
bigdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central MA-Gilford
Posts: 1,003
Thanks: 130
Thanked 65 Times in 54 Posts
Default

I'm not a pessimist or being negative here, but if anyone thinks or believes this Kayak/Canoe registration fee will actually be used for F & G budget, I think you're dreaming...

This registration may be initially earmarked for F & G purpose, but when the State needs additional funding for a new project, or to offset another State fund bucket, they move the money around at their will, that's just a fact.
If there was a guaranty that the registration money would stay in F&G budget
that would be great, they need the money and that Dept. is always way under-funded.

The new registration may be optional at first, but that's just to allow legislators to get their footing established, to make it permanent ! Tell me that doesn't happen ?

Not to digress here, but I remember the story about funding the Mass. Turnpike. The Mass Legislature sold the taxpayers the story that the loan to fund the project would be a 30 yr Bond loan, after that there would be no more tolls.The turnpike opened in 1957, and you know the rest of the story....

Apologies for going off-topic, and sorry to open any wounds, but this is just an example when State govt. goes off the rails !
bigdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2019, 05:28 PM   #53
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default agree and disagree

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdog View Post
I'm not a pessimist or being negative here, but if anyone thinks or believes this Kayak/Canoe registration fee will actually be used for F & G budget, I think you're dreaming...

This registration may be initially earmarked for F & G purpose, but when the State needs additional funding for a new project, or to offset another State fund bucket, they move the money around at their will, that's just a fact.
If there was a guaranty that the registration money would stay in F&G budget
that would be great, they need the money and that Dept. is always way under-funded.

The new registration may be optional at first, but that's just to allow legislators to get their footing established, to make it permanent ! Tell me that doesn't happen ?...
There may be a little truth in your thoughts, but it does take a new law passed and signed by the governor to move money out of dedicated funds. Different from a departments operating budget where things can be moved around. In order to raid a dedicated fund you have to go through the whole legislative process. So, most dedicated funds get spent down so there won't be enough to raid.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post:
bigdog (12-31-2019)
Old 12-31-2019, 05:55 PM   #54
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
Looks like: When you go into a club or theater, you buy a ticket or pay a cover charge. When you enter some, not all, state parks, you pay an entrance fee. Sounds like this is similar. You buy a sticker (season pass) to use a ramp provided and maintained by Fish and Game. If you're using a ramp owned by your association, you're paying through HOA fees. No sticker needed. Similar, right?
If Thinkxingu (sp?) has a copy of Rep. Goley's amendment, it would be great to publish it here. One of the quirks of the legislature is that they publish bills on line that have not been passed, but they don't put amendments on line until they pass. As we see in this thread, an amendment can make significant changes even before there is a public hearing.

See my posting #25 which includes a link to the current amendment.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
Descant (01-01-2020)
Old 12-31-2019, 08:35 PM   #55
kawishiwi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 496
Thanks: 204
Thanked 143 Times in 93 Posts
Default Easy...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
how will they know when I come off my private land with my kayak that I did not come off of a launch? or a friend was visiting with their kayak and came off private land

that to me is a major flaw here
Not so hard, just enforce the law at the access.
__________________
...in my great and unmatched wisdom...
kawishiwi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2020, 11:01 AM   #56
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 595
Thanks: 348
Thanked 180 Times in 111 Posts
Default

I posted against this before Think's excellent detective work. But I am in favor of those using public launches chipping in 10 or 20 bucks per year to help the lake.

Actually, at the risk of incurring widespread wrath, I would support $10-20 per public ramp use of every boat, registered or not, money to be earmarked for lake ecology programs. It's similar to the fees for state parks, about the same price as a ticket to the movies, and just a bit extra on the day's gas bill.
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2020, 12:36 PM   #57
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingScot View Post
I posted against this before Think's excellent detective work. But I am in favor of those using public launches chipping in 10 or 20 bucks per year to help the lake.

Actually, at the risk of incurring widespread wrath, I would support $10-20 per public ramp use of every boat, registered or not, money to be earmarked for lake ecology programs. It's similar to the fees for state parks, about the same price as a ticket to the movies, and just a bit extra on the day's gas bill.
I agree, if kayaks have to pay a fee at the ramps all boats should.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2020, 01:43 PM   #58
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Just cut the crap and make every boat have a state registration sticker that is traceable to the owner of any water craft that is under the jurisdiction of the marine patrol.

No more mickey mouse rules that favors one activity over another. I personally could care less ............. if you have two boats get two registrations. If you have ten boats get ten registrations.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Top-Water For This Useful Post:
DEJ (01-01-2020)
Old 01-01-2020, 02:37 PM   #59
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
I agree, if kayaks have to pay a fee at the ramps all boats should.
Registered boats already pay, through their registration, for lake protection (milfoil) MP, Search and Rescue (Fish & Game), etc. A portion of un-refunded gas tax also goes to F&G each year.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post:
Top-Water (01-01-2020)
Old 01-01-2020, 04:01 PM   #60
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
Registered boats already pay, through their registration, for lake protection (milfoil) MP, Search and Rescue (Fish & Game), etc. A portion of un-refunded gas tax also goes to F&G each year.
It does if it's registered in NH.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2020, 05:39 PM   #61
TiltonBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 1,623
Thanks: 247
Thanked 975 Times in 397 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
It does if it's registered in NH.
That is true. However there are also boats that register in New Hampshire that may never be used in New Hampshire waters so they are contributing to the state without using any of the resources.

(I heard this from a friend)
TiltonBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2020, 06:18 PM   #62
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,793
Thanks: 479
Thanked 849 Times in 596 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltonBB View Post
That is true. However there are also boats that register in New Hampshire that may never be used in New Hampshire waters so they are contributing to the state without using any of the resources.

(I heard this from a friend)
Or you might have three or four boats that you pay for but wouldn't use any more than if you just had one so you would be paying more. There are all kind of ifs.
tis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 08:49 AM   #63
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltonBB View Post
Since you are not using the launch ramp you are not affected. Since it is voluntary you can choose whether to participate, or not.

The explanation by the State Representative said the intent was to have users of the ramps pay something towards maintenance. It was felt that the ramps are currently maintained using motorboat registration fees and that was unfair since there are other users of the ramps that do not contribute towards their upkeep.

Although I am not in favor of more government regulations and fees, with the explanation the intent of the legislation makes sense to me.
fully understand that, but how to the "enforcers" of the law know that
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 09:36 AM   #64
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
fully understand that, but how to the "enforcers" of the law know that
If the amendment passes, it is voluntary. Nothing to enforce. I expect to see more amendments since the amendment to give funds to public water access is different from the original bill which gave money to MP and lake protection (milfoil control).
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 09:39 AM   #65
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
If the amendment passes, it is voluntary. Nothing to enforce. I expect to see more amendments since the amendment to give funds to public water access is different from the original bill which gave money to MP and lake protection (milfoil control).
even more foolish, yes let's waste time on voluntary fees but pay someone real tax dollars to process it
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 11:19 AM   #66
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default not tax dollars

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
even more foolish, yes let's waste time on voluntary fees but pay someone real tax dollars to process it
The overhead is covered from the fee, not tax dollars. Fish and Game, like the parks division at DNCR, is essentially self-supporting and does not rely on tax dollars.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 01:20 PM   #67
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
The overhead is covered from the fee, not tax dollars. Fish and Game, like the parks division at DNCR, is essentially self-supporting and does not rely on tax dollars.
all realized, but in reality is there enough "voluntary fee payments" going to cover the costs associated

never understood the purpose of "voluntary" when it comes to fees. Either it is a required fee or not? otherwise its a donation, and its something that can be done on end user level and not at the state level where as previously posted by others, won't amount to much more than an toe in the door for more to come.

C'mon people it is a kayak
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 02:40 PM   #68
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default fee vs voluntary

AC2717: The original bill charged a fee. The amendment changed that to voluntary. Don't cross the two.
The example they're following is other voluntary plans in the parks division such as a "Parks" license plate and a "Hike safe" card. The "Moose" plate has raised substantial funds for conservation. The parks also use "Iron Rangers" to collect parking fees at trail heads. It's mostly an honor system. Seems to work. Carry in Carry out, mostly works, although I guess there will always be some people who leave trash and litter. I giggle at the (local) park that has a Carry in Carry out sign next to a trash barrel. I guess for people who can't read.
The reason for such a ramp fund bill is that it enables Fish and Game to print and sell the stickers and it mandates where the funds will be allocated. I'd say they don't have that specific authority now. So, it's as much to direct F & G as it is to encourage sticker purchase.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 03:17 PM   #69
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

Just remember that this is as previously pointed out the important part for now is putting a framework into place. At some later time with another amendment "voluntary" becomes "mandatory".

I see this as a multi year and slow walked effort but let's not be naïve here, the end game is clear and not voluntary. I'm sure some would love to charge you a fee just because you exist and other to what extent you exist.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 03:45 PM   #70
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default Invasive species example

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
Just remember that this is as previously pointed out the important part for now is putting a framework into place. At some later time with another amendment "voluntary" becomes "mandatory".

I see this as a multi year and slow walked effort but let's not be naïve here, the end game is clear and not voluntary. I'm sure some would love to charge you a fee just because you exist and other to what extent you exist. :rolleye2
You may be right in the long run. I recall around 2001 when $3 was added to the boat registration fee to help control Milfoil and other invasive species. I think it is up to $9.50 now. However as lake association members know, the public has been asking for more help with milfoil control. Those who use F & G ramps are asking for more improvements, better parking, etc. There is some sentiment that yakkers should participate in managing our waters instead of just saying they cause no harm (except the cost of SAR as discussed above.) I'd rather pay a directed fee where I see direct benefit, than a general tax where we trust the legislature to pick and choose my priorities.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 03:49 PM   #71
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default Didja notice?

We're up to post #70+ on this thread and have stayed pretty much on topic. Thank you all. It's been a good conversation.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 05:22 PM   #72
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,577
Thanks: 1,009
Thanked 447 Times in 328 Posts
Red face Some Don't Understand the Concept...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
AC2717: The original bill charged a fee. The amendment changed that to voluntary. Don't cross the two.
The example they're following is other voluntary plans in the parks division such as a "Parks" license plate and a "Hike safe" card. The "Moose" plate has raised substantial funds for conservation. The parks also use "Iron Rangers" to collect parking fees at trail heads. It's mostly an honor system. Seems to work. Carry in Carry out, mostly works, although I guess there will always be some people who leave trash and litter. I giggle at the (local) park that has a Carry in Carry out sign next to a trash barrel. I guess for people who can't read.
The reason for such a ramp fund bill is that it enables Fish and Game to print and sell the stickers and it mandates where the funds will be allocated. I'd say they don't have that specific authority now. So, it's as much to direct F & G as it is to encourage sticker purchase.
Was it FLL who was seen reaching into that barrel and carrying some items out?
ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2020, 05:28 PM   #73
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,262
Thanks: 204
Thanked 1,470 Times in 605 Posts
Default

The state could always consider adding a option on every boat registration renewal to donate $$

There is no option to donate to this when purchasing a fishing license, there are other options but not this specifically.

The state could also consider using the lottery to raise money where certain special games could be introduced specifically benefitting the F&G.
MAXUM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2020, 09:27 AM   #74
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

if we are really looking at accepting a charge or voluntary fee then
instead of a kayak fee, charge a parking fee for the vehicle in the parking areas for ramp access
now it becomes - not a on water enforcement or a ramp enforcement. and you do not need people to run it, just a pay station in the parking lot, and when they don't pay the police can ticket and generate revenue that way for the town as well.
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2020, 10:16 AM   #75
TiltonBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 1,623
Thanks: 247
Thanked 975 Times in 397 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
if we are really looking at accepting a charge or voluntary fee then
instead of a kayak fee, charge a parking fee for the vehicle in the parking areas for ramp access
now it becomes - not a on water enforcement or a ramp enforcement. and you do not need people to run it, just a pay station in the parking lot, and when they don't pay the police can ticket and generate revenue that way for the town as well.
Difficult to enforce.

How would you know if they had launched a kayak and owed the fee?

What if the vehicle owner is just there to jump on a friends powerboat for the day? That friend would have already paid his "fee" through registration.

Would you exclude vehicles with trailers that might have hauled a boat, but could have brought in a kayak?
TiltonBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2020, 12:49 PM   #76
AC2717
Senior Member
 
AC2717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maynard, MA & Paugus Bay
Posts: 2,173
Thanks: 594
Thanked 263 Times in 192 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltonBB View Post
Difficult to enforce.

How would you know if they had launched a kayak and owed the fee?

What if the vehicle owner is just there to jump on a friends powerboat for the day? That friend would have already paid his "fee" through registration.

Would you exclude vehicles with trailers that might have hauled a boat, but could have brought in a kayak?
simple, just like a regular parking lot, doesn't mater if boat or kayak, your car is in the lot you pay to use it. I'm not deciphering between boat or kayak
__________________
Capt. of the "No Worries"
AC2717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2020, 10:09 PM   #77
rick35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bear Island/Merrimack
Posts: 582
Thanks: 31
Thanked 128 Times in 78 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AC2717 View Post
simple, just like a regular parking lot, doesn't mater if boat or kayak, your car is in the lot you pay to use it. I'm not deciphering between boat or kayak
What lots would I need to pay to use? I already pay taxes to Meredith for poor parking at Shep Browns. Would you have me pay again? This is a very complicated topic. Every idea that has been discussed has flaws. If you can’t do it equitably the best solution is to not do it at all.
rick35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 05:47 AM   #78
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,682
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 200
Thanked 554 Times in 414 Posts
Default ...... like, why not!

Down at the parking lot at the Weirs Beach sandy beach area, the City of Laconia has a $2.00/hour pay-to-park parking lot system in place that uses a single pay station, takes quarters or credit cards, and has numbered all the different parking spaces with space numbers.

It seems to work very good, especially with using 2-quarters for 15-minutes, or 8-quarters for one hour.

A pay-to-park system seems like a doable situation for getting users to pay, at your local boat launch ramp ......... like, why not!
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 06:39 AM   #79
thinkxingu
Senior Member
 
thinkxingu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,777
Thanks: 737
Thanked 780 Times in 466 Posts
Default

It sounds like most people realize and understand the need for financial support for lake access in NH. Whether that is a result of revenue vs. needs or proper diversion of funds and how to fix the problem or raise the needed funds seems to be the sticking points.

I have no answers for those, but can we just take a moment to celebrate this joyful moment of positive discussion? GOOOO TEAMMMM!!!

Seriously, though, the Hike Safe card has really earned a following--each year, I see reminders posted on hiking forums I belong to and the overwhelming response is that it's worth supporting.

Is maybe a "Boat Safe" card an option, where a portion of the money goes to marine safety organizations and the rest into making sure water access facilities are safe? Maybe the state could work out a deal with restaurants, businesses, tow companies, etc. for discounts to those who purchase one?

I'd gladly hand over $20 for a Boat Safe card if I could save even 5% on a trip to ParaFUNalia or $5 off a fill-up at Ambrose Cove or...ooh! ooh! a free topping on my Candy Bar Explosion sundae at the new 19-Mile Bay store!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
thinkxingu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 09:11 AM   #80
rick35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bear Island/Merrimack
Posts: 582
Thanks: 31
Thanked 128 Times in 78 Posts
Default

I think the moose plates idea might be a way to get donations. I see a lot of them on the road so it looks like it is a success. Maybe a plate with a nautical flag sticker to show your support? Sign me up!
rick35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 09:21 AM   #81
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 955
Thanked 455 Times in 292 Posts
Default

Simple. Just make kayakers buy a $5 sticker to use the vessel on any state waters...same with canoes, paddle boats etc...$5 doesn’t break anyone’s bank roll and it pays their way to support the resource.
Marine patrol/F&G can enforce as a regular duty on their lakes. Make the sticker large enough to see at a distance. Solved.
These vessels have had a free ride for long enough.
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hillcountry For This Useful Post:
Descant (01-04-2020), Top-Water (01-04-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 11:34 AM   #82
TiltonBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 1,623
Thanks: 247
Thanked 975 Times in 397 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkxingu View Post
It sounds like most people realize and understand the need for financial support for lake access in NH. Whether that is a result of revenue vs. needs or proper diversion of funds and how to fix the problem or raise the needed funds seems to be the sticking points.

I have no answers for those, but can we just take a moment to celebrate this joyful moment of positive discussion? GOOOO TEAMMMM!!!

Seriously, though, the Hike Safe card has really earned a following--each year, I see reminders posted on hiking forums I belong to and the overwhelming response is that it's worth supporting.

Is maybe a "Boat Safe" card an option, where a portion of the money goes to marine safety organizations and the rest into making sure water access facilities are safe? Maybe the state could work out a deal with restaurants, businesses, tow companies, etc. for discounts to those who purchase one?

I'd gladly hand over $20 for a Boat Safe card if I could save even 5% on a trip to ParaFUNalia or $5 off a fill-up at Ambrose Cove or...ooh! ooh! a free topping on my Candy Bar Explosion sundae at the new 19-Mile Bay store!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
How much do you think the state would have to increase the business profits tax to offset the reduced revenue from commercial establishments that offer the discount?

Remember, any amount taken off the gross revenue of a business is profit not realized.
TiltonBB is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TiltonBB For This Useful Post:
Top-Water (01-04-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 11:42 AM   #83
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

It's all fluff talk for the sake of talking about nothing. Not to be taken seriously.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 11:51 AM   #84
Winilyme
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Ice in = CT / Ice out = Winnipesaukee
Posts: 34
Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Might as well include bicycles too while we're at it. US News ranks NH 44th worst out of 50 states for transportation infrastructure. CNBC gives NH an 'F'.

If we still don't have enough cash then we can forage for scraps - wagons, rafts, tricycles, drones, SUPs, baby carriages...
Winilyme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Winilyme For This Useful Post:
Diana (01-04-2020), Top-Water (01-04-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 12:13 PM   #85
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 955
Thanked 455 Times in 292 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winilyme View Post
Might as well include bicycles too while we're at it. US News ranks NH 44th worst out of 50 states for transportation infrastructure. CNBC gives NH an 'F'.

If we still don't have enough cash then we can forage for scraps - wagons, rafts, tricycles, drones, SUPs, baby carriages...
You're right! Bicyclists are a PITA and pay nothing! Infrastructure...lol
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 12:21 PM   #86
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hillcountry View Post
You're right! Bicyclists are a PITA and pay nothing! Infrastructure...lol
Your so cruel. What about the children.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Top-Water For This Useful Post:
Hillcountry (01-04-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 12:29 PM   #87
Winilyme
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Ice in = CT / Ice out = Winnipesaukee
Posts: 34
Thanks: 7
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top-Water View Post
Your so cruel. What about the children.
Lemonade stand. Five $1.00 servings sold and they've got their sticker.
Winilyme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Winilyme For This Useful Post:
Hillcountry (01-04-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 12:46 PM   #88
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,682
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 200
Thanked 554 Times in 414 Posts
Default Route 49 has two bike lanes, both sides, north & south

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hillcountry View Post
You're right! Bicyclists are a PITA and pay nothing! Infrastructure...lol
It is somewhat interesting that Rt-49, 12 miles length, running through Campton, Thornton and Waterville Valley from Route 93-Exit 28 to Waterville Valley is maybe the only state road in central NH that has three foot wide, paved shoulders or side lanes suitable for bicycles.

It was totally re-constructed with these new "bicycle" lanes added in about 1982 during the Gov John Sununu administration.

Here's a big thank-you for building Route 49 with these well designed bike lanes going out to Governor John Sununu. Whatever extra it cost, it was money very well spent. It's a beautiful 12-mile bicycle pedal, traveling within the woods of the WMNF, and running along the nearby Mad River.
__________________
Down & out, livn that Walmart side of the lake!
fatlazyless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 02:16 PM   #89
Descant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 1,935
Thanks: 586
Thanked 632 Times in 391 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winilyme View Post
Might as well include bicycles too while we're at it. CNBC gives NH an 'F'.
I'm proud to get an "F" from CNBC.
Descant is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post:
Hillcountry (01-04-2020), MAXUM (01-05-2020)
Old 01-04-2020, 03:03 PM   #90
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 1,770
Thanks: 955
Thanked 455 Times in 292 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top-Water View Post
Your so cruel. What about the children.
“Children” do not belong on our roadways!
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2020, 03:32 PM   #91
Kamper
Senior Member
 
Kamper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Thornton's Ferry
Posts: 1,207
Thanks: 65
Thanked 145 Times in 109 Posts
Default

Bicycles...

I lived in a town that required bikes to be registered, when I was a kid. I never heard of anyone getting a ticket for an unregistered bike and after we had lived there a couple years my folks decided we could take our chances. People with multiple bikes would register them one at a time and swap out the lights and horns/bells.

The jig was up when they ran out of stickers and told everyone not to worry since no more were going to be bought that year.

This will probably happen with canoe/kayak stickers if it is only voluntary.
Kamper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2020, 08:49 AM   #92
The Real BigGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 610
Thanks: 20
Thanked 175 Times in 114 Posts
Default

Kamper, your input jogged my memory. When I was a kid I remember bikes having a maybe 7 inch long vertical license plate coming up from their rear reflector. Don’t know if it was a local or state requirement but they disappeared in the late 50’s early 60’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
The Real BigGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2020, 11:26 AM   #93
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

I can only barley remember these plates and never needed or had to have one. One thing I do remember is they always had the town/city name embossed on them. Although this is a silly topic now. I do think there should be something. Mostly for what happened to me last summer with an empty boat, then an empty life jacket, and no id on the boat, Every boat or water craft should have an current yearly I.D. tag to aide law enforcement or search and recovery if needed. Something simple ..............


Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2020, 11:47 AM   #94
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pondguy View Post
Wow what a blast from the past I remember having one of those plates on my bike as a kid when we lived in Medford. When we moved to Derry I'm not sure if we had to register our bikes there, seems to me we did at Town hall.
I'm reporting you as we speak. for failure to register, I have chief Garone on the phone now.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Top-Water For This Useful Post:
pondguy (01-05-2020)
Old 01-05-2020, 11:59 AM   #95
Top-Water
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Derry-Belmont
Posts: 957
Thanks: 660
Thanked 373 Times in 222 Posts
Default

I think he was the chief then too. He might be still looking for you.
Top-Water is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2020, 12:50 PM   #96
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,658
Thanks: 54
Thanked 739 Times in 308 Posts
Default

I think Kayaks should bear some of the F&G/MP burden.... $5 - $10 fee with a numbered sticker is not a bad idea.

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2020, 01:30 PM   #97
joey2665
Senior Member
 
joey2665's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Meredith Bay & LI, NY
Posts: 2,407
Thanks: 541
Thanked 640 Times in 431 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsy View Post
I think Kayaks should bear some of the F&G/MP burden.... $5 - $10 fee with a numbered sticker is not a bad idea.

Woodsy
Question: Are unpowered sail boats such as Sunfish types required to be registered?

If so then kayaks should be subject to the same rules
joey2665 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2020, 01:46 PM   #98
The Real BigGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 610
Thanks: 20
Thanked 175 Times in 114 Posts
Default

I think the registration requirement for sail boats is based on length. I want to say 13 ft. but I could be wrong. I think kayaks only hit that length when you are talking high end or they are ocean kayaks.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app
The Real BigGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2020, 01:50 PM   #99
chachee52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tyngsboro, MA and Gilford, NH
Posts: 127
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joey2665 View Post
Question: Are unpowered sail boats such as Sunfish types required to be registered?

If so then kayaks should be subject to the same rules
Technically a sun fish is supposed to be registered, as I read the law. Any sailboat over 12" (if I remember correctly) and a sunfish is 13'9". This is down from 16ft back in the day that my buddy and I used to race a Hobie 16 and that did not need to be registered.
My 2 cents with this, Why can't they do a card like hikers do? If you get rescued and have the card you are taken care of, if you didn't pay for the card, you have to pay for the rescue efforts. (I understand its not as simple as that and there are other things that go on)
I do understand that there are places that kayakers are putting in and taking parking spots from boaters that are paying for registration fees. This way people that actually use ramps and such have to pay, people that just have kayaks for in front of their house and never transport them don't have to pay. And for someone like myself and my father-in-law who have multiple kayaks (he builds wooden ones) we don't have to pay $200 dollars for boats that we are only using one at a time anyway.
chachee52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2020, 02:09 PM   #100
bigdog
Senior Member
 
bigdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central MA-Gilford
Posts: 1,003
Thanks: 130
Thanked 65 Times in 54 Posts
Default Contact your State Rep about proposed Kayak Fee NH HB-640

For those registered voters who live in Gilford who wish to voice your opposition or approval to the proposed Kayak fee (HB 640), your State representative is:
Senator Harold French
District 7
Phone: 603.271.4063
email:Harold.French@leg.state.nh.us

FYI, State District 7 includes the following towns:
Andover, Belmont, Boscawen, Canterbury, Franklin, Gilford, Northfield, Salisbury, Webster and Laconia

This Bill is still in the NH 'House', so it would more sense to contact your House Rep for your town.
FYI House District 2 covers Gilford and Meredith, your House Reps are:
Glen C. Aldrich: 343 Old Lakeshore Road Lot 43 Gilford, NH 03249-6598
Harry H. Bean: 234 Saltmarsh Pond Road Gilford, 03249-7567
Deanna E. Jurius: 49 Stoney Brook Road Meredith, NH 03253-4707
Jonathan D. Mackie: 20 Campground Road Meredith, NH 03253

If I have inaccurately mis-stated anything here, please feel free to chime in.......
bigdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.47512 seconds