DNR proposes higher fees for fishing licenses, boat registration, state parks

Gitchi Gummi wrote:

If you were in the BWCA and some form of law enforcement came into your campsite, I’m guessing that was Forest Service and not DNR.

@duluth1an I am fairly sure that he was DNR, but I guess he could have been USFS. He checked both our BWCA permit and our fishing licenses. He tagged us for having an expired registration on a canoe–it was borrowed and the owner thought it was up-to-date–turns out it wasn’t.

Very nice guy. He had a curly-coated retriever with him that the kids enjoyed. We BS’d for a bit. He suggested a few other lakes we’d like. Then, he took off after a group that we snitched on for camping in a non-designated site. We no problems and were glad he was protecting our resources.

ajw wrote:

People need to start holding the government accountable. It doesn’t matter if it still feels like a bargain to pay X amount to hunt and fish because at some point it won’t.

X2 – People look at it as a small increase in Tax/Fee here and one there. They never look at the overall picture of all those added up. When people think of taxes they only ever seem to think of State and Federal tax’s. Its crazy the amount of additional tax’s/fee’s that people pay daily or throughout the year.

Wow that is crazy. Like I said, I’ve never heard of a CO stepping foot into a bwca campsite, let alone asking to see your BWCA permit and I’ve been going to the BWCA for ~20 years. I didn’t think that was something they could enforce.

Definitely DNR though if they wrote you up for a canoe registration. You weren’t by chance on one of those couple BWCA border lakes that allows motors, were you?

Brian Klawitter wrote:

On Pool 4 we have
Goodhue County Water Patrol
Pierce County Water Patrol (they work Prescot at least half the time)
CO’s from both MN and WI.

I see plenty of LEO’s. About the time I start thinking there’s none around a disable boat gets in the way of the tow and in a short time they are there.

I’ve been stopped in FEBUARY (first time I met Britany, the MN CO). That was awesome!

I think the high traffic areas are covered well. It’s the outstate areas where a CO can’t be everywhere at the same time.

^Wabasha County too.

They do a pretty solid job covering the lower end of Pool 4 on the weekends. They’ve got a couple boats that are out there every weekend it seems. On bigger holiday weekends they will even be out in the fire department rigs anchored along the edge of the channel observing. If you want to see chaos, try running the channel from just below Wabasha to Lake Pepin on a sunny weekend day in July. Since the Covid boat boom, I am hardly comfortable having my kids out there as you’re relying on the common sense of hundreds of other boat drivers to avoid issues no matter how defensive you are. It’s not uncommon to see groups of kayakers, jet skis, 30+’ speed boats, a couple hundred pontoons, barges, and fishermen all in the same few miles of the channel there.

Gitchi Gummi wrote:

You weren’t by chance on one of those couple BWCA border lakes that allows motors, were you?

No, this was on Isabella.

I frequent lakes just south of Isabella outside of the BWCA and regularly see the USFS & MDNR’s CO’s working in tandem.

i very rarely see a CO, but i do stop in and visit with one occasionally at his house!!! just north of deer river. but i dont regularly fish big popular lakes…..thats where they seem to go. my brother did tell me a CO pulled into the PA of our little lake and watched him and mom fishing once. they BS’ed with them a bit.

the last time we bear hunted my kid got checked coming out of the woods!!!

and yea i did see an article recently they added a bunch of new recruits….. think it was in outdoor news.

gimruis wrote:

How about Wisconsin then? You can buy a license over the counter there as a non resident for about 160 bucks. No lottery. And I’d venture to say they have more deer hunters than any state in the country.

I buy my MN license every year without a lottery, to include a couple anterless permits. Access to these varies depending on region, but that’s true in WI as well – I get my permit and unlimited anterless permits where I hunt in south-central WI but my brother has no antlerless permits where he hunts further up north.

At least we can agree that non residents licenses can be increased to more appropriately align with some neighboring states then.

in the case of WI it’s already pretty comparable, actually.

i pay $210/year to hunt both (WI resident $24) (MN non-resident $186).
you’d pay $194/year to hunt both (MN resident $34) (WI non-resident $160).

i pay $71/year to fish both (WI resident $20) (MN non-resident $51)
you’d pay $75/year to fish both (MN resident $25) (WI non-resident $50)

duh queen wrote:

I frequent lakes just south of Isabella outside of the BWCA and regularly see the USFS & MDNR’s CO’s working in tandem.

This was exactly my experience when I was in that area last time. Both the DNR and FS were working together.

Michael C. Winther wrote:

in the case of WI it’s already pretty comparable, actually.

That was my point. Iowa is a rape job compared to both MN and WI when referencing non resident deer license. Could you imagine the uproar if we starting making Iowa non-residents put in for a non-refundable angling license that costed upwards of 500 bucks?

Appreciate the data though, its helpful.

Alagnak1 wrote:

Karry K- if you’re so confident that the money the DNR spends is put to good use what is stopping you from just writing and sending them a big fat check instead of jumping on the MORE TAXES band wagon?

If I could I’d gladly write a big fat check because I think it’d be a wise investment in Minnesota’s outdoor future but that’s not reality.
.
The proposed increase in fees isn’t the same as an increase in taxes. If you don’t fish, boat or use the state parks in Minnesota, you’ll be unaffected.

You may be right and it’s all a big, proposed conspiracy right? Of course the fees will be put to good use. What reason do you have to think otherwise?

I’m not jumping on any bandwagon and I dislike increases in fees as much as anyone else but we all have to face reality. We can’t expect the DNR to maintain and improve Minnesota’s outdoor resources if those of us who enjoy them refuse to pay for the experience can we? If we can’t even step up and pay for the great outdoors opportunities that we enjoy in MN do you expect someone else to step up for us? It’s up to us.

The revenue from the proposed increased fees will pay for five additional fisheries positions, increase spending on lake and river infrastructures, upgrade camping facilities, increase accessibility to parks and trails, fund safety education, shore up overspent budgets and boost outreach and enforcement, among other things according to the DNR.

I think it’d be a wise investment.

The state government has us believing it’s a “good deal” that we can pay more to put our canoe in the water.

Every time I see a increase in anything coming from Minnesota government all I can think of is Walz sitting on his $17B tax confiscation treasure chest and the only thing he can think of to do with it so far is give his teachers union a nice chunk for their support. Our schools are doing so well after throwing billions into them over the years. Money is clearly not the answer to the education system. The idea of giving the tax paying citizen back just a pittance is something the government is incapable of making happen. Meanwhile has anyone’s property tax gone down? Mine hasn’t. Remember the government does nothing to make money they take it and they are big spenders.

Now as far as the DNR they need to increase fines for poaching fish and game by at least 1000% imo. People who do this and there are many more than what you think rarely get anything more than a wrist slap. The fines are not enough of a deterrent and most who are inclined to do it in the first place go right back to doing it. Most of them do it for years without ever getting caught if they do at all. Getting caught poaching needs to be a life altering event just like getting a DUI.

and the govt wonders why people leave. tax, tax, tax and tax some more!

The fees will be put to good use,lol..Like the aquatic invasives that have been wiped out by all the fees we have been paying?Am I to believe that paying ten more dollars should help finish the eradication of them? Pay more to use the lakes and rivers while the state,city,and county governments pour salt into the ditches,creeks,and storm drains that feed them…Must be what they mean when they say adapt to climate change.

See follwing comment:

A reasonable non-resident license program could be function of the cost of a resident license in the non-resident’s state. Example A non-resident’s in WI could be the same multiple as is a non resident’s over resident’s in his home state. If a Iowa resident pays $30 for a deer license, but non-residents are $500 (16.7times what a resident pays), he would pay 16.7 times the resident rate in what ever state he chooses to hunt( WI, MN, ND, SD, etc). The political pressure this would bring in the resident’s state may be enough to get rid of those exorbitant out of state costs, because his license rate to hunt out of state is tied directly to what his state charges others to hunt his state. Make any sense?

Karry Kyllo wrote:

The proposed increase in fees isn’t the same as an increase in taxes. If you don’t fish, boat or use the state parks in Minnesota, you’ll be unaffected.

Eau Contraire. The courts have consistently found user fees to be taxes. ” Any assessment that raises money in excess of what is needed to defray costs is a tax.”

On the $17B… imagine going into a store and buying something for $30 and giving them a $50 and they keep your $20 and call it a “surplus”. They would be in prison. This is exactly what this state is doing to its tax payers.

Sounds like many of you will be running for public office in the near future.

Not me, I am no criminal. It is so corrupt, unless you throw out 51%+ and replace it with people who are not owned, nothing will change. I prefer to just beoch about stuff.

Ralph Wiggum wrote:

Sounds like many of you will be running for public office in the near future.

Not me. I’ll be running “from” office. Why would anyone tarnish his good name and reputation by associating himself with a bunch of corrupt, self serving hacks like what we have in St Paul or Madison…….and don’t even get me started with DC….

Karry Kyllo wrote:

If I could I’d gladly write a big fat check because I think it’d be a wise investment in Minnesota’s outdoor future but that’s not reality.

No you really can. Send a letter thanking them for their selfless work, and mail it with a substantial check to: MN DNR, 500 Lafayette Rd N, Saint Paul, MN 55155. They will accept it. But like that non-existent list of things you think Strommen is doing great, I have a feeling this to will never materialize.

Ralph Wiggum wrote:

Sounds like many of you will be running for public office in the near future.

As the saying goes Heaven wont have me and the devil (politicians) thinks Ill take over.

I don’t think you run for office as much anymore as you get appointed.

I see we’ve meandered into the conspiracy theorist territory..

They haven’t raised some of these fees since 2006? The per-year on these increases doesnt seem too bad.

buckybadger wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Brian Klawitter wrote:</div>
On Pool 4 we have
Goodhue County Water Patrol
Pierce County Water Patrol (they work Prescot at least half the time)
CO’s from both MN and WI.

I see plenty of LEO’s. About the time I start thinking there’s none around a disable boat gets in the way of the tow and in a short time they are there.

I’ve been stopped in FEBUARY (first time I met Britany, the MN CO). That was awesome!

I think the high traffic areas are covered well. It’s the outstate areas where a CO can’t be everywhere at the same time.

^Wabasha County too.

They do a pretty solid job covering the lower end of Pool 4 on the weekends. They’ve got a couple boats that are out there every weekend it seems. On bigger holiday weekends they will even be out in the fire department rigs anchored along the edge of the channel observing. If you want to see chaos, try running the channel from just below Wabasha to Lake Pepin on a sunny weekend day in July. Since the Covid boat boom, I am hardly comfortable having my kids out there as you’re relying on the common sense of hundreds of other boat drivers to avoid issues no matter how defensive you are. It’s not uncommon to see groups of kayakers, jet skis, 30+’ speed boats, a couple hundred pontoons, barges, and fishermen all in the same few miles of the channel there.

Ha the first weekend I moved to this area I went and checked it out from the shore and ended up at this area as my first look at the mississipi. I thought good god this river is crowded , how the hell do people fish through this mess .

Thennnn I drove up to Lake city and saw there was some room to breathe .

gimruis wrote:

Could you imagine the uproar if we starting making Iowa non-residents put in for a non-refundable angling license that costed upwards of 500 bucks?

LOL!
Minnesota doesn’t hold a candle to the Dakota fisheries.

I haven’t bought a MN non res license in years.
Haven’t missed it either. I know I’m not the only one.

Unfortunately it looks like we’ll be moving back to MN in the near future. Just not the State it used to be.
I’ll be more than happy to put on the extra miles, pay the non res fees and spend my time on Dakota waters unless I get desperate.

bullcans wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimruis wrote:</div>
Could you imagine the uproar if we starting making Iowa non-residents put in for a non-refundable angling license that costed upwards of 500 bucks?

LOL!
Minnesota doesn’t hold a candle to the Dakota fisheries.

I haven’t bought a MN non res license in years.
Haven’t missed it either. I know I’m not the only one.

Unfortunately it looks like we’ll be moving back to MN in the near future. Just not the State it used to be.
I’ll be more than happy to put on the extra miles, pay the non res fees and spend my time on Dakota waters unless I get desperate.

Jiminy.

Yes and ND knows how to make money off of nonresident fisherman.
A couple years back they added a $15 AIS sticker fee to all nonresident boats. Well I called ND DNR about it. The person I talked to explained the reasons for the fee, bla, bla, bla, etc. When I asked if residents had to pay the fee the answer was it was included in a boat owners registration fee.
So ND boat registration fee increased $15 a year I asked? Nope it only went up $5. Yep stick it to the nonresident, again.