By John Bebow - October 19, 2007
Michigan boasts some of the very best hunting and fishing anywhere in the United States. Anglers and hunters vote with their waders and boots. Only two states (Texas and Pennsylvania) have more hunters than Michigan. Only four states (Minnesota, Florida, Texas, and California) have more anglers than Michigan, according to federal statistics.
So, do Michigan hunters and anglers pay a high price for top-notch recreation? Are their hunting and fishing licenses expensive? No. The average angler in Michigan pays $19.68 for the privilege of fishing here. The average hunter pays $35.28. Few, if any, states have better hunting and fishing than Michigan. But hunting licenses are cheaper here than in 39 other states. Fishing is cheaper here than in 21 other states, according to a Center for Michigan analysis of national data compiled by the federal government.
Michigan hasn’t increased hunting and fishing license fees since 1996. Because of inflation, you’d need a dollar and thirty-three cents today to buy what a dollar bought in 1996. Fill your truck with gasoline for the drive to your favorite fishing hole and you’ll pay a lot more than you did 11 years ago.
But, in Michigan, the basic cost to hunt and fish remains a bargain. An unsustainable bargain.
Hunting, fishing, and wildlife viewing is, after all, a $4 billion-a-year business in Michigan and will continue to be vibrant part of the Michigan economy – unless we ruin our woods and waters through disinvestment.
For many months, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the state’s leading outdoor recreation lobbying group, the Michigan United Conservation Clubs, and more than a dozen other hunting and fishing groups statewide have pleaded with legislators to raise hunting and fishing license fees to support conservation officers who patrol our forests, lakes and streams to stop poachers and polluters, biologists who make sure those lands, waters, fish and game are healthy, habitat improvement projects, and many other routine costs of doing business if we’re going to responsibly preserve and enhance the bountiful natural resources that cause so many people to hunt and fish in Michigan to begin with. Budget cuts have cost the DNR one-third of its workforce since 2000.
Other states with great hunting and fishing resources – including some of those so-called low-tax Western states – charge much more for the enjoyment of their wildlife. In Colorado and Wyoming, for example, hunters pay five times more than their peers in Michigan. In places like Alaska and Oregon, anglers pay 30 percent more than their peers in Michigan.
Under the hunting and fishing license increases introduced months ago but not yet voted on in the Legislature, the cost to legally chase any species of fish would go up twelve bucks over four years. The cost to hunt dear would double, to thirty dollars, over four years, an increase that's less than the cost of a case of beer for deer camp.
But legislators — apparently trembling at the No-Tax Bogeyman and recall threats – this month told Michigan Natural Resources Commission Chairman Keith Charters that he can forget about it. License fee increases aren’t going to happen.
"We got a lot of sympathy, but you can't put sympathy between two slices of bread," Charters told the MIRS news service last week. "Without a solution, draconian things will happen in November."
Maybe legislators figure those forests, lakes, streams, and wildlife – and the $4 billion economy they produce — will just take care of themselves.
5 Comments
Although I agree with most of what you said, primarily because of the 'no free lunch' economics of it, but a few facts were missing that raised a sublimal anti-hunter/gun control flag due lack of consideration for data that shows less and less hunters due to economic issues. Gas prices, lay offs and travels costs, all of which have affected our northern recreational industry profits, coupled with the access to low cost food for rural families in economic need were not addressed. There is another area of 'gotcha' that also makes MI consumers wary of pricing issues and that is the state park "CAR Sticker" versus family access fee.
Every car in the family has to have its own sticker, and if I sell the car, I must remove the sticker with a razor blade and present it to the DNR to get one for the new car; too much effort and logistics, so we have to buy another or start trading cars to go to the parks. People would pay much more for an individual of family PASS that allows them to use the parks regardless of the vehicle they are driving.
Easier access stimulates more use, which in turn generates more money from park programs and cost justifies additonal staff, etc.
Back to specific hunting licenses and another sore point; out of state sportspeople paying very little to hunt and fish here. If they can fund a long distance trip to MI to enjy our resources, the increase of fees would present a minor obstacle to their trip. We charge very little for out state licenses, approximately the cost of one nights stay in a good motel. This is the area I would look to double up and catch up, and would not have as severe a negative voter impact for those in Lansing wearing the chicken feathers.
Another possibility is county specific, or region UP, Upper LP and Lower LP regional licenses that increase much slower when a hunter only hunts his/her own local region; this could also be by county as a separate, lower cost (current rates) license by county, sharing revenue with counties for processing the licenses.
This would target the favor the local hunter or fisherman (and retirees) who may also depend on the game as a source of food; they normally will not be traveling to hunt for food because the cost becomes prohibitive by the mile. The fees for region or statewide hunting could be increased even higher while offering the consumer choices and less costly alternatives, such as fishing locally, but going north once a year for deer or turkey.
JTOL (Just Thinking Out Loud)
1. Michigan as a destination is not happening right now. Most in the state can't afford to vacation & others have decided to stay home. I couldn't believe my eye on Labor Day weekend, I was at a Lake Michigan State Park and the lot was barely 25% full. It was 85 degrees and beautiful. With only 1 out of state car, we raised their fees and they stayed home.
2. To raise these rates now, will be putting a burden on many families that are relying on hunting & fishing to keep meat on their tables. Life isn't so rosy here.
3. Every time we give this state an inch in increased fees & taxes, they raise expenses a mile. This is why we face our budget crisis now.
4. The number of licensed hunters & fishermen is DROPPING. People just don't do these things as much anymore. If anything we should LOWER the out of state license costs and encourange others to come and spend money. We need it.
Hunting and fishing fees in Michigan are purely a function of the "Joe lunch bucket" mentality. It is unfortunate that our State has refused to recognize reality and enact fees that are consistent with the quality of hunting/fishing in Michigan, which is by far some of the best in the country. Our legislature, as with the Big Three AND the UAW, have continually refused to recognize the competitive realities of everything outside of their little microcosm-an investment in the Michigan DNR through licensing, smart regulation AND enforcement would geometrically the "experience" of the outdoors in Michigan (and foster a priveledge rather than the current entitlement mentality. This "idealogy" (or truth, reality or COMMON SENSE!) could and should apply equally to the remainder of our State government…If you seek a pleasant peninsula…LOOK AROUND…!!!
Since there has been no real buget cuts, only a re-allocation of where the money is spent, who is to say that the increased revenue from higher licenses fees will not also be re-directed to other non-DNR budgets by our esteemed state leaders?
That's right. Don't tell me there haven't been increases. We pay 5x that of yesteryear for camping & park passes. Not including the price of gas to even get there.
Yes amenities, etc. have been improved at almost every state park, but $25 /night approaches that of a cheap hotel. Example: the new fire pits at all of the state campgrounds. Let's call them hobo pits because you have to stand over them to use them. Why should the state spend so much money on something as irrelevant as concrete reinforced fire-pits?
Michigan is a great place; let's keep it that way.
Go Blue
Post a Comment