Maine, like a lot of states, is having trouble funding its Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Maine, not necessarily like a lot of states, loves to tax its citizens. Maine is one of the most heavily taxed states in the Union. Maine is coming off one of the most severe winters in history and in parts of the state, the deer herd has been hit very hard. Needless to say, the state has its troubles financially and is faced with decisions on how it is going to fund programs.
The MDIFW is facing a shortage this year in its budget and they are scrambling to find funding. Sen. Bruce Bryant, Committee Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, is proposing an increase in hunting, trapping and fishing license fees by $2.00 per year for residents and $4.00 per year for nonresidents.
Coming as no big surprise, Maine sportsmen are divided on whether they should be asked once again to pick up the slack.
Rep. Tom Saviello of Wilton and member of the JSCIFW, is also proposing a bill that would levy a fee on hikers and kayakers of $20.00 annually. That money, as I understand it, would go into a pool used to offset the costs of the Maine Warden Service to respond to search and rescue calls for non-license holders in the state. This bill may be facing more resistance than the license fee increase.
I’m not going to get into discussions about whether or not I think any of the fees are fair, necessary or justified. What I will do is raise some questions that I think need to be answered before anyone in Augusta or the users and sportsmen can make qualified decisions on what should be done.
Sportsmen are notorious for complaining about fee increases and we can’t really blame them. It does seem that all too often they are called upon to pick up the slack when it comes to financial shortcomings. But also true to sportsmen is that they don’t mind coughing up their fair share and a lot more, when they are able to see the worth of their investment.
There is also a trust factor. Sportsmen have to have a belief that the MDIFW is looking out for them. Here’s one example. Last year in Michigan, the Department of Natural Resources, said it had to raise license fees because it was looking at a $10.8 million shortfall. Sportsmen there were also divided but after raising fees, when the end of the year came around, DNR had a surplus of nearly $20 million. Trust me when I say there is no more trust between Michigan sportsmen and the MDNR and it could be years before MDNR will get a license fee increase again.
As I see it, those complaining the most about paying the extra fee are doing it for two basic reasons. 1). They see their services being cut along with a reduction in fish and game and opportunities. 2). They believe that non payers that rely on Fish and Game services, which includes the Maine Warden Service, need to start anteing up their fair share. In honesty, I think these two reasons are legitimate, although I probably won’t get a majority approval on that from readers.
How MDIFW will find the funding remains to be seen. What isn’t being answered, and I have sent out emails that have not been answered, is how is funding of MDIFW going to be affected if Gov. Baldacci gets his way and merges MDIFW with other “natural resources” departments in order to save money?
As most of you know, I am dead set against such a move for a number of reasons, one of them being the problems that arise from how revenue is generated to this new department and how it gets spent. Sportsmen need guarantees that the money they lay out in license fees is actually going to be spent on managing fish and game and not going to fund the local nature walk project that once open will be closed to all hunting and fishing.
In previous discussions I have had on this subject, people remind me that Maine is required by law to spend fish and game money on fish and game programs. I realize that but nobody will answer my question when I ask if those laws become null and void if legally the MDIFW is dissolved and a new entity of natural resources is created?
Maine doesn’t have the best track record when it comes to spending the money generated by license fees on fish and game items. If Baldacci gets his way, will the formation of a different department guarantee that Maine sportsmen’s money will be spent as promised?
Baldacci opposes a license fee increase, which I find interesting as I never knew a tax he didn’t like. Maine sportsmen need to decide if any money they have to spend more than they do now will be spent as promised and whether it is worthwhile. I don’t completely buy into the argument that Skip Trask, spokesman for the Maine Trappers Association and Maine Guides, used as was reported in the Banger News.
Skip Trask with the Maine Trappers Association and Maine Professional Guides Association pointed out that a daily lift ticket at a ski resort can cost $70 while some golfers pay $60 for a day of green’s fees.
Paying $40 for a year’s worth of hunting and fishing, as the bill proposes, is a deal by comparison as long as it helps keep wardens patrolling the backcountry to protect the resources, Trask said.
Trask is right in his representation of the costs of skiing and golf. I’ll also concur that the cost of a license to hunt, trap and fish in Maine is a bargain but making such a comparison isn’t in and of itself justification to raise fees. We shouldn’t raise fees simply because we can and get away with it – and I don’t think Trask is suggesting such a thing.
My point still comes back to perception of the license holder. It’s what you get for your money and whether you feel the money is spent with the best interest of the sportsman in mind.
This proposal for a rate hike comes at a troubling time in my mind. If this was coming at a time when Baldacci wasn’t suggesting a hocus-pocus, mix up and blend departments together, closely resembling a shell game, then maybe the decision could be easier.
It seems the majority of Maine sportsmen want non-paying users to contribute. How to make that happen is argumentative for certain. Making government bigger in hopes of accomplishing that task will never work. We need to fight Baldacci’s idea of creating a bigger department of natural resources and return the fish and game department back to more what it used to be – fish and game management.
Tom Remington
No related posts.
