|
|
Posts: 218
| There has been a proposal to essentially privatize the boat launch at Big St. Germain Lake and charge a "reasonable" daily use fee ($7-$10). This would take the boat launch out of the hands of the DNR and has many hidden side effects. Lakes without public launches typically do not get stocked by the DNR for one. This proposal was initiated by members of the Big St. Germain Lake Council. The current boat launch is maintained (and upgraded a couple years back) by the DNR and paid for with your tax dollars, license fees etc. My opinion is that charging a daily use fee would be a HUGE mistake.
The lakes committee has a meeting coming up and I would encourage anyone with an interest in this topic to attend or at the very least send a note expressing your questions or concerns. Here's a copy of the meeting announcement letter I received from the Chamber of Commerce.
As we stated during our Chamber after 5 social event we would let you know when the next Lakes Committee meeting was to be held. Town Chairman Walt Camp has told us that it will be Tuesday, May 8th at 7PM at the St. Germain Community Center. The topic came up as a result of conversation about charging a launch fee at the Big St. Germain boat ramp. If you have an opinion on this fee per launch proposal this meeting may be worth attending. It is the belief of the St. Germain Chamber that this fee proposal would be detrimental to tourism in the St. Germain area.
St. Germain Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
PO Box 155
St. Germain, WI 54558
(715) 477-2205 / 800-727-7203 / Fax (715) 542-3423
www.st-germain.com / email: [email protected] |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Pete was is the reasoning behind this? Why make it private, and what do they need the daily fee money for? |
|
| |
|
| What do they think they'll be able to use the money for? The law says they can't charge more than $7 without prior DNR approval and the money must be used to maintain the launch itself.
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/cfa/accessabandonment/AllowableFees.html
If the launch is already being adequately maintained by the DNR, there's no need for the town to collect money to maintain it. If that's the case this sounds a lot more like an attempt to reduce public use of the lake - good for the priviledged few who live on the lake, bad for everyone else in town running a business.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32882
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That is exactly what it looks like. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | it's a fear-based money-grab playing scare-tactics to people who are "used to paying where they are from". i'm in the valley monday and tuesday and hope to be back in-time for the meeting.
this is what could happen if we continue to "ask" to pay more fees. they will use it to charge us ... in spades. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| Public Waters - 5/3/2012 9:09 AM
What do they think they'll be able to use the money for? The law says they can't charge more than $7 without prior DNR approval and the money must be used to maintain the launch itself.
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/cfa/accessabandonment/AllowableFees.html
If the launch is already being adequately maintained by the DNR, there's no need for the town to collect money to maintain it. If that's the case this sounds a lot more like an attempt to reduce public use of the lake - good for the priviledged few who live on the lake, bad for everyone else in town running a business.
I agree completely with a slight note of correction. It is NOT the town that would collect for this or for that matter even want it to happen. This is the brainchild of a few members of the Big St. Germain Lake District. At the previous meeting I attended the dollar figure was not set but it was stated that there is a mechanism in place that would allow such a group to do this and charge a "reasonable fee" and the $7-10 numbers were thrown around. |
|
| |
|
| Or more accurately what happens when we get a little too conservative. |
|
| |
|
| This is the brainchild of a few members of the Big St. Germain Lake District.
Is the launch in good shape? If so, it sure does sound like the brainchild of a few people who want to exclude everybody else from "their" lake.
Who owns the launch site, or has the agreement with the DNR for maintaining it? I assume it's the lake district or else they wouldn't be exploring this option? Lake management districts are one of the groups specifically listed in NR 1.91 (11) allowed to charge "reasonable" fees if they're the responsible group.
http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/nr/1/91
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 802
| If this happens on Big St., what'll keep this from becoming the new accepted way of access on the other lakes? Imagine all the lakes you hit with fees, nice huh? Especially puts the hurt on us lake jumpers who hit 3-6 lakes over our 16 hour fishing days...
Steve |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1120
Location: West Chester, OH | Something not clear to me: Is the BSG Lake Council a private lake association? (vs a public entity) If so, how are they able to assume ownership of a publicly owned facility? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 547
Location: Oshkosh | I agree with the comment of if this passes, what stops more lakes from doing this and the effect it would have on the lake jumppers. What I feel would be a good idea is to charge a 5 od 10 dollar yearly county wide launch fee that is used strictly for launches. Think of how much money that would raise a year for Onida and Vilas county even at $5! Yet it is not a large fee that it will prevent anyone from going on their vacation, or force them to leave their boat or jet ski at home. Just my 2 cents.
Peter
Edited by WI Skis 5/3/2012 11:08 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Big Saint is only a few miles from my house, and I seldom fish it; however, if this fee passes, it most likely won't be long before other lakes follow suit. That is my real concern especially for people that like to hit several lakes in a day as previously mentioned.
|
|
| |
|
| Those interested in contacting the lake association can reach them by following this link: http://www4.uwsp.edu/cnr/uwexlakes/lakelist/orgdata.asp?OID=69
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| jonnysled - 5/3/2012 10:33 AM
it's a fear-based money-grab playing scare-tactics to people who are "used to paying where they are from". i'm in the valley monday and tuesday and hope to be back in-time for the meeting.
this is what could happen if we continue to "ask" to pay more fees. they will use it to charge us ... in spades.
Why not just offer a stamp you can buy with your fishing license that gives you access to the ramp? Problem solved!  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1286
Location: WI | Why not just buy a fishing license that has money added into it to go towards those things. Oh wait... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | ulbian - 5/3/2012 10:15 PM
jonnysled - 5/3/2012 10:33 AM
it's a fear-based money-grab playing scare-tactics to people who are "used to paying where they are from". i'm in the valley monday and tuesday and hope to be back in-time for the meeting.
this is what could happen if we continue to "ask" to pay more fees. they will use it to charge us ... in spades.
Why not just offer a stamp you can buy with your fishing license that gives you access to the ramp? Problem solved! ; )
well played Bob! ... lol |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | jonnysled - 5/4/2012 6:20 AM
ulbian - 5/3/2012 10:15 PM
jonnysled - 5/3/2012 10:33 AM
it's a fear-based money-grab playing scare-tactics to people who are "used to paying where they are from". i'm in the valley monday and tuesday and hope to be back in-time for the meeting.
this is what could happen if we continue to "ask" to pay more fees. they will use it to charge us ... in spades.
Why not just offer a stamp you can buy with your fishing license that gives you access to the ramp? Problem solved! ; )
well played Bob! ... lol
While that was a good funny, it would solve the problem and I wouldn't have an issue doing it.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 582
| This is nothing more than local people living on this lake to stop people from going on this lake. its a power grab. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32882
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Perhaps we should set up a system where everyone places the vast % of our income into a fund the legislators and private interests can squabble over, and we get access to hunting and fishing, roads, city services, all our taxes paid, health care and the level of service increases on all fronts.
Worked for the Communists and Socialists.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | jackson - 5/4/2012 6:59 AM
This is nothing more than local people living on this lake to stop people from going on this lake. its a power grab.
yup ... suckering liberal minded people who "can justify it vs. coffee or a tank of gas" ... stp oil treatment on a pig i believe was the best analogy.
hey, minnesota people ... do you enjoy paying your vehicle value tax each year? i thought you pay the tax to the state when you buy the darn thing? it astonishes me how clear the power grab of taxation is, yet it's applauded by bleeding hearts.
unreal |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| Yes, the point is we ALREADY PAY for these launch ramps. It's sort of like going to the grocery store and buying your goods then having the grocery store charge you some additional fee to maintain the store. This IS a power grab, nothing more nothing less. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Mind you I am not saying what is done is right (completely against). What I am saying is if I want to use the lake I will do what I it takes to use it.
I sure hope this doesn't go too far, and as others mentioned set a precedence for the future. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | don't trip while you backpeddle travis :0) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | It has been a few years, but as I remember from being a Conservation Congress delegate on a Public Access Comm with the DNR, a taxable entity such as a county, town, city, or "lake district", not a lake association, can charge up to the daily entrance rate of a state park, at boat landing they control and the landing will still be consider a PUBLIC LANDING in the eyes of the DNR.
Like it or not, ask anyone who fishes in the southern 2/3 of the state and they will tell you free landings are getting rare. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Johnnie - 5/4/2012 8:45 AM
Like it or not, ask anyone who fishes in the southern 2/3 of the state and they will tell you free landings are getting rare.
HOT ... HOT ... HOT ... HOT |
|
| |
|
| So who actually owns the access on Big St Germain? It sounds like a private site being maintained by public money for public use.
Shouldn't that private entity have the right to make their own decisions about it? Shouldn't they be able to pick whether to let the DNR maintain it for the public, or charge a fee to maintain it privately themselves, or even (gasp!) shutting it down completely?
If it's private, would you rather that the government decides what they can and cannot do with it? Or should we decide? Or maybe Sled should decide for them?
If it's a private-public partnership (as it sounds) and they're considering going entirely private, then Pete is on the right course by working with the Chamber of Commerce to try and apply pressure to them to make a different decision and keep it free and open. I assume that will involve showing them the benefits of keeping it free. Which benefits are likely to matter to THEM?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | there is a local action group that is putting together an appropriate response. it's involvment includes Pete along with the owner of a major resort among others and represents this group specifically. i'm confident they will articulate the position well. i think the attendence will show a lot of support and keep it from getting out of control.
at least i hope so ... don't like the precedent if it comes to that.
Edited by jonnysled 5/4/2012 10:32 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: SE Wisconsin | This isn't a fun topic. The "free" launch on Big Saint should be left as it is.. |
|
| |
|
| Public Waters - 5/4/2012 10:18 AM
So who actually owns the access on Big St Germain?
The State of WI owns the launch, which is why a private group shouldn't be able to impose a fee on a launch they don't own. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | In a time where fuel is 4.00 a gallon, bag limits are dropping and property values are falling like meteors, placing a tax on public lake use is idiotic. Its like saying, "hey we know that 1/2 the amount of people are visiting than use to be, so to express our gratitude to those who do show up.....pay us 7.00 please"
I wonder what Rob Manthei thinks of this. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1451
Location: Kronenwetter, WI | "I wonder what Rob Manthei thinks of this."
http://www.outdoors911.com/reports/showthread.php?25890-Big-st-boat... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| I would just like to reiterate that if you are opposed to this concept please make your feelings known. I posted information to contact the St. Germain Chamber on the original post. Otherwise feel free to send to me and I'll make sure it gets to the meeting on Tuesday. Virtually every local person I know is opposed to this idea but if they know that word is getting out across the state and out of state visitors and WILL impact tourism it will carry some weight. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 144
Location: Loves Park, IL | Pete
PM sent to you to forward, please.
Jeff |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| Thanks Jeff. I sent a copy to the Chamber office and will also hand deliver at the meeting on Tuesday. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | went to the meeting tonight and the subject was called for and on the record for about 30 minutes with an introduction of the situation presented.
the opposition was well represented by the Chamber of Commerce, Guides and others in the room.
a woman from i believe the DNR spoke a bit too.
it was represented as being "in discussion" and no further.
my feeling was that the opposition was able to send the message that it would have a negative effect across a spectrum of resultant issues and that there were many more productive options along with no guarantee for "total" control if that was the expected result.
glad i went and will continue to participate when and if i can.
the most profound question asked was "how is the recruitment of volunteers from the lake association for inspectors?" ... apparently those who are calling for it don't step up to the plate to do anything about it by volunteering during the times they would be most needed. i held back the urge to mumble "murmur-murmer-murmer-murmer" from the crowd ... LOL
i sensed this issue is not over though, so keep tuned to updates and keep supporting ...
Pete and Rob were well prepared and so was the Chamber!
Edited by jonnysled 5/8/2012 8:47 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| Thanks for attending Jon and for your report. I made a pretty long post on my website Fish Report board and would invite anyone who is interested to read it over. I'd post it here if there is interest. Thanks to all who have supported the effort to squash this proposal. Like Jon I have a good feeling that we made an impact tonight and the idea of a boat launch fee is a lot less likely than it would have been if this had been kept under the radar. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 272
| Still missing something.....
How exactly was this lake association entity planning on taking control of this public access point? Were they going to buy it? Did the state/DNR agree to sell it or relinquish control or abandon it?
I've seen things like this go on in city and townships I've lived in, but it usually starts as a proposal by one party and is agreed upon by both. Usually involves a road that is bordered on all sides and dead ends within one particular party's property. They go to the city council or town board and propose to buy said road, or the city agrees to relinquish control and maintenance to the interested party. At some point before the decision is final, anyone in attendance who is a resident in the jurisdiction can voice an opinion.
I don't see anything about that here.
For the record, if this were even remotely similar to the stamp thing, boaters would have had to have been lined up at the launch, standing with wads of singles and a pencils in hand, begging for someone to put out some envelopes, a flat surface to write on and a lockbox because they felt the landing was inadequate. THAT didn't happen either.
-Eric
Edited by muskie-addict 5/8/2012 11:00 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| Eric, thanks for asking. A lot of this was cleared up at the meeting and I'd encourage you to read my full report. In essence a "lake district" is a special government body that can work in a "partnership" situation with the DNR to allow a boat launch charge. According to the representative of the DNR who attended there are only two lakes in the state that do this. Both are in the southern part of the state. Lake Geneva is one and I don't believe she said what the other lake was. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 272
| Thanks, Pete.
I guess this begs the question of how and why a "lake district" gets started/inserted/implemented.....whatever the term is. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 218
| A lake district is a more formal organization than a lake association and is a special government entity. There are tons of details but here is a bit of info that I found. Lots more if you want to study the state statutes.
WHAT IS A LAKE DISTRICT?
The details of the laws governing lake districts can be found in Chapter 33 of the Wisconsin State Statutes and are encapsulated in the Guide to Wisconsin's Lake Management Law. The following are abbreviated highlights:
WHAT IS A DISTRICT?
A lake district is a special purpose unit of government. The first districts came into existence in 1974 with the passing of Chapter 33 of the Wisconsin State Statutes. There are approximately 100 lake districts in Wisconsin today.
WHAT IS ITS PURPOSE?
The purpose of a district is to maintain, protect, and improve the quality of a lake and its watershed for the mutual good of the members and the lake environment.
HOW IS IT FORMED?
A lake district can be formed in one of four ways:
by 51% of the landowners in the proposed district petitioning the county or town board;
by owners of 51% of the land in the proposed district petitioning the county or town board;
by resolution of a village board or city council; or
by conversion of a town sanitary district. |
|
| |
|
| Its Falk's, no Barrett's no Walker's fault ... tax the 1% |
|
| |
Big St. Germain Needs Your Help