# Invasive species stickers!!!



## huntducksordietrying

This has been a topic on the fishing side. Thought I'd throw it up over here since I use my boat in ID on the duck hunt. You have to have an Invasive Species sticker on your boat to launch in ID. and WY. In ID its $22 and WY its $30. Just thought I'd give y'all a heads up on that.


----------



## dkhntrdstn

I got a post card in the mail say that. I might have to buy one for ID for my duck boat.


----------



## king eider

great, another fee/tax from the government. its getting ridiculous!!


----------



## Mojo1

Yeah, Wyoming sent out postcards to everyone in their database informing us of that new rule. Never use a boat up there, so I'm not worried about that fee.


----------



## Donttreadonme

One more reason to ban all duck boats. Idaho and Wyoming obviously see that they are a major problem, why can't Utah and Utahn's see it? :lol: 






















PS I am only kidding. This place is dead here lately so I thought I would stir the pot a little.


----------



## Mojo1

Joel Draxler said:


> One more reason to ban all duck boats. Idaho and Wyoming obviously see that they are a major problem, why can't Utah and Utahn's see it? :lol:


I say we ban all boats no matter what they are used for!

Better ban decoys and waders too, you never know when the zebra muscles might hitch a ride on them. :twisted:


----------



## Gordon

> Better ban decoys and waders too, you never know when the zebra muscles might hitch a ride on them.


Yup! Just ban being in the water!


----------



## stuckduck

I dont get what the point of the sticker is... There is no inspection on the boat just put your money in an envolope, mail it and bang you get your sticker. then to charge non res. more, what a load of crap. they are raising the money for something, just hope it goes to fight the mussle. I bet it will end up in the genral fund or maybe just part of it will.. any way I do fill better now.


----------



## dkhntrdstn

Joel Draxler said:


> One more reason to ban all duck boats. Idaho and Wyoming obviously see that they are a major problem, why can't Utah and Utahn's see it? :lol:
> 
> PS I am only kidding. This place is dead here lately so I thought I would stir the pot a little.


That a other topic right there. Maybe we should just ban all hunting in clubs,privit land. every where is open to every one to hunt where they want to and on anybody land.




stuckduck said:


> I dont get what the point of the sticker is... There is no inspection on the boat just put your money in an envolope, mail it and bang you get your sticker. then to charge non res. more, what a load of crap. they are raising the money for something, just hope it goes to fight the mussle. I bet it will end up in the genral fund or maybe just part of it will.. any way I do fill better now.


I agree.I just hope Utah don't start doing this crap.


----------



## Donttreadonme

dkhntrdstn said:


> That a other topic right there. Maybe we should just ban all hunting in clubs,privit land. every where is open to every one to hunt where they want to and on anybody land.


Huh?


----------



## Mojo1

> stuckduck said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont get what the point of the sticker is... There is no inspection on the boat just put your money in an envolope, mail it and bang you get your sticker. then to charge non res. more, what a load of crap. they are raising the money for something, just hope it goes to fight the mussle. I bet it will end up in the genral fund or maybe just part of it will.. any way I do fill better now.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree.I just hope Utah don't start doing this crap.
Click to expand...

Now do you really believe the DNR will turn down jumping on this cash cow now that everyone else has started?

We might as well get ready to buy those stickers here in Utah, it's just a matter of time.
Stuckduck, according to the Wyoming DNR site, the sticker is to fund their program/effort to fight them. They are also seeking public comment on their proposed control program, check it out. Here's the link http://gf.state.wy.us/

I don't think they will stop those zebra mussels but I tend to agree we need to try and that takes money, so I understand the fund raising. I just don't like how they stick it to the non-residents with those prices. I wish Utah used the same system as most of the southern states do. Those states impose the same reciprocal fee structure on their neighboring states residents as those neighboring states charge their re hunters/outdoorsman. 
Simple explanation if Wyoming charges $XXX for ______ tag for Utahns, then Wyoming hunters pay the same $xxx amount for the same tag here in Utah.


----------



## rjefre

I got my postcard last week too. I won't be hunting in Wyoming this year. It really sucks that they charge more for a non-resident boat. They can jam it.

It is too late to make a difference now, but this is what I just sent in to them as my comment:
*Topic: Aquatic Invasive species Sticker--The fact that you are charging more money for a non-resident boat is a steaming pantload of crap. I will not be buying a Wyoming license this year or any year herafter.*
R


----------



## Mojo1

rjefre said:


> I got my postcard last week too. I won't be hunting in Wyoming this year. It really sucks that they charge more for a non-resident boat. They can jam it.
> 
> It is too late to make a difference now, but this is what I just sent in to them as my comment:
> *Topic: Aquatic Invasive species Sticker--The fact that you are charging more money for a non-resident boat is a steaming pantload of crap. I will not be buying a Wyoming license this year or any year herafter.*
> R


 :lol: I never use a boat up there so in my comment I proposed that they go to a per launch/use fee, that way the biggest users pay the most. I haven't got a response yet!


----------



## Donttreadonme

I am sorry guys but what is the big deal about them charging more for out of state boat users? You pay MORE to hunt there as an out of stater, you pay MORE to fish their as an out of stater. Is it really that big of a deal that they charge you more to run a boat there? 

I am honestly not trying to sound like a dink here but I just don't get what the fuss is all about. Will you stop running your boats here when (not if, when) Utah starts requiring a similar stamp? You have always had to pay to play, cost rises and additional fees will always be charged in the future. The states want to fight the problem before it gets totally out of hand and they need money to do so. Where will that money come from if not from the stamps? 

That is my rant. Now go ahead and fire away at me.


----------



## Mojo1

Actually I think they are pouring all that money into an empty hole, they aren't going to be able to stop the spread.


----------



## Fowlmouth

Mojo1 said:


> Actually I think they are pouring all that money into an empty hole, they aren't going to be able to stop the spread.


+1 just another damned excuse for more money.


----------



## Donttreadonme

Mojo1 said:


> Actually I think they are pouring all that money into an empty hole, they aren't going to be able to stop the spread.


The same could be said about phrag around the GSL yet several who are complaining about this stamp have suggested something similar to raise funds for that fight.

Just saying....


----------



## Fowlmouth

stamps, stickers and fee after fee won't do any good unless the money actually goes where it was originally intended. Remember the habitat stamp for small game? What fund did all that money actually go to? hmmmmm Big Game if I remember correctly. If there is that big of a problem with invasive species then charge an extra fee to users at the specific waters where the problem is, not everywhere. 
Also, in regards to the phrag problem there should be an entrance fee to bikers, hikers and bird watchers on all WMA's. These people use the area just like hunters do, so why should hunters be the only group flipping the bill? I know that's a whole different topic... :roll:


----------



## king eider

Joel Draxler said:


> The same could be said about phrag around the GSL yet several who are complaining about this stamp have suggested something similar to raise funds for that fight.
> 
> Just saying....


That is a good point Joel. Kinda puts it into perspective doesnt it.


----------



## Skye Hansen

I can see that they need more money to be able to fight the cause before it gets out of hand. However, there is a point that charging fees can get out of hand. I think that most people would be okay with charging the fees if they felt that the money would go towards the problem. But without them checking your boat how do they solve the problem. Having a sticker doesn't mean the boat is clean. I fish in Idaho a lot and will probably buy a sticker, but that doesn't mean that I am happy as can be to donate another twenty bucks to the program. If you want to rant about them charging more go for it. I think the Gov. just jumped on this because they saw a way to make more money.


----------



## dkhntrdstn

Joel Draxler said:


> The same could be said about phrag around the GSL yet several who are complaining about this stamp have suggested something similar to raise funds for that fight.
> 
> Just saying....


Yea but they are spending the money on the phrag around the GSL.They are a least burning it.


Fowlmouth said:


> stamps, stickers and fee after fee won't do any good unless the money actually goes where it was originally intended. Remember the habitat stamp for small game? What fund did all that money actually go to? hmmmmm Big Game if I remember correctly. If there is that big of a problem with invasive species then charge an extra fee to users at the specific waters where the problem is, not everywhere.
> Also, in regards to the phrag problem there should be an entrance fee to bikers, hikers and bird watchers on all WMA's. These people use the area just like hunters do, so why should hunters be the only group flipping the bill? I know that's a whole different topic... :roll:


+1


----------



## RJ-Max4

Darin Noorda said:


> [quote="Joel Draxler":12nrobj3]
> The same could be said about phrag around the GSL yet several who are complaining about this stamp have suggested something similar to raise funds for that fight.
> 
> Just saying....


That is a good point Joel. Kinda puts it into perspective doesnt it.[/quote:12nrobj3]

I agree, the extra funds raised would help fight the battle!


----------



## rjefre

I guess I could see charging *commercial* boaters from out of state a higher fee, but it seems unfair to target an out of state private boat. They don't charge private vehicle out of staters extra fees to *drive* in Wyoming. They charge non-resident fees for hunting and fishing because every out of state tag issued may reduce the resident's opportunity for that fish/game. A boat, an ATV, or a vehicle is non-consumptive in as far as fishing and hunting goes, and no one is deprived of their opportunity to boat on a Wyoming water by allowing a non-resident to launch. It may be different on a rafting river where only a designated number of permits are given to run a particualar section (which allows non-residents to displace residents in usage), but there are no restrictions on pleasure boating so the extra fee is arbitrary and capricious.
R
P.S. If Utah ever made a stamp to raise $ for phrag control, it would make no sense at all to charge a non-resident more money for that stamp. that would be rediculous.


----------



## Skye Hansen

rjefre said:


> P.S. If Utah ever made a stamp to raise $ for phrag control, it would make no sense at all to charge a non-resident more money for that stamp. that would be rediculous.


+1


----------



## dkhntrdstn

rjefre said:


> P.S. If Utah ever made a stamp to raise $ for phrag control, it would make no sense at all to charge a non-resident more money for that stamp. that would be rediculous.


+2


----------



## rjefre

You know what else is ridiculous? The fact that I misspelled ridiculous and a few other words in my last post. Please excuse my poor grammer, sometimes I get in a hurry and don't re-read what I write before hitting the "submit" button. 
R


----------



## Donttreadonme

From the Wyoming Game and Fish site:



> *Where does the money for the decals go?
> *
> Fees collected for the AIS decals will fund the AIS program along with a General Fund Appropriation. These fees will pay for programs to educate the public about AIS, prevention efforts to keep AIS from being introduced into Wyoming such as watercraft inspections, enforcement, and implementation of AIS regulations.


From Idaho's Game and Fish site:



> *Q. What will the fees cover?
> *
> A. The fees generated from the sale of IISF stickers will fund vessel inspections, washing stations and informational materials that will assist Idaho with preventing the introduction of aquatic invasive species like quagga mussels. For additional information, contact the Idaho Department of Agriculture.


I couldn't find in Idaho where a specific fund was named where this money would be deposited. I am sure it is written in the actual law but I don't care to take the time sifting through it.

I don't like to see Wyoming appropriating part of the funds to the general fund, they have plenty of $$ in that fund already. I don't agree with charging a fee for one program then using that money for something different. If any government fee is going to be introduced, the funding needs to go directly to that specified program.

So is it the fact that there is a sticker required at all that has people so up in arms or is it just because out of staters are being charged more?

I still just can't imagine why $30 would be a deal breaker. When you look at all the $$ one spends on a vehicle to pull a boat, the boat it's self and gas in both, $30 additional once a year just doesn't seem too daunting of a price to pay to me.


----------



## dkhntrdstn

Joel Draxler said:


> So is it the fact that there is a sticker required at all that has people so up in arms or is it just because out of staters are being charged more?


Yes Joel that what got people up to tight about. You pay 90 bucks for your linc and then you got to turn around and pay another 30 bucks to take your boat up to Idaho.Like they said the money is not going to what it should go all of it.any was.


----------



## Fowlmouth

Joel Draxler said:


> I still just can't imagine why $30 would be a deal breaker. When you look at all the $$ one spends on a vehicle to pull a boat, the boat it's self and gas in both, $30 additional once a year just doesn't seem too daunting of a price to pay to me.


You just answered your own question why we hate to pay more. eg: look at the money people spend for boats, the vehicles to pull them, the gas they use and then fee after fee to use the **** things. $30 may not seem like a lot of money but when you start adding up $30 here and another $30 there, it gets expensive in a hurry. I license 3 vehicles, 2 ATV's and a boat each year and that is expensive enough (especially this year with the increase the state imposed) I'm just saying when is enough enough? If we keep giving in with $30 here and $30 there we will continue to see fees being initiated by all groups. Next we will be asked to pay a fee to use our ATV's on public land to help with restoration projects. We all know the money never goes where it is supposed to and it ends up somewhere totally non related to what it was for to begin with.
I don't think the fees should be more for non residents. I guess the next question is: Is Utah going to initiate a sticker program for boaters?


----------



## dkhntrdstn

Fowlmouth said:


> Joel Draxler said:
> 
> 
> 
> I still just can't imagine why $30 would be a deal breaker. When you look at all the $$ one spends on a vehicle to pull a boat, the boat it's self and gas in both, $30 additional once a year just doesn't seem too daunting of a price to pay to me.
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your own question why we hate to pay more. eg: look at the money people spend for boats, the vehicles to pull them, the gas they use and then fee after fee to use the **** things. $30 may not seem like a lot of money but when you start adding up $30 here and another $30 there, it gets expensive in a hurry. I license 3 vehicles, 2 ATV's and a boat each year and that is expensive enough (especially this year with the increase the state imposed) I'm just saying when is enough enough? If we keep giving in with $30 here and $30 there we will continue to see fees being initiated by all groups. Next we will be asked to pay a fee to use our ATV's on public land to help with restoration projects. We all know the money never goes where it is supposed to and it ends up somewhere totally non related to what it was for to begin with.
Click to expand...

well put there fowlmouth.


----------



## Vanilla

Probably won't be the most popular post in this thread, but here's my take on these stickers and fees. 

1- Running a boat in Utah or in another state is not a right, but a privilege. A privilege that is subject to regulations and requirements (I.E. fees). So when people ask, "When is enough enough?", my answer is, when the regulatory bodies in charge of that activity say it is. Yep, it feels like people are getting "nickeled and dimed" but the fact is, if you want to play, you play by the rules. 

2- I have no issue with a state charging out of state users more to use their resources in general. (I disagree that running a boat in another state's waters is like driving on their roads...but that's another topic.) And I have no issue with a State putting the burden on preventing and attacking a problem on those who they view cause the problems. Let's take Idaho for example. There is not a lake in Idaho (to my knowledge) that has confirmed mussels in them. So from their perspective, where is the problem going to come from? People coming from states that do have the problem. My understanding is the Idaho stamp goes directly to fund the check stations and decontamination stations they run. What is the problem with that? I really don't see any issue with saying, "You can come here, if you follow the rules, decontaminate your boat, and then fund the stations that will make sure you follow the rules since you are the people that are going to bring this problem to us." 

Fact of the matter is this: if people followed the rules in the first place invasive species wouldn't be a problem. It is only a matter of time before lots of waters are contaminated because too many people run around with the attitude of "What good will it do, it's going to happen anyway!" If we're not good stewards of our resources, who will be?


----------



## dubob

Joel Draxler said:


> From the Wyoming Game and Fish site:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Where does the money for the decals go?
> *
> Fees collected for the AIS decals will fund the AIS program along with a General Fund Appropriation.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't like to see Wyoming appropriating part of the funds to the general fund, they have plenty of $$ in that fund already.
Click to expand...

Joel,

I believe what the WY G&F statement is saying is that the AIS Program is funded by the decal fees AND a General Fund Appropriation; not that some of the decal fees are going into the General Fund.


----------



## Donttreadonme

dubob said:


> Joel Draxler said:
> 
> 
> 
> From the Wyoming Game and Fish site:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Where does the money for the decals go?
> *
> Fees collected for the AIS decals will fund the AIS program along with a General Fund Appropriation.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't like to see Wyoming appropriating part of the funds to the general fund, they have plenty of $$ in that fund already.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Joel,
> 
> I believe what the WY G&F statement is saying is that the AIS Program is funded by the decal fees AND a General Fund Appropriation; not that some of the decal fees are going into the General Fund.
Click to expand...

Thanks Bob, now that you point it out, I can see that an appropriation FROM the general fund TO the AIS program is what Wyoming is doing. See, this is why my simpleton mind can't comprehend the issue people are having with these stamps.

TS30 great post.


----------



## wyogoob

Recognizing that controlling AIS is more than a game and fish issue, Wyoming legislators appropriated a one-time allocation of $1.5 million (best I can remember) from the General Fund.

The Wyoming Game and Fish Dept tries to maintain it's independence. The agency over the years has stayed clear of seeking money from the state's General Fund and the legislative oversight it would bring.

And FYI, the last I knew, over 60% of the Wyoming Game and Fish Dept's operating income came from non-residents.


----------

