Big Cliff Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 So why not just increase enforcement and fines to increase revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishindevil Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 I WOULD GLADLY PAY ALOT MORE FOR MY SEASONAL LICENCE FEES IF THEY WOULD HIRE ALOT MORE CO'S AND DOUBLE OR TRIPPLE THE FINES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKRISONER Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) I guess they have to do something to replace the tax revenu they aren't collecting since gas prices are dropping and more people are quitting smoking. As much as the rumour is that Smoking is a revenue generator, in a country with free healthcare, the million dollar cancer treatments far far far out spend the revenue collected from tax on smokes. It is true about taxing the extra 2 bucks on the fee though. But 2 bucks to fish, id personally pay $200 if it came down to it. I also agree that I would be willing to pay hundreds more if it meant that i saw more CO's nailing the guys taking slot fish and running over limits. Edited November 14, 2014 by AKRISONER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 You should see some of the fee increases they are levying, or proposing to levy. The worst ones are the non-general public ones, the ones that get little to no attention. For example, an MTO encroachment permit (a permit to work with the MTO right of way) is currently $520. It will be $2,080 in two years! They want that deficit paid off! The $2 increase for fishing doesn't bother me, it does a bit more for hunting. It's already difficult to legally harvest a deer/moose/bear especially if you work full time and can't get a lot of time off. If they opened up more deer tags or gave a few more days in riffle season, I'd accept higher fees. Maybe I'm just pissed that I can't seem to find a deer when I know they are everywhere haha. I kind of agree that seniors should pay for licenses, maybe not in full, half or something. A lot of people still work well into retirement, they can income split and generally spend less with age. Demographics are much different now. One truck load of scrap metal, or not eating out one time pays for your year-round fishing license...perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeytier Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 One truck load of scrap metal, or not eating out one time pays for your year-round fishing license...perspective. That's it. A conservation-minded angler can still harvest enough fish to eat fish a couple times a week all year for under 30 bucks. Hell of a deal as far as I'm concerned. The $2 fee doesn't bother me, but what does bother me is that the MNR will likely never become a funding priority for the province, and will be perpetually underfunded. I'd argue that they do a damn fine job with the hand they've been dealt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Bag Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 A toonie! Really? You guys need a reality check. Open your eyes and look around, Homeless living on our streets. No food, No shelter. Many here will drop well over a grand on a custom rod and reel. Yet you'll whine about a toonie. Get a grip!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmokestackLightnin Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Lew; I don't mind paying a $2.00 fee, if it helps. However, as a seniors I / we don't need a card, or licence, so there doesn't appear to me that there is any place for the MNR to apply their $2.00 fee. Deer and moose draws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Farmer Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Makes sense to me when were taking pension cuts. And you believe them when the licence fees were supposed to go towards our fisheries in the beginning. I have a lure that guaranties to catch fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adempsey Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Someone posted a link this MNR discussion paper on another board that talks about the new fee. Thought it would be useful to post it here. It's on page 20. Basically, the revenue stream is not keeping up with the costs. They are charging the $2 to help pay for processing the licenses. Sure it's only $2, but that's not the point is it? My issue is that government tends to be incredibly inefficient and stagnant. Charging more money or taxes or fees is the easy way out. At least they are exploring new options to increase revenue as per that document. Of course, reducing costs and increasing efficiency should be the priority. Something that all levels of government fail to accomplish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entropy Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 This sounds like fun. A surcharge across Canada on outdoor equipment, to fund fish and wildlife conservation programs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entropy Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 or this • Large or across the board increases to existing licence fees to cover the cost of the fish and wildlife program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beans Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Are you smoking "funny" cigarettes Lew ???...The little increases to your pensions won't cover the cost of a licence and the $2 increase...DAMN THEM !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lew Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Are you smoking "funny" cigarettes Lew ???...The little increases to your pensions won't cover the cost of a licence and the $2 increase...DAMN THEM !!! Almost need some of them funny cigarettes to put up with our governments Norm LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danjang Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Someone posted a link this MNR discussion paper on another board that talks about the new fee. Thought it would be useful to post it here. It's on page 20. Basically, the revenue stream is not keeping up with the costs. They are charging the $2 to help pay for processing the licenses. Sure it's only $2, but that's not the point is it? My issue is that government tends to be incredibly inefficient and stagnant. Charging more money or taxes or fees is the easy way out. At least they are exploring new options to increase revenue as per that document. Of course, reducing costs and increasing efficiency should be the priority. Something that all levels of government fail to accomplish. That report highlighted three main drivers of the reduced revenue experienced by the special purpose account. The other two that you didn't mention are HUGE! 1. The decline of the fishing population. In ~33% of the 2010 fishing license holders did not renew in 2011, a significant blow to the money generated. 2. Baby boomers reaching retirement age. Much like the CPP issue, the number of people reaching that magic number will continue to increase. Combine that with the younger generations being less inclined to enjoy the natural resources, we're going to be in big trouble there. 3. The MNRF is not doing enough to recoup costs. Licensing is not covering the cost of managing the fisheries. This finding was part of the Drummond report, a liberal initiative.' In addition, the increasing threat of climate change, invasive species and disease will continue to put a strain on fisheries management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misfish Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 (edited) Doesn't bother me. Guys who hunt deer pay almost $50 for there tag alone. That right there pisses me off the most. PLUS ADD ON THE SMALL GAMES TAG. Is there a market price these days on venison? Talked to a few fellas this week that hunted. A group of 12 guys had one doe tag. They seen more does then they had seen in years. They asked why the low number of doe tags in their area. Answer? The hard winter last year. OMG Edited November 14, 2014 by Brian B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBCregal Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Irish, That's how I read it as well. Fishing license isn't broken down by species but more by limits so everything is covered under one license. Hunting licenses are all bought separately so to me it looks like they'd all be subject to an individual fee. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 Tell me why I should pay for a licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ketchenany Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 $2.00 plus HST I bet. this government can't get enough from us. "NO tax increases" - just more service charges. I love when I see a government advertising and they add the tag line "Paid by the Government of Ontario" Think about it, who gave them the money in the first place. I want to change to "Paid by the PEOPLE of Ontario". For the amount I fished lately they may not see it. As they haven't seen a penny from the 407 fiasco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 Tell me why I should pay for a licence. Cause a lying, cheating,stealing, inept, corrupt, incompetent, misguided, valueless, ineffective, dysfunctional, unproductive and more often than not as worthless as a third nut provincial government says you have to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cram Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 Every state or province I've fished in has had a license you had to pay for. The gov gouges us on a lot of fronts, but I don't think this is one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 Well I think I'm just going to stop fishing, $2 is outrageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRIFTER_016 Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 $4 on years you have to replace your card Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 Thanks Moxie. They only nibble so you can't set the hook. You are paying them to steal your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Farmer Posted November 15, 2014 Report Share Posted November 15, 2014 (edited) Every state or province I've fished in has had a license you had to pay for. The gov gouges us on a lot of fronts, but I don't think this is one of them. I'm going into business selling those lures. Edited November 15, 2014 by Fish Farmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now