This year in MN therea was a $16 fee/license required for your fishouse to be towed on the lake to use for the duration of your stay. It used to be a license was needed only if it was left unattended. I believe (my opinion) is there are a greater number of fishouses whose wheel system and worth preclude leaving it on the ice unattended when with a push of a button it can be hauled back home. The state, out of jealousy or spite, cannot leave the money issue alone and added the fee. What, I ask, is the benefit of the added fee? Most people i talk to are not concerned and pay the 16 dollars just because.

Maybe the money goes back to manage the fishery?

The license to fish in the first place is supposed to go there. Now, even if you pulled your shack on the ice as a love nest to share with the old lady and didn't even 'wet your line' you still pay for the fishery.

Just pay up you cheapskate.lol.

Love wasn't free before this fee and it's just become a bit more expensive for the greatest show on ice.

Drive the road between Red lake and Baudette I bet I saw 40 wheelhouses.

Lot of lovers, I guess.

And to think you are even allowed ONE walleye on some lakes.

look out for frostbite!.lol

Next year they'll probably charge an additional fee for the old lady to park the grocery getter on the public access while out enjoying the love nest.

If you can afford $10,000 to $30,000 for a fish house that you can park on the lake for the weekend.... Towed by your $70,000 truck. You can afford to pay $16.

But I guess, if it supports the fishery...

Some Minnesotans can't resist the call to class warfare.

Maybe when senator groper resigns Minnesotans will elect more conservative candidates that won't try to get every penny they can. Your state is fairly liberal....someone has to pay for all that "free stuff." !

He has been replaced by another liberal as appointed by Governor goofy. I hold no hope that Republicans will run anyone outside of 6 degrees difference than Handsy Feanken. The beat goes on.

Just pay them and be quick about it. Fishing isn't a right, it's a privilege bestowed upon you by your Government.....

Uh huh. Can you prove it it actually goes there?

Osky

That's kind of your fault. If you southerners hadn't flocked to my lake, we'de still have a 14 fish limit up here .

No sir. Even if it did I wouldn't support it.

Agreed.

Osky

Just more money the govt can suck out of ya... I'm sure it's "said" to go somewhere important...pffft.

$10,000 to $30,000 for a fish shanty?I'm assuming this is sarcasm.

Taxation is theft!

And having to pay $16.00 for the "privilege"of being able to pull a shanty out on the so you can ice fish without freezing to death is stupid,and that's not sarcasm.

Perhaps that fee should be based on the value of the shanty. A $300 shanty at $16, and a $30,000 shanty at the proportional equivalent...

And that money should go back just to fund poor locals that live around the lake.

In all fairness he is from Pillager. Is that close to Plunderer?

If it's not worth it, don't do it.
Sounds like you're wanting something for nothing. Or, should fish and game work for nothing? And, if you haven't noticed, most things cost more over time-luckily this fee is not a necessity.

See, here's one that would agree with my first post lol

It takes a Canadian to point out the obvious?

It does go directly to the game and fish fund so proceeds are used to manage the fishery.

Like it or not, the history here is that all fish houses used to be licensed, with proceeds going to manage the fishery. As portables (the fold-up clams type) became more common the Legislature exempted them from requiring a license. Then the wheel house explosion happened and most of the old permanent ice shacks disappeared. Fish house revenue dried up for fish management and need to be replaced. Either fishing license needed to go even higher or replace the old license on wheeled fish houses. That is what happened.

I'd guess it to cover the cost of cleaning up after everyone and to cover some of the costs to rescue the ones to dumb to get off before the ice breaks loose and they drift away, lol.

Yikes. Is that really you Gry....?

Osky

Nope. They already charge the individuals for that.

Osky

Knew they had to charge for that somewhere. That on top of the 16?

Sportsmen are the first to add fees to exclude others from their endeavor. It's not unlike other licensing schemes from hairdressers to doctors.

No joking about the prices. Flat screen tvs, toilets, and kitchens.

https://outletrecreation.com/IceHouseList.aspx

The lakes are full of ridiculous houses. It's about time they had to pay something. If I build a house for a few hundred bucks and leave it on the lake I have to pay for a shelter license. But until now These guys could pull a small mansion out on the lake and live there for days without and license.

I am sure the dnr will use the extra money to keep the accesses plowed out and usable through the winter.

That could be sarcasm

Pat if your boat is longer than mine should you pay more? I don't think you should.

Osky

Interesting.Here in Michigan our fisheries cover 4 of the Great Lakes,and of course all the inland lakes and tributaries.We have a world class walleye fishery,outstanding bass fishing,salmon and steelhead,I'm just covering whats in the great lakes of course the trout fishery and inland lakes are altogether different.I bought my license in Nov. and I believe it was $30.00,but that included my trout stamp too.Once you fork that over your done.I had no idea other states charged for such things.

Your lake??????

Happening all over they have been taking turns raising taxes at every level of State government from vehicle tags, property, hunting tags, preference points and sales tax just to name a few.

If we ever get the NR thing figured out the fee will be $1000 based on our track record.

Gotta keep it fair

Do you pay a fee to have a house on a lake?



We'd still have a 20 fish limit if you guys were still netting lol.

That's exactly how watercraft licensing works... though I don't know what they charge for a houseboat compared to a fishing boat of any size.

What an interesting read. I never knew ice fishing was on such a luxury level. The people I have seen ice fishing was sitting on a padded bucket without even a wind block. I never imagined those ice houses lined up like a trailer park.

Does anyone wonder if the government employs people who just drive around and look at our world for new taxes and fees to stick people with?

It's time for bikes, kayaks and canoes to start paying their share.

You'll see some real crying when bikers have to register their bikes and buy trail passes. Register all watercraft.

I have to register my boats, camper and snowmachine. I pay launch fees. I buy trail passes.

Time to fleece someone else.

I never heard of a fee for an ice shanty before. Really feel like it would be time to brake out the 5 gallon pail and a good jacket before I paid a launch fee for a wood box. Then again its 0 degrees now so maybe sell the shack and buy a pop up.

Let's pass the hat for Flyinflop, apparently he needs $16 ............ I'm in for a nickel

+I don't think your going to hear as much complaining from the silent sport users as many here feel they will do. Many already support financially many conservation and outdoor organizations and clubs etc. What is strange to me is why legislators and agencies have not sought more to tap into that resource. Maybe they don't want them to have much of a voice and one way to limit their voice is to not ask for financial support.

Bryce

I'm sure fister has never seen a fee or license he doesn't support.

Many of these wheeled fishouses are used as campers in the summer time and alread pay a license fee to travel down the highways and biways of the state.

And after I was going to give you a nickel You're not very nice.

Maybe if you call your legislators you could ask for public access be plowed during for the winter if your looking for an added benefit.

Kre, we have a license on canoes over a certain size as well. They hit you for whatever they can here in MN and the sheeple smile and take it. None of our neighbors have this fee. None. It's not about money, it's about principal.

I notice the new law also says if you are more than 200 feet from you flip over it needs a license. So now what, when I run over to visit the neighbor 201 feet away I need a license on my flip overs?

If this went through legislature and I'm sure it did I'm mad at myself for not seeing it.

It's just another tax.

Canoe over 10ft have to be licensed, when you spend as much as MN does you have to get the money from somewhere. Steve, get yourself a 200 ft rope, tie it around your waste to house, always in compliance.

What am I going to do if I'm a half mile away eating lunch with my companions? So now I'm going to have to load my stuff up and pull it with me or else buy a license because someone else thinks it's only 16 dollars? But wait! I have three of these things.

3 ? Well hey big spender!
As Finn said I firmly believe this state has people on the payroll who's only job is to cook up more taxes.

Osky

Boy, I won't complain about buying a kayak launch permit in PA anymore. Sounds like your paid officials are hosing you sportsmen in Minnesota.

Thats SOCIALISM at its best/worst!

Does a Saturday Night Live idiot come to mind?

I'm one of those silent users. I bike and canoe. As a cyclist, we would love to pay fees for the very reason Bryce mentions. Most of us are begging the government to take our money.

I think I should have done a better job of explaining what I have. I have two of the otter flip overs and just bought a hub pop up.

I'm thinking you inferred I had three of the wheeled castle type houses. I'm just a poor pipeliner lol. Actually I don't want anything to do with a wheeled house. You couldn't hardly give me one and if I won one, I'd use it for camping. It would never see the ice.

Well, I'll be danged. I've never heard of the government turning away free money. Send your checks, I'm sure voluntarism would get your own money better spent than mandating everyone else fork over cash, too.

x2

Here in WI if you own a square stern canoe you pay the boat licensing fee. Any craft using electric motors also needs to be licensed.

Bryce

In Michigan you have to buy a park pass for 11.00 just to park in the parking lot. But then its good for the year.

Lol but thats what the powers that be are afraid of.

This is exactly why I don't want those nonconsumptive users to pay fees. While I hate paying increased license fees as much as anyone, it is what gives us our voice. If we weren't a revenue source, the powers that be would listen even less. Taxing the nonconsumptive users will be the final nail in the coffin for our voices being heard.

Spot on! State natural resource management is not going away. We can have fish and wildlife management financed by dedicated funds generated from hunting, fishing and trapping licenses, or we can broaden the funding to general funds and have the bird watching, tree hugging, granola crunchers, with an equal voice in game and fish management.
My preference is that hunters, trappers and anglers continue calling the shots.

I don't know what other state averages are but in Maine, sportsmen take/harvest about ten percent of our big game population year in/year out.

One out of ten bear, one out of ten deer, one out of ten moose. I had the opportunity to point that out in a Letter to the Editor in one of our states larger newspapers.

That letter was in response to a nonconsumptive user (anti-hunter) who was complaining about how our F&G catered to outdoorsmen. I think it helped put our consumption in a clearer light. I'm in the woods year round and I don't see these nonconsumptive users. They seem to stick to KOA and state parks.

I pay plenty of fees. I'm good with it.

https://www.facebook.com/Hillmans-Resort-Tall-Tales-Tavern-101406583237769/

I don't know if the link worked. It's a video of the most ridiculous fish house I've ever seen, and it's on Red lake right now.



Two storys tall, sleeps 12, and has 20 holes. It's a far cry from sitting on a bucket....

$$$$$ Chaching!

What's your point?

A house like that is borderline retarded, they would catch more fish sitting on a bucket or running and gunning with a snowmobile and an otter flip over. For people who build or rent houses like that, the fishing is secondary. It's more about sitting around, bsing, drinking beer and if a fish happens to swim by it's a bonus.

It's a great and noble thing that you love paying fees. Nothing is stoping you from paying all that your heart desires. Heck send $16 a week if you believe you are getting your money's worth. Form a group of other voluntarists and pool your money for lobbyists if you believe your money will be better spent to influence the divvying up of our natural resources.
However, don't feel that your campaign of making everyone else pay is noble. There is very rarely anything virtuous in force.

Nothing virtuous in force? Do me a favor and tell my ex wife's attorney that.

Osky

Yep, send your money to the govt. They will put it to good use. And yes, all will be used for exactly what they say it will be....BWAHAHAHAHA.

Anyone that believes what the govt says, hasn't worked for them...or for very long.

I have. Its all smoke and mirrors.

You mind pointing out to me where I mentioned I love paying fees? I don't want the dollars paying wardens coming out of the general fund. As mentioned above, that gives the nonconsumptives (antis) more say in how the resource is used. And no one is forcing me to pay a thing, I do it by choice. There's law enforcement to be paid and they don't make enough. Satisfied? Hope so.

So if we don't want others to help fund wildlife and conservation work and research then we need to pony up more, not less unless we want those resources totally not managed, which may change the landscape considerably for many consumptive users. I feel it is better to have other users contribute some skin in the game plus they learn more about managing a resource by being a part of that instead of just letting the demographic changes taking place determine the outcomes over time.

Bryce

Change the first couple of "we"s into "I"s and erase the feeling statement while adding that you promote volantary funding of programs you find useful and we would be in total agreement.

If the bureaucratic governing bodies would spend more time managing the resource and not people it might be an easier sell to ask for more funding.