Pontoon boat owners read this

Senate Bill 1028 - Non-motorized Boat Fees Proposed

Senators Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day) and Kate Brown (D-Portland) have
introduced Senate Bill 1028. This political odd couple is trying to find a
compromise to the issue of river access. The bill assures public access to
Oregon's rivers and streams, but it also packs significant non-motorized
boat fees.

The fee schedule proposed is $2/foot every biennium and a registration
sticker must be displayed. The fees would be paid to the Oregon Marine Board
for additional law enforcement, information and education, recreational
facilities and improved access to waterways for recreational use. A
transferable registration fee for people who own more than one boat may be
purchased for $20, however, only one boat may be on the river at one time.


SB 1028 has been referred to the Senate Rules committee. Those interested in
making their voice heard should contact the following Senate Rules committee
members and their own personal State Senator and Representative.


Here's some contact information -

Senator Kate Brown (D-SE Portland)
Rules Committee Chair
Capitol Phone: 503.986.1700
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE, S-323, Salem, OR 97301
Email: sen.katebrown@state.or.us

Senator Jason Atkinson (R-Jacksonville)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1702
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE., S-216, Salem, OR, 97301
Email: sen.jasonatkinson@state.or.us

Senator Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1950
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE., S-223, Salem, OR, 97301
Email: sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us

Senator Charlie Ringo (D-Beaverton)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1717
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE., S-318, Salem, OR, 97301
Email: sen.charlieringo@state.or.us

Senator Frank Shields (D-E Portland)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1724
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE., S-309, Salem, OR, 97301
Email: sen.frankshields@state.or.us

Check the following to find your State Senator and Representative:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/index.html

[TheCamel]

Stew:
Thank you for the "heads up". I just sent the State Representative for our area, an e-mail advising that I do not support the proposed legislation.

For those of you that are represented(lets not get in to how well you are represented) by Kelley Wirth, her e-mail address is (link)rep.kelleywirth@state.or.us

[Joe Schwab]

Why would you not support fees that would increase access and improve facilities? Who is supposed to pay for them? Don't floaters impact a stream also? Look at what the Deschutes fees have done.

Same with bicycles being supported of the backs of motorists. I ride bicycles and would gladly pay a fee if there was one.

There is no free ride!

Joe...put down the Kool-Aid Why should pontooners or any non motorized boaters have to pay FOR RIGHTS THEY ALREADY HAVE!!!!!!!
I'm pretty sure most motorized boaters feel, and rightly so, they already pay enough.
SB1028 is a bad bill and SB423 is 1000% better People should throw their support behind that!
You can bet any access bill Ferrioli is backing will only benefit land owners.

[Chromaflage]

How do they propose to measure/classify float tubes? How are they going to define pontoons from u-boats, float tubes, etc.? Are water toys next? What a can of worms.... Just more extortion if you ask me.

I'll tell you why I wouldn't support it - once it starts, they can increase fees at will. Then they start siphoning off part of the fees to pay for some other underfunded program, etc. Pretty soon, you won't be able step foot on the shores of a river or lake without paying a standing fee. Rather than identifying waste, un-needed programs, and opportunities to save money, they propose to collect a fee and raise taxes.

CrF

How do they propose to measure/classify float tubes? How are they going to define pontoons from u-boats, float tubes, etc.? Are water toys next? What a can of worms.... Just more extortion if you ask me.

I'll tell you why I wouldn't support it - once it starts, they can increase fees at will. Then they start siphoning off part of the fees to pay for some other underfunded program, etc. Pretty soon, you won't be able step foot on the shores of a river or lake without paying a standing fee. Rather than identifying waste, un-needed programs, and opportunities to save money, they propose to collect a fee and raise taxes.

CrF

Exactly CF

[Chromaflage]

Here's a quick and dirty note I threw together and sent to my state legislators. Feel free to copy, modify and send to your:

Sen. Metsger and Rep. Smith,

Regarding Senate Bill 1028:

I would like to urge you to vote against SB1028, which proposes to institute fees for the use of non-motorized boats and water craft. I see much difficulty in distinguishing between a non-motorized boat, an inner tube, water toys, floatation devices and float tubes. The users of such devices already are required to pay parking fees, day use fees, BLM fees, etc. Further many who use these devices are already paying a premium for motorized boats in registration fees, day use fees and launch fees. It seems to me a bit unfair to single one type of user of our lakes, rivers and streams to carry the burden of increased enforcement, maintenance, access etc. Regarding the transferable registration between two water craft, to me this is an enforcement nightmare. The bill itself will REQUIRE additional enforcement, which, of course, will need to be additionally funded....it seems to me that this is a built-in mechanism for perpetual fee increases. Access to recreational areas is challenging and costly enough. Please urge a no vote on this bill.

Thank you,

[garyk]

Thanks for the post. Perhaps you should edit the title to include, prams, canoes, inflatables, etc.

AND you can bet if the Registration Numbers are supposedly to identify wrong-doers, why exempt those on foot. I promise they'll extend that fee to EVERYONE that somehow uses the river.

I gotta calm down before I write letter to Sen.Brown.

[Fish-n-Fever]

What's next? A registration fee for Life Preservers?
Bobbers? Kids in inner tubes?
It's a money hungry government we have. It is not about safety it is about money, and money that will NEVER be used where they say it will anyway. TAX everybody that walks within view of a water way and they will have plenty of money. (Last comment was pure sarcasm)

That's my opinion.
Ron

[Elkguide]

thanks for the info and the heads up



Elkguide
Casey

[freespool]

You can bet any access bill Ferrioli is backing will only benefit land owners.

--------------------

Stew, you are right, anything with Ted Ferrioli's name on it, will be bad news for those who hold our river access dearly. He has demonstrated time and again his disregard for our federally guaranteed right to access our rivers and streams. He represents all that is bad about out state government.


salmon hugger

[Paddlefish]

Hmmm . . .

Speaking as an avid bicyclist and paddler-fisherman, I'm not opposed, in principle, to "paying my way," even though none of my land- or water-borne vehicles requires a fraction of the infrastructure, space, or facilities required by RVs, SUVs or 22-foot-long jet sleds.

My collective 119 linear feet of seven canoes and touring kayaks, however, "got their padles up" a bit at this one -- and only one or two of them are likely to be interested in the kinds of "debatably navigable" waterways we're talking about.

Even so, I think I could support it with assurance that nearly 100% of the moneys collected were actually spent on the proclaimed benefits, rather than administration of the program. (Yeah, who just said, "NO WAY!")

Put the same money in the hands of unpaid, volunteer users of those same resources, match the desires with the expenditures, even partner with those foundations and organizations devoted to purchasing and conserving valuable natural sites and previously private properties.

Then we might have something worth enthusiastically voting for.

[clacksteel]

Unless this fee is going to drastically increase our river rights or the quality of the facilities I won't support it. I am just curious, lets say that you have a pontoon boat that you put a motor on when you are in lakes (electric), and then remove and just float when you are on rivers, do you have to pay for both the motorized boat registration and the floater registration?

[Beaver1]

GGGgggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

This blows me away.

Get me a ream of paper and a large cup of coffee. Its letter writing time!