Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fish Wildlife Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fish & Wildlife asks legislature to preserve authority for paddler access fee amid repeal effort
Summary
Fish & Wildlife officials urged lawmakers to preserve statutory authority to set an "area license" that would charge paddlers a modest fee to use 205 access areas, saying repeal language in the House could strip the department of administrative tools and unintentionally broaden requirements for other fees.
My name is Jason Bachelder, the commissioner, told the Senate Finance Committee that his department is proposing an "area license" to allow paddlers to pay a small fee to help maintain 205 fishing-access areas and related kiosks, mowing and snow removal. "This area license is essentially a license for folks who don't already pay into our ability to have fishing access," Bachelder said, adding that the proposed fee would be "less than the cost of a fishing license" and that existing fishing, hunting and motorboat registrations would exempt users from the new charge.
The department estimates full build-out could generate roughly $250,000–$290,000 over several years; Bachelder said a one-time $50,000 appropriation would not substitute for an ongoing funding stream. "We're looking to add funding to our base budget which would be used ... to fund these access areas," he said.
Tam Smith, general counsel for Fish & Wildlife, told the committee that bill language now under consideration (notably a repeal in section 22) would do more than simply require legislative review of a new paddler fee. "From a purely administrative standpoint ... this complicates things," she said, describing how the statute and the department's existing rule have been used narrowly for camp tuition, limited licenses and occasional special-use permits. Smith said the bill would repeal the current rule and force the department into more burdensome rulemaking and reporting requirements to set what it now uses only in a limited way.
Committee members asked whether a narrower fix — keeping the rule but directing the department to bring new, novel fees to the legislature — would address the concern; counsel said that targeted language or a clarifying amendment to 4132 could accomplish the committee's policy objective without producing the unintended administrative consequences described in testimony.
The committee did not take a final vote. Members agreed to work with department counsel and the committee's counsel to draft language that would preserve the department's limited fee-setting authority for existing programs while ensuring that newly established recreational-access fees would be subject to legislative review.
The committee is expected to circulate draft amendment language and consider it before formal floor action.
