Support Iceshanty... Get some great gear and forum goodies... Join The Iceshanty Hardwater Militia
HB 255 - Boat Fees AmendmentsThis is in regard to HB255 sponsored by Representative Waldrop. Scott Jenkins initiated a fee structure for the AIS Program back in 2015 I believe. It was a very flawed bill then and the current bill will not fix the flaws. Let me explain.HB255 deals with fees needed to run the Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Program. I am 100% in favor of this program. Mr. Jenkins bill’s first flaw was that it ONLY required the fees to be paid by Utah registered boat owners. Non-resident registered boats got a free ride as did Utah owners of non-registered boats (essentially any water vessel without a motor). The second major flaw was that the fee was attached to the boat registration fee. It SHOULD have been attached to a separate decal; NOT part of the boat registration cost.While HB255 will correct the non-resident registered boat free ride, it does not say in what form the $20 fee will be collected. Since a non-resident boat can operate for up to 60 days in Utah without incurring a registration requirement, how/where will the AIS fee be collected? HB255 just says the fee will be $20 initially. There is no mention about when or where this fee will be collected by the state of Utah.Non-registered water vessel owners – both resident and non-resident – now get a free ride and don’t have to pay the fee. This would include float tubes, row boats, kayaks, paddle/sail boards, etc. They will continue to get a free ride and will not be required to pay the fees to support the AIS Program.If the State of Utah is going to have an AIS Program – and I think they should -, then ALL vessel owners, resident and non-resident, using registered or non-registered water vessels on Utah waters, SHOULD be paying the AIS fee to do so. The mussels causing the problem have no clue as to which water vessels are registered and which aren’t; they will attach themselves to both.Senator Scott Jenkins informed me by email back in 2015 when I contacted him regarding the application of fees to registered Utah boat owners only that he was much more in tune with state issues than any of his constituents and he was better able to determine what was best for the state and that he didn’t need any input to make the right decision on any issue. I would hope that your attitude about your constituents is somewhat better than that.There is a definite need to improve and enhance the Utah AIS Program. HB255, as written, isn’t the way to do that. It should be defeated as written. As a long-term boat owner, I would very much like to be involved with correcting the flaws in the current program. Please let me know your thoughts on the matter.Sincerely
Out of stater here, just saw this and was curious as to why the $20 fee should apply to non-motorized boats? ALL boats (water vessels) can transport invasive species from one body of water to another. ALL boat (water vessel) owners should share the cost to administer the program, not just registered boat (water vessel) owners.Can't waders and wading boots spread invasive species too? Should they pay a fee? Yes, they can. And several states now ban the use of felt soled boots while fishing. There are also a couple of countries that have banned felt soled boots. However, they are NOT classified as a water vessel and I don't know of any state that requires an invasive species decal before using them in a water body.Seems a little over the top to me to have to pay $20 for your kid's kayak that cost $90 at Costco. Wyoming & Idaho charge $30 for their stickers. Idaho charges less for non-motorized; it's only $7 for your kids kayak. I don't know if Wyoming has this or not. Currently Utah does NOT charge anything for unregistered (non-motorized) vessels. They absolutely SHOULD be charging for ANY vessel IMHO.Do non-motorized boats have to be registered in Utah? No, they do not. And I'm okay with that. And that is exactly why I beleive the AIS fee should be to purchase a seperate decal and NOT be added to the boat registration fee. EVERY vessel owner should be required to support and fund this program.We have a number of places where you can rent a tube (literally just a regular tube, nothing fancy) and float down the river for a couple of hours before getting picked up. Would those need to pay the fee? If the state defines it as a water vessel, then yes, a decal should be required to place it in a state water body.We don't have an invasive species fee in WI, but most launches have cleaning stations and signage about how to avoid the spread. Like I said, not trying to provoke, just genuinely curious so I can be well informed if they try to introduce a similar bill here. I agree with you that the language is pretty vague!
I agree with most of what you say, especially the out of state fee. I’m about fed up with buying a Wyoming and Idaho sticker every year, while residents from those states pay nothing to boat in Utah. Here is where I slightly disagree with your stance. I currently own a crestliner, duck boat, Jon boat, 3 kayaks, float tube, 2 river pontoon boats and a paddle board (I know, why wife reminds me all the time- I have 5 bbq’s/smokers too- she is very understanding to my hobbies). There’s no way I will vote or support legislation to pay a fee on each of those. I will however support a transferable sticker or placards that I can move from vessel to vessel. I never use them at the same time. You don’t think I should pay the AIS fee 10x’s per year, do you? I’m thinking a transferable placard to the named owner solves that situation- what’s your thoughts,
I would be perfectly fine paying for a decal for all my watercraft if the funds don’t go to support paying for the useless system we have in place now. Paying an employee to sit in their truck and ask where your boat was last isn’t going to do anything to prevent the spread.
Your talking about adding a fee that doesn’t currently exist. Totally different than a registration or license plates that I knew was law when I bought my boat. I chose that going in. The AIS fee has existed in Utah since 2015 when the $10 fee was added to the boat registration total. I told the idiot that wrote the original bill (State Senator Scott Jenkins) that it was flawed and even discussed it with my legislators and they agreed it was flawed. They discussed it with Jenkins. His attitude was 'Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.' So you've been paying this AIS fee on your registered water vessels since 2015. It is NOT something new.All my watercraft values added together don’t total the value of 90% of the boats I see launching. So your assumption may not be as accurate as you think. I’m fine with your “you can afford it” view as long as it is based on value. My $3,500 fishing boat should be 10% of a $35,000 boat. My opinion is still that I’m only using one boat at a time, therefore my burden on the system is the same as a single boat owner. I would be perfectly fine paying for a decal for all my watercraft if the funds don’t go to support paying for the useless system we have in place now. Paying an employee to sit in their truck and ask where your boat was last isn’t going to do anything to prevent the spread. Here is an idea. Have your decal be a bar code that opens a gate across the ramp. If you were on an infected water last, the gate doesn’t open until your decontaminated. No paying people to do nothing and solves the issue of ramp launched boats. The feds could implement this and make it effective across state lines.
I have contacted them, and gotten a response. Thank you - ya done good. The way I see it is you and I are on the same page here. Mostly, we are. I’m just suggesting to broaden your view so ALL our side can unite. My view is just another perspective. I don’t think my kids unicorn floaty, because it floats on a lake, needs the same AIS tax as a $100k wake board boat does. I tend to not think about those complex processes to collect fees. While the state has some structured fee systems, I don't know what is involved in implementing one for an AIS Decal if/when they come to their senses and implement one. Too many variables here for me to bother with. The state has the resources to implement a structured payment system if it is determined to be warranted.I think the biggest flaw is no out of state fee. HB255 would change that. However, HB255 has no process whereby to actually collect the non-resident fee because Utah allows non-resident water vessels to operate for up to 60 days a year without registering in Utah. That's just one of the things that Representative Waldrop didn't know and is looking into.Relate it to hunting: a resident OTC elk tag in Utah is $50. Non-res Wyo/Id is $500-700 and climbing yearly. If Utah implements an AIS sticker fee, I feel that same ratio should apply. It will create a state line fee war, which I think Wyoming and Idaho started. We (Utah) need to catch up. Utah definitely needs to charge non-resident water vessel owners operating on Utah waters an AIS fee. WE NEED TO HAVE A DECAL SYSTEM!That’s why I feel this is one of the few things the federal government could manage better than states will. Here is one of those things we will never agree on. State governments are bush league when it comes to messing things up in the law making business. The Feds are pro all the way. I definitely don't want the Feds involved in this in any way, shape, or form. I worked as a Fed (military & civil service) almost all of my adult life. We DO NOT want to go there.Your fighting a good fight and I appreciate it, as well as any Utah watercraft owner should. The system definitely needs some fixing and fine tuning. On that we are 100% in agreement.
23-27-304, Subsection (4)(a) The division shall study options and feasibility of implementing an automated system capable of scanning, photographing, and providing real-time information regarding a conveyance's or equipment's: (i) last entry into a body of water; and (ii) last decontamination.(b) The study described in Subsection (4)(a) shall evaluate the system's capability of: (i) operation with or without the use or supervision of personnel; (ii) operation 24 hours per day; (iii) capturing a state assigned number on a vessel or conveyance as described in Section 73-18-6; (iv) preserving photographic evidence of: (A) a conveyance's state assigned bow number; (B) a conveyance's or equipment's entry into a body of water, including the global positioning system location of where the conveyance is photographed; and (C) decontamination of the conveyance or equipment; (v) identifying a conveyance or equipment not owned by a resident that is entering a body of water in this state; and (vi) collecting the fee described in Subsection (1) or (2).(c) The division shall present a report of the study and findings described in Subsections (4)(a) and (b) to the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee before November 30, 2020.(d) Based on the findings of the study described in this Subsection (4), the division shall implement a pilot program to provide the services described in this Subsection (4) on or before May 1, 2021.