Minnesota legislators put the state’s investment in natural resources on the back burner last year and failed to approve increases in fishing and hunting licenses that many agree have widespread support.
Let’s hope Republicans and Democrats can get together this year and help prevent the Game and Fish fund from going in the red — which, by the way, is against the law.
The core functions of the DNR — game and fish management and law enforcement — have long been mostly paid with revenues from hunting and fishing licenses. The outdoor enthusiasts have had no real objections to this kind of “user fee” funding, and it’s worked well for decades. But it also hasn’t kept up with needs.
Smaller projected hunting and fishing license fee revenues and cuts in state and federal funding over the years have experts saying the fund will be in the red as soon as June 2013. The modest fee increases are supported by and large by sportsmen’s groups and the hunting and fishing fraternity in general.
They would be raised for the first time since 2001 and go from $17 for an individual resident fishing license to $24. A resident deer license would go from $26 to $30. Even if one considered inflation from 2001, the new fishing license fee would be barely over the rate of inflation for 10 years. In fact, if you considered the rate of inflation on a fishing license price of $7 in 1970, it should, by that measure, cost $41 today.
Clearly, Minnesotans are getting a good value for the outdoor dollar.
We should remember this increase is not a tax. It clearly is as pure as you can get for a user fee. Those who benefit pay the cost.
So, we hope the debate on license fees does not get bogged down in the no-new-taxes conversation or create some other kind of off-kilter way for government to provide a service many, many citizens seem to want and are willing to pay for.
Editorials
Our View: Raise fees on hunting, fishing
- Editorials
-
-
Thumbs: Redistricting is broken
Thumbs down:
The latest redrawing of Minnesota’s political boundaries came with a hefty legal bill.
-
Our View: Voter ID not as simple as it seems
Why it matters
Constitutional amendment means it is set in stone; we need more details.
-
Our View: A healthy approach to learning gaps
As Minnesota schools leave behind No Child Left Behind, a new accountability system shows a promising and realistic approach to closing the achievement gaps in schools.
-
Our View: NFL critics mobilize, but Vikings here to stay
Excitement was in plain sight earlier this month when the final touches were put on plans to build a $975 million stadium for the Minnesota Vikings, ensuring that the state and the team will be linked together for at least the next 30 years.
-
Our View: Winona State's gain is MSU's loss
Why it matters
Scott Olson brought much to Minnesota State University and to the community; his leadership will be sorely missed.
-
Our View: Good turnout at anti-bully session
Community involvement in solving the bullying problem is identified as important. Mankato had a strong showing at a recent meeting on the subject.
-
Our View: Automatic cuts will test Congress
It appears the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration that Congress passed last year are working as designed, or maybe not.
-
Our View: Senjem is positioning
Thumbs down: To Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem’s posturing on civic center funding.
-
Our View: When will this partisan war end?
Earlier this year in his State of the State address, Gov. Mark Dayton said “If we cooperate, if we share our best ideas, if we exchange our rigid ideologies for our shared ideals, we will revitalize our state.”
-
Our View: War on terror isn't over
Weary of a war on terror that has gone on for years, we would like to declare victory and return to normalcy. But the terror war goes on.
- More Editorials Headlines
-

