SF2100 State Park User Fee Pilot Program

[Fishbonker]

This bill would establish a user fee for Lake Manawa State Park.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SF2100&ga=87

The fee would only be charged to nonresidents. $5.00/day or $40.00 for a years pass. This would only be a pilot program.

 

[Tim Hull]

It is about time that someone other than hunters start paying for State lands

 

[mplane72]

About damn time! That would be a yes. Should just dive in and go state wide on all major parks out of the gate. Take a look at Wisconsin and pretty much follow their program.

 

[Daver]

About damn time! That would be a yes. Should just dive in and go state wide on all major parks out of the gate. Take a look at Wisconsin and pretty much follow their program.

FYI, there was an effort, I think about 20'ish years ago now to charge for admission to state parks. I forget most of the details and the charge was short lived, maybe one or two years and it got dropped. Not saying it shouldn't be done these days, but I remember a lot of complaining/friction about it when it was tried.

 

[mplane72]

FYI, there was an effort, I think about 20'ish years ago now to charge for admission to state parks. I forget most of the details and the charge was short lived, maybe one or two years and it got dropped. Not saying it shouldn't be done these days, but I remember a lot of complaining/friction about it when it was tried.

I vaguely remember that. I don't really care about the bitching or even lower usage rates. If people really value their parks they'll get over it. I'd rather see 25 people who paid using the park then 100 who didn't.

 

[flugge]

When I was in Minnesota, we bought a park pass, it was GREAT. I am in favor of it!

 

[JNRBRONC]

If I recall correctly, it was a $10 sticker you bought to put on your windshield. The complaints were "I already pay state taxes to support our parks, why should I pay more." Well, the DNR is getting less money from the legislature so it needs to be made up elsewhere. I'm all for bringing it back. It might even cut back on the littering that happens.

 

[HorseDoctor]

Kinda the same as last year when there was so much pi$$ing and moaning about an increase in hunting license fees that it got dropped (if I remember correctly)... Wish some (a lot of) of the politicians had the cojones to just do what is right, instead of what will get them re-elected by the "gimme somethin cause i'm entitled to it society" !!!

 

[mplane72]

Kinda the same as last year when there was so much pi$$ing and moaning about an increase in hunting license fees that it got dropped (if I remember correctly)... Wish some (a lot of) of the politicians had the cojones to just do what is right, instead of what will get them re-elected by the "gimme somethin cause i'm entitled to it society" !!!

I actually did not hear that much complaining about that. I did question the steep jump all at once. My understanding was what really killed the bill is the Farm Bureau. They did not like the provisions that would have led to land coming out of production.

 

[Fishbonker]

I actually did not hear that much complaining about that. I did question the steep jump all at once. My understanding was what really killed the bill is the Farm Bureau. They did not like the provisions that would have led to land coming out of production.

The bill had a provision that the habitat stamp money went for something other than habitat. Your assessment that FB didn't want any more land "lost" to public hunting is spot on and that is one of the things that killed the bill. It was a poison pill of sorts. You get what you want (fee increase and more funds for the Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund) but it kills you in the long run.