Another Washington State Tax on Boaters

ssobol said:

This is big issue in some places. In others that ship has already sailed (e.g. Lake Michigan).

The Asian Carp battle is still being waged for Lake Michigan (and all of the Great Lakes). It is not yet lost. The locks in Chicago that lead to the river system are the greatest threat and must be permanently closed. That threat to all of the Great Lakes has dire consequences. But don't tell that to the looper community. And don't tell it to Chicago and Illinois who have been fighting to keep the locks operational. They had an allie in Obama. One hopes that the current President sees the issue for what it is...a catastrophe in the making.

Click to expand...

Zebra mussels are already there and causing problems.

Loopers aren't the only ones that transit the locks in Chicago.

Rufus said:

Zebra mussels are already there and causing problems.

Loopers aren't the only ones that transit the locks in Chicago.

Click to expand...

Yes, Zebra mussels have been there for decades. They've killed off every bit of the microscopic type life in portions of the lakes. Much of bottom in the Manitou Passage is choked off by a blanket of mussels that die and secret a poisonous chemical when they decay.

Right, the locks are used by others. But it's telling that AGLCA does nothing to support the efforts to close them. Now there's a place for taxes. Loopers are by and large the primary recreational users of those locks and from out of state/region....complicit in aiding and abetting a looming environmental catastrophe if there ever as one. Tax 'em to death.

ssobol said:

Yes, Zebra mussels have been there for decades. They've killed off every bit of the microscopic type life in portions of the lakes. Much of bottom in the Manitou Passage is choked off by a blanket of mussels that die and secret a poisonous chemical when they decay. ...

Click to expand...

But they do filter the water quite effectively. There are places where the water is much clearer because of the mussels.

ssobol said:

Loopers are by and large the primary recreational users of those locks and from out of state/region....complicit in aiding and abetting a looming environmental catastrophe if there ever as one. Tax 'em to death.

Click to expand...

However, the primary users of the locks are not recreational users. Not loopers, not any form of recreational users. They are commercial users. There is a lot of shipping from the Great Lakes south and closing that route would have significant economic impact on others. There are options that could be built to work for recreational boaters such as railway or lifts out and over but they would not work for the commercial shippers.

Rufus said:

However, the primary users of the locks are not recreational users. Not loopers, not any form of recreational users. They are commercial users. There is a lot of shipping from the Great Lakes south and closing that route would have significant economic impact on others. There are options that could be built to work for recreational boaters such as railway or lifts out and over but they would not work for the commercial shippers.

Click to expand...

Obviously. Tax them to death as well. Use the proceeds to build a port/railway facility to move goods around the closed locks. Lots of excuses for facilitating the death of the Great Lakes eco-system...none of them add up over the long run. There are fail safe solutions. Haven't heard any loopers championing any of them....

Rufus said:

There are fail safe solutions. Haven't heard any loopers championing any of them....

Click to expand...

Loopers only take advantage of infrastructure created for commercial usage. If the commercial usage was not already in place to do the loop, there would be no such thing. And combination of government legislature could move to limit or ban recreational "looping" if it were. There would be a negative impact on business that services the boater called the looper. (Marinas, eating establishments, tourist destinations, stores and provisioning establishments) I am not sure government was created to depress recreational boating. Taxing is a means of restricting consumers too. However taxing "to death" a recreational activity doesn't generate funds in many recreational activities. The recreational consumer would have the choice of NOT doing that activity because it is just recreational. If the Looper was taxed at the choke point South of Chicago, my guess is the number of Loopers would be greatly reduced. The boater formerly known as a Looper would take a pass on paying the tax and return back North on Lake Michigan. Again marine based business down stream of Chicago would pay that price in diminished sales.

But what got my curiosity is your statement about fail safe solutions. The only fail safe solution that I am aware of is remove all boat traffic from all non-impacted waters. Then eliminate birds that could spread mussel spawn. That is the only fail safe solution I can think of. Is there other fail safe solutions?

Rufus said:

Yes, Zebra mussels have been there for decades. They've killed off every bit of the microscopic type life in portions of the lakes. Much of bottom in the Manitou Passage is choked off by a blanket of mussels that die and secret a poisonous chemical when they decay.

Right, the locks are used by others. But it's telling that AGLCA does nothing to support the efforts to close them. Now there's a place for taxes. Loopers are by and large the primary recreational users of those locks and from out of state/region....complicit in aiding and abetting a looming environmental catastrophe if there ever as one. Tax 'em to death.

Click to expand...

It seems a pretty simple matter to eliminate the risk of invasive species transmission past the Chicago lock. Close that lock and make all boat traffic lock through the Calumet. Take a stretch of that river between 2 locks and maintain a chlorine content high enough to kill invasive species. Require a 6 hour quarantine period if necessary.

Reality says, sooner or later fish eggs on birds feet will bring the invasive species to the Great Lakes regardless. Unless you're going to kill them off back down the Illinois river, it's already a lost battle.

Ted

A few years ago, we had a guy leave his dingy tied to the dinghy dock unused all summer. It filled with rainwater fairly quickly, but managed to balance rain and evaporation all summer, so it was only ever about 50%-75% full of water. Being a rib, it reamined floating.

By the end of the summer there were small fry swimming around inside the flooded dinghy. The entire process took only about 4 months.

A bunch of simple minded responses here. It's a money grab pure and simple. Meanwhile all military vessels, foreign and domestic, the Washington State Ferry System and most foreign commercial vessels are exempt from these draconian measures.

ProMaritime said:

A bunch of simple minded responses here. It's a money grab pure and simple. Meanwhile all military vessels, foreign and domestic, the Washington State Ferry System and most foreign commercial vessels are exempt from these draconian measures.

Click to expand...

So all responses that don't agree with yours are simple minded? Clearly you don't even understand the law or purpose to think that the vessels you mentioned are even relevant. Last time I looked, not a lot of military vessels, commercial ships or ferries being moved on trailers from lake to lake. Draconian? Is this overreaction Monday like radio talk shows have after Sunday football? Fine to say it's just to collect money, but the rest of your argument really isn't much on target.

I live in WA and like the tax on out-of-state boats trailered into our waters. Protects our fish and waters. Thank you, WA State Gov't!

djleu said:

I live in WA and like the tax on out-of-state boats trailered into our waters. Protects our fish and waters. Thank you, WA State Gov't!

Click to expand...

So the millions collected are actually used to protect the fish and waters? Yeah right. It goes right into the King County pockets. Has NOTHING to do with fish and water.

King County??? The Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Prevention Permit was authorized by the Washington State Legislature. Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) has been tasked to control invasive species in Washington and the fees help fund the department’s efforts.

djleu said:

I live in WA and like the tax on out-of-state boats trailered into our waters. Protects our fish and waters. Thank you, WA State Gov't!

Click to expand...

That works both ways.... expect Oregon to tax you when you go to there state, and the next state, and the next.

This is CLEARLY a bogus money grab and has NOTHING to do with protecting the water. We need to wake up and smell the politicians. They are NOT on our side.

And, can you imagine if all the state did this on the great loop? It would kill that activity.

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

So the millions collected are actually used to protect the fish and waters? Yeah right. It goes right into the King County pockets. Has NOTHING to do with fish and water.

Click to expand...

I know it is fashionable (and fun!) for the rest of the state to blame everything on King County, but in this case it just doesn't fly. The tax isn't going to any county but to the state. Money collected through these fees are deposited into the state's aquatic invasive species management account. This account will be used, as appropriated by the legislature, to fund the activities outlined in Chapter 77.135 of the Revised Code of Washington to combat the effects of invasive waterborne species.



The projection is that by 2021, $415,000 will be collected annually through the permit fees.

Larry M said:

King County??? The Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Prevention Permit was authorized by the Washington State Legislature. Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) has been tasked to control invasive species in Washington and the fees help fund the department’s efforts.

Click to expand...

The state is run by King County and their pockets are deep. Nothing gets done unless King gives their blessings.

I wasn't going to post on this issue, but oh well, here goes.
Just a different perspective. As a Canadian, due to this new fee and the complexities of the "cruising permit", I do not head to Washington waters like I used to. This fee makes sense for trailered boats (assuming the funds generated are used for the correct purpose - and that is a big assumption as ASD stated) that may transport AIS from area to area or lake to lake. However, when it comes to saltwater, you cannot convince me that my trawler operating in the Salish Sea is potentially bringing any species into Wash. waters that are not already there! The border does not apply to water creatures. They move freely on their own or the tides and currents move them, and the distances here (in the NW) are not that great. Deep sea commercial traffic may spread sea creatures, but not local boaters.
To cross over to US (Washington) waters, it now costs me about $80 Cad. (AIS and Cruising permit) plus, my Nexus is now next to useless as I have to report immediately to a Customs office to obtain (buy) a "Cruising Permit" (Federal Gov).
Just saying that all of this doesn't make me want to "head south" for a cruise to spend my money in the US.

firehoser75 said:

I wasn't going to post on this issue, but oh well, here goes.
Just a different perspective. As a Canadian, due to this new fee and the complexities of the "cruising permit", I do not head to Washington waters like I used to. This fee makes sense for trailered boats (assuming the funds generated are used for the correct purpose - and that is a big assumption as ASD stated) that may transport AIS from area to area or lake to lake. However, when it comes to saltwater, you cannot convince me that my trawler operating in the Salish Sea is potentially bringing any species into Wash. waters that are not already there! The border does not apply to water creatures. They move freely on their own or the tides and currents move them, and the distances here (in the NW) are not that great. Deep sea commercial traffic may spread sea creatures, but not local boaters.
To cross over to US (Washington) waters, it now costs me about $80 Cad. (AIS and Cruising permit) plus, my Nexus is now next to useless as I have to report immediately to a Customs office to obtain (buy) a "Cruising Permit" (Federal Gov).
Just saying that all of this doesn't make me want to "head south" for a cruise to spend my money in the US.

Click to expand...

All good points. I don’t know anything about the “cruising permit” requirement but I wonder if the AIS permit can be ordered and received by mail before the trip?

I agree with you that vessels that are staying within the Salish Sea likely don’t represent an invasive species hazard. Of course, I’m not a marine biologist.

Financial security in one respect for me personally, is to live under my means so additional/higher taxes are less likely to affect.

Yes an AIS can be purchased on line. https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/invasive/permits

As I read this only $20 of the $24 annual fee reaches the fund. (83.33%)
The dealer handling fee is $2 (if on line)
And it appears the state of Washington charges a $2 transaction fee
Not that this is a big deal but if you bought this online it is your paper used to print the receipt so the state does not have to mail this (no postage) and does not have to have any paper to send to the consumer. Sure there is a transaction fee to the card company (Visa, MC, AX or ??) and that is likely negotiated to a very low number because of volume.

Interesting. The State of Washington charges a transaction fee on top of the fee to the fund.

If this were a non-profit and 83% went to the benefit the cause, would you donate?
Will this deter out of state boaters, se plane operators and commercial transporters?

For me the fee would be a factor to visiting the state.
The question I would want to ask as a resident of that state or any state that has a fee, does it work? Is the money going to a service that is making a difference? Is the difference being documented?

Or will the money just be used to service the many dams in Washington State or pay for continuing water way maintenance?

markpierce said:

Financial security in one respect for me personally, is to live under my means so additional/higher taxes are less likely to affect.

Click to expand...

Hi Mark,
Good point (not applicable in my case), but there is also principle involved. Canada (and the province of BC) does not charge any fees of any type on US boaters coming up for a visit (as far as I know). And by the way, in most anchorages I go into here in BC the majority of the boats are US flagged.
Personally I like most Americans and some of my best boating friends are Americans!
Just saying that having to order an AIS permit prior to crossing south (especially when it is very, very unlikely that my boat is contributing to this problem), then having to obtain a cruising permit or notify CBS for every boat movement and pay additional fees, is not very "visitor friendly" in my humble opinion.

Wifey B: Just to further incite the angry crowd, when you buy the annual permit, it's not good for a full year. You do get 365 days, but 2020 is a leap year so if you buy it starting on 5/12/2019, it ends on 5/10/2020. Oh the horror.

^^^ Now that's funny, I don't care who you are!!!!!