Enforcement- Of course I too am in favor of proper enforcement, particularly for regs dealing with fees. We have done away with a couple of fee regulations here because we found it impossible to enforce them evenly. But the new state permit reg is just that. New. And enforcement theory on new regs is often to go easy in the beginning and assume that most violators were just not informed. I’m betting more strict enforcement will be phased in over the first year or so.

Resource- In discussions about funding, I have trouble separating specific resources like water, from what it takes to manage them. Maybe I’m missing something there. I’ll agree that pleasure boaters and recreational anglers do use lake resources, although maybe not the same.

Singling out certain groups- one of the most basic concepts of funding with user fees is that users of public facilities are charged fees for what they use. Singling out groups is part of what makes it all work. Everyone entering a park that charges a gate fee, should pay that fee, as it is a pretty universal component. Campers, on the other hand are going to pay an additional fee for the add on for that specific activity. Boaters pay certain boating related fees, depending on what they are doing, but don’t have to pay camping fees unless they are also camping. I see no way to do this without singling out groups by activity, unless you want to have some sort of comprehensive “Recreation Permit” that lets you do it all. I’m guessing that such a permit would have to sell for hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars, and would not be real popular with the general public.

Grandkids- I got a herd of those, and I sure agree with those comments. Both that we need to find a way to keep our outdoor heritage intact for future generations, and that “most of us take for granted” what we have.