New 3 Dollar fee for Tag At DVL

[FrazeIb1]

I am not happy about the new 3 dollar fee at DVL either. After talking to the staffers at the lake, they told me the reasoning behind the new $3 dollar fee. I guess the MWD is no longer providing funds to DVL. Regardless about how we feel as fishermen, this is a business. If money is was being provided by a source and the source cuts off the money, DVL has to make up for the loss in order to keep the lake operational. I understand that It cost alot to maintain DVL. I know they have bills to pay.

But, I support DVL by purchasing the yearly pass which cost $450.00 per year. If the fees are going up that's fine. But I think if you bought the yearly pass you should recieve a little compensation in return. I'm not pointing fingers here but just trying to make sense. The majority of the people who bought the yearly pass are boat owners. The shore fishermen and rental boat guys will not have to pay anything.

I think who ever came up with this idea did not think this all the way through. You are charging the wrong people. Instead of charging the boat onwers who have the yearly pass, why dont you just charge everyone 1 extra dollar for the fishing permitts and believe me everything will even out. I think you would lose more money if boat owners stop purchasing the yearly pass at DVL.

Concerned fisherman.........

[seal]

Yes I think blaming the operators, no matter how silly the 'unbundling' of fees is getting, is not the proper place to place overall blame.

MWD or whoever has put so many limitations on the recreational opportunities out there that the sole revenue source is fisherman so the operators have no choice but to target us. No matter how much we may like basically a fishing only lake the revenue is just not going to be that large so DVL will operate much more like a pay to fish lake where entry/fishing fees are extremely high.

At least that's how I'm beginning to see it.

[HawgZWylde]

I am not happy about the new 3 dollar fee at DVL either. After talking to the staffers at the lake, they told me the reasoning behind the new $3 dollar fee. I guess the MWD is no longer providing funds to DVL. Regardless about how we feel as fishermen, this is a business. If money is was being provided by a source and the source cuts off the money, DVL has to make up for the loss in order to keep the lake operational. I understand that It cost alot to maintain DVL. I know they have bills to pay.

But, I support DVL by purchasing the yearly pass which cost $450.00 per year. If the fees are going up that's fine. But I think if you bought the yearly pass you should recieve a little compensation in return. I'm not pointing fingers here but just trying to make sense. The majority of the people who bought the yearly pass are boat owners. The shore fishermen and rental boat guys will not have to pay anything.

I think who ever came up with this idea did not think this all the way through. You are charging the wrong people. Instead of charging the boat onwers who have the yearly pass, why dont you just charge everyone 1 extra dollar for the fishing permitts and believe me everything will even out. I think you would lose more money if boat owners stop purchasing the yearly pass at DVL.

Concerned fisherman.........

I spoke with the staff a couple of weeks ago. They told me that they were operating in the red. They are a private business attempting to stay afloat in one of the most hostile states to do business in. And dealing with one of the most difficult quasi-government entities (MWD).

I agree with your suggestion that charging ALL a dollar more, or whatever it takes to keep them afloat. Singling out boat owners is not in their best interests in my opinion...

[fish player]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00

[IN2DEEP]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00
That would be $3 per tag not $3 for the whole year
That can add up!

Show up dry and get reinspected each visit to avoid this charge

[FrazeIb1]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00

Let me educate you a little Fish Player...it's not 453.00 who would cry about $3.00.......I fish DVL 8-10 times a month. Yes I paid the $450.00 and I pay $3.00 for the fishing permitt. Now I have to pay an additional $3.00 everytime I fish. @10X a month = an additional $30.00 X12= $360.00 0n top of the $450.00 which is a total of $810.00 a year......that's just rediculous........do you see the point now......

[liteline]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00
I go to the lake 100 times a year, that $450 goes to $750, nuf said.

[ShellBack USNRET]

I am not happy about the new 3 dollar fee at DVL either. After talking to the staffers at the lake, they told me the reasoning behind the new $3 dollar fee. I guess the MWD is no longer providing funds to DVL. Regardless about how we feel as fishermen, this is a business. If money is was being provided by a source and the source cuts off the money, DVL has to make up for the loss in order to keep the lake operational. I understand that It cost alot to maintain DVL. I know they have bills to pay.

But, I support DVL by purchasing the yearly pass which cost $450.00 per year. If the fees are going up that's fine. But I think if you bought the yearly pass you should recieve a little compensation in return. I'm not pointing fingers here but just trying to make sense. The majority of the people who bought the yearly pass are boat owners. The shore fishermen and rental boat guys will not have to pay anything.

I think who ever came up with this idea did not think this all the way through. You are charging the wrong people. Instead of charging the boat onwers who have the yearly pass, why dont you just charge everyone 1 extra dollar for the fishing permitts and believe me everything will even out. I think you would lose more money if boat owners stop purchasing the yearly pass at DVL.

Concerned fisherman.........


I agree, I would have less complaints if they charged everyone instead of targeting a particular group. $1 increase on the entrance fees, spread the pain to everyone. THIS IS A FAIR PRACTICE IF REVENUE IS INDEED THE ROOT CAUSE!

For those like myself who bought the Season Pass, we don't have a choice. Until my 24 visit I'm in the red. If I knew this was coming I would have declined on a Season Pass, and instead paid PER VISIT. This would free me up to visit other lakes when I passed on the $3 tag tax. If they offer a refund of my Season Pass, I will not use DVL as much and visit Perris or others lakes once in awhile, otherwise I'm stuck with DVL. I am now forced to pay the $3 tag tax, or go thru re-inspection until I break even.

This is the second time I got caught up with this Seasonal Pass. I had just paid for a Seasonal Pass when the ramp closed due to the low water. Never got a warning or nothing when I bought the Season Pass ($225). Three months later they closed the lake and refused to give us refunds. At that time we never knew when the ramp would open again. When the ramp opened, they started the clock on our Season Pass ($225) on the opening day. I could not return to DVL for several months due to other obligations, therefore I only got 6 months of use on a 12 month Season Pass ($225). I asked why they couldn't start the clock the day of renewing my Season Pass ($225), because I couldn't fish earlier. They told me sorry, but that's the rule. I even asked for a Military Discount, they said no to that also. Short story I lost money on that whole deal.

Who gets the $450 season pass fees?

[IN2DEEP]

Maybe I'm confused.
This $3 fee is for the tag to avoid the Quagga Mussel re-inspection when you come back the next time, right?

[FrazeIb1]

Maybe I'm confused.
This $3 fee is for the tag to avoid the Quagga Mussel re-inspection when you come back the next time, right?

Yes, you have to pay $3 dollars to avoid having to get your boat inspected upon your return. I think boat owners are going to take chances and just have their boat inspected instead of paying $3 dollars for the tag. this in turn will cause boaters to fish at other lakes and cause DVL to lose even more revenue.......

[CraigH]

I'm not sure I understand the comments about the $3 fee targeting a specific group. I understand this is new for boaters, but everyone else has been paying an additional fee for several years. If you go to the lake to shore fish or hike, you are charged a $2 shore access fee (I'm not sure what they actually call it). If you go to the lake to hike you are charged a $7 entry fee plus the $2 shore fee, and if you fish from shore you pay the $7 entry, $3 fishing, and $2 shore access fee. In reality, this $3 evens up the fees. If you don't have a boat you pay an additional $2, and now if you do have a boat you are charged an additional $3. I'm not saying I support the additional fees, just pointing out that everyone except boaters have been paying them for years.

[ShellBack USNRET]

I'm not sure I understand the comments about the $3 fee targeting a specific group. I understand this is new for boaters, but everyone else has been paying an additional fee for several years. If you go to the lake to shore fish or hike, you are charged a $2 shore access fee (I'm not sure what they actually call it). If you go to the lake to hike you are charged a $7 entry fee plus the $2 shore fee, and if you fish from shore you pay the $7 entry, $3 fishing, and $2 shore access fee. In reality, this $3 evens up the fees. If you don't have a boat you pay an additional $2, and now if you do have a boat you are charged an additional $3. I'm not saying I support the additional fees, just pointing out that everyone except boaters have been paying them for years.

Take another look at the balancing scale.

Everyone pays the $7 entrance fee, boaters, shore fishers, hikers, everyone! (wildlife are exempt).
All anglers pay $3 fishing access permit, boaters, shore fishers, and Seasonal Pass holders.
$2 shore access fee versus $12 boat launch fees.
Only the boaters pay the $3 tag tax, which is used to offset operations cost for the entire lake (as per quoted in this thread).

Put the additional fee on the $7 entrance fee and everyone shares the burden of keeping the lake operational (as per quoted in this thread).

Does this clear things up for ya!

[FrazeIb1]

I'm not sure I understand the comments about the $3 fee targeting a specific group. I understand this is new for boaters, but everyone else has been paying an additional fee for several years. If you go to the lake to shore fish or hike, you are charged a $2 shore access fee (I'm not sure what they actually call it). If you go to the lake to hike you are charged a $7 entry fee plus the $2 shore fee, and if you fish from shore you pay the $7 entry, $3 fishing, and $2 shore access fee. In reality, this $3 evens up the fees. If you don't have a boat you pay an additional $2, and now if you do have a boat you are charged an additional $3. I'm not saying I support the additional fees, just pointing out that everyone except boaters have been paying them for years.

I don't know what else I can say for everyone to understand. Just re-read the post if you don't under stand.....

[Kareem Korn]

I spoke with the staff a couple of weeks ago. They told me that they were operating in the red. They are a private business attempting to stay afloat in one of the most hostile states to do business in. And dealing with one of the most difficult quasi-government entities (MWD).

.


Their operating in the red probably because they got the contract to run Lake Hemet and the campgrounds. In order to get that lake they also had to take Anglers lake. Anglers lake is going to start being hit with all kinds of regulations and fees that will not only make it unprofitable to operate but very hard to stock and keep stocked to draw anglers. Lake Hemet is seasonal and is a very hard lake to operate and keep in the black.

So there's your three bucks. :Neutral:

[dixoncider]

Seems to me that if they increased the fishing fee from $3 to $4 and then charged $3 for the "inspection" not the tag it would be better for all involved..

[fishchum]

What would happen if everyone don't get a tags? and everyone go for the dry inspection everytime we go fish?
and in several months, they don't make the money. what then? how will they operate?

another fees? just to make it up.

[DarkShadow]

Boycott DVL!

[HawgZWylde]

What would happen if everyone don't get a tags? and everyone go for the dry inspection everytime we go fish?
and in several months, they don't make the money. what then? how will they operate?

another fees? just to make it up.

Fishchum and Dark Shadow. They will go BK, and yet another privately run business will close. And if the state takes it over, you will lose days of fishing due to mid week lake closures as just announced by P&R. Perris and Silverwood will be closed Tuesdays and Wednesdays due to budget cutbacks. That would suck for many of us whose days off are midweek. It would suck for guys who want to avoid crowded weekends. I think they should reconsider sticking it to boaters and spread the misery to all anglers by raising their entry fee rather than just for the tags...

[eah]

Boat inspection is what takes time and costs the operator money, whereas tagging a boat takes viturally no time. Why not, if you must charge, require a $3 fee to inspect a non-tagged vessel and let tagged boats off the "hook". If that does not fully fund the operation, then maybe a buck to be tagged when you exit.

[hook1fred]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00

ignorant..... school is a good thing ;)

[Fysher]

Stop crying about 3 dollars what is the differnts from 450.00 or 453.00

If this was true then none of us would care. But it's $3.00 for each visit, that'll add up through out the year.

Something is mind bolgging to me, so if you don't want to pay the $3 fee then make sure you have your boat dry and have it re-inspected. If you pay the $3 fee, then you don't have to get inspected and you get to enter and not wait, but that would cause a problem with the quagga mussels then for instance, the boat has quagga mussels on it (if inspected throroughly) but the owner pays the $3 fee, so he passes "GO" and enters the lake and introduces the quagga mussels in.???????

[laserbrn]

Yeah, I don't go to DVL, but this sounds completely *** backwards. Isn't there a cost to do the inspections? Didn't they hire staffers and don't they need more labor if more boats show uninspected? So why discourage the use of tags that save everyone time and money?

Seems to me you just raise the cost of the annual pass, raise the cost of the entry fee at the gate, raise the fishing fee, raise the shore access fee, etc, but don't discourage lake users from being efficient and saving $

[sweetfish]

If this was true then none of us would care. But it's $3.00 for each visit, that'll add up through out the year.

Something is mind bolgging to me, so if you don't want to pay the $3 fee then make sure you have your boat dry and have it re-inspected. If you pay the $3 fee, then you don't have to get inspected and you get to enter and not wait, but that would cause a problem with the quagga mussels then for instance, the boat has quagga mussels on it (if inspected throroughly) but the owner pays the $3 fee, so he passes "GO" and enters the lake and introduces the quagga mussels in.???????


They inspect the boat at the beginning of the day and ask if you would like the boat to have a tag for the future visit. The tag is place on the bow to the bow rope and boat so if you do not go to another lake and launch the tag would still be in place. The tag is placed on the boat at the end of your visit and is a tool for the inspectors to see the boat was not on another body of water after leaving DVL. Therefore it eliminates the procedure of the boat being inspected for the quagga mussle.

[sweetfish]

I too am not in favor of this new fee. What if I opt for the tag and pay the $3.00 fee and decide I want to fish Skinner or Perris afterwards, which would mean I gave away $3.00.

[IN2DEEP]

Boat inspection is what takes time and costs the operator money, whereas tagging a boat takes viturally no time. Why not, if you must charge, require a $3 fee to inspect a non-tagged vessel and let tagged boats off the "hook". If that does not fully fund the operation, then maybe a buck to be tagged when you exit.
This makes a lot of sense :Thumbs Up:

[Fysher]

Thanks Sweetfish for the clarification. That does suck though if you want to use your boat at another lake before visiting DVL again.

The fee is just silly, you want a free pass and not wait in line for inspection, pay me the $3 and you're good on your next visit, and "Oh yeah, your boat must be un-used in water until your next visit here in order for you to get in without the inspection" In red-That's what they probably don't tell you when purchasing the fee. Looks like you're going to have to designate a boat exclusively to DVL only if you're going to be paying the fee and make that $3 count.

[yolo]

I got the solution. Allow 4 stroke jet skis! Even recreational boating. They would instantly be in the black. This way a jet skier like me and a fisherman like me could kill 2 birds with one stone. :LOL:

[HawgStalker]

As a shore angler I would have no problem paying a buck or two more to catch LMB at such a GREAT fishery.....

They should spread it around!

[DVL_Local]

Boycott DVL!

lol @ DarkShadow ...I see what you did there.

[TheAsianGuy]

I got the solution. Allow 4 stroke jet skis! Even recreational boating. They would instantly be in the black. This way a jet skier like me and a fisherman like me could kill 2 birds with one stone. :LOL:

True, but MWD would not allow any bodily contact with the water, hence, the large mountain and a steel wall. It has been this way for decades.