# ladue rumor?



## beetlebailey (May 26, 2009)

heard maybe its a rumor, that ladue res may be open to gas motor up to 10 hp... anyone heard this, heard was talked about in columbus!!


----------



## jmay (Jun 12, 2012)

I would doubt it. LaDue is owned by The City Akron and it would be up to them. But who knows?


----------



## Skippy (Dec 2, 2009)

I'd hate to see that. Used to fish it a lot when I lived up there but now only go up there maybe 3 times a year. 

Could you imagine the mess it would be with everyone trying to get there boats in and out. There's no docks and there isn't even any good boat ramps. You would need a full time cop down there.


----------



## REEL GRIP (Jan 11, 2013)

A few years ago, the state offered to put in
a new boat ramp and parking lot,if Akron would
OK gas motors (10hp). but Akron said no.


----------



## icebucketjohn (Dec 22, 2005)

Not a chance.... as far as I know.


----------



## REEL GRIP (Jan 11, 2013)

FYI a few years back, 07 I think,
There was a 10% tax put on the
manufacture of all fishing related
items,to improve boat ramps around 
the country. The deal was pushed
hard by Ray Scott.10% of it all is a
lot of money. I know, I'm paying it.
Any one see any improvements?
I havent.


----------



## The Ghost (Jul 3, 2013)

Fishing tackle has been taxed since 1950 under the Dingell Johnson Act, with the act expanding in 1987. A substantial proportion of the state's fisheries management funding comes from these sources. However, the vast majority of funding for boat access comes from a tax on gasoline, and the Division of Wildlife is legally unable to spend that on non-motorized lakes.


----------



## The Ghost (Jul 3, 2013)

Deleted pending clarification.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

never happen


----------



## icebucketjohn (Dec 22, 2005)

Nope... Not gonna happen


----------



## johnrude (Mar 29, 2009)

i doubt it will ever happen and i hope it never does !


----------



## set-the-drag (Jan 13, 2013)

City of Akron water dpt won't let it due to increasing water contamination from gas motors being ladue is one of Akrons primary water supplies i don't blame them it wouldn't benefit Akron it would cost them more to treat the water


----------



## berkshirepresident (Jul 24, 2013)

Re - National Fishing Tax:

You sure about that?

I'm a CPA, own my own tax practice, and have never heard of that tax......largely b/c it doesn't exist.

I'm afraid that you've believed an Urban Legend for some time now.


----------



## leeabu (Apr 10, 2004)

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/AboutUs/ItemsTaxedJan2011.pdf

It does exist! Stick around newbie. You may learn something from us old timers!!!


----------



## fishingful (Apr 5, 2004)

set-the-drag said:


> City of Akron water dpt won't let it due to increasing water contamination from gas motors being ladue is one of Akrons primary water supplies i don't blame them it wouldn't benefit Akron it would cost them more to treat the water


Akron is super hypocritical about the protecting the water supply issue. They have a horrible sewage plant that overflows and dumps raw sewage into the Cuyahoga River and National Park.


----------



## Jose' (Aug 31, 2013)

I live 7 miles from the lake..go there 3-4 times a week for the past 20 years. Seeing the pressure it gets now...compared to what it was before when we had to buy a season permit..not too mention the amount of garbage that accumulates now with the extra people..boats and shore fishermen
combined. I just can't see them allowing gas motors and that much more pressure on the lake..of course it wouldn't surprise me anymore.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## steelmagoo (Apr 13, 2004)

berkshirepresident said:


> Re - National Fishing Tax:
> 
> You sure about that?
> 
> ...


It is a Federal Excise tax. Manufacturers and sellers pay the tax and pass it along as higher prices. Consumers pay ALL taxes, always.


----------



## berkshirepresident (Jul 24, 2013)

My comment was supposed to be in reply to Reel Grip's post....which is not accurate.

I did not take the time to change it at first. We all know that we pay various taxes on our ammo, licenses, etc.

But Ray Scott did not create some type of fishing tax system that we all pay in to.

Comments by The Ghost are spot on.


----------



## leeabu (Apr 10, 2004)

Sorry. On my computer REELGRIPS post reads "The deal was pushed
hard by Ray Scott." I don't know how it shows up as "created by Ray Scott on" your computer. The tax is paid by the fishing tackle manufacturers (which by the way REELGRIP is). It is then passed onto the consumers, so yes there is a fishing tax system that we all pay into evertime we purchase fishing tackle.


----------



## berkshirepresident (Jul 24, 2013)

leeabu said:


> Sorry. On my computer REELGRIPS post reads "The deal was pushed
> hard by Ray Scott." I don't know how it shows up as "created by Ray Scott on" your computer. The tax is paid by the fishing tackle manufacturers (which by the way REELGRIP is). It is then passed onto the consumers, so yes there is a fishing tax system that we all pay into evertime we purchase fishing tackle.


If the Dingell Johnson Act had an effective date of 1950, had could Ray Scott have had anything to do with it? He was 17 years old at the time.

Perhaps Ray Scott got involved in the 1987 revision.

I did not like Reelgrips wording. That's just my opinion. Perhaps I read it to quickly on my lunch break.

Anyway, enough pissing on each other.


----------



## leeabu (Apr 10, 2004)

In 1984, the Sport Fish Restoration Act expanded. The "Wallop-Breaux" 
amendment included additional fishing equipment in the calculation, an 
import duty on recreational boats, and a portion of marine fuel tax 
revenue. This amendment included funding for aquatic education 
programs as an eligible activity.


----------



## chaunc (Apr 11, 2004)

This thread has drifted way off topic. Shuttin it down.


----------

