© 2025 Interlochen
CLASSICAL IPR | 88.7 FM Interlochen | 94.7 FM Traverse City | 88.5 FM Mackinaw City IPR NEWS | 91.5 FM Traverse City | 90.1 FM Harbor Springs/Petoskey | 89.7 FM Manistee/Ludington
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

State House Republicans introduce bill to raise cost of fishing licenses

Two men in green sweatshirts stand on near a truck on a bridge of a river. A pipe protruding from the truck funnels water and fish into the river.
David Kenyon/MI Dept. of Natural Resources
DNR staffers plant rainbow trout in the Au Sable River, 2015. Fish stocking is one of several services that could be affected by funding deficits in the DNR's fisheries and wildlife divisions. (Photo: David Kenyon/Michigan Department of Natural Resources)

There is a new attempt in the state legislature to raise fees for fishing licenses following a failed attempt last year.

Several Republican representatives are co-sponsoring the bill, including Parker Fairbairn (R-Harbor Springs) and Ken Borton (R-Gaylord) of northern Michigan. It was introduced late last week.

A license to fish for species not stocked by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources would go up by $2 and a $5 hatchery stamp would be required to fish for stocked species, like salmon, steelhead or walleye.

Several sport fishing groups are pushing for the legislation, saying they want to avoid cuts to the state’s fish stocking programs and increase inland fishing opportunities.

"We're at a point right now that stocking cuts are going to happen in 2026 if there's not some budget increase for the fisheries division. And we just don't want to see that happen," said Ed Blissick, with the Great Lakes Salmon Initiative. "Our fishery relies on stocking — salmon and trout stocking is critical to the fishery."

Fishing license fees have not increased since 2014, despite inflation and rising costs.

"You have the same amount of amount of money coming in, but it costs much, much more to do your work," said Ed Eisch, assistant chief of fisheries division. "So that means you really only have one choice: you can do less of that work. We're legally obligated to not overspend our budget."

As it's currently drafted, the bill would require 100% of revenue from the licenses to go directly to fisheries division for the first five years.

"That doesn't necessarily mean we're going to get to spend 100% of that on fisheries division activities," said Eisch, with the DNR.

"We can't leave the other divisions high and dry, because the work they do is necessary for fisheries management as well, whether it's enforcing the rules, selling the licenses or administering the overall operation of the department. So what we would have to pass some of that money through to those other divisions."

Ellie Katz reports on science, conservation and the environment.