Update R.I. Saltwater Fishing License

[Jim Mckeough]

The Sunday meeting of the Weekapaug Surfcaster was attended by
Rep. Blake Filippi. Rep. Filippi stated that he is not trying to do away with the Saltwater Fishing License and go to a Federal License.

Rep. Filippi ideas are as follows:

The R.I. Saltwater Fishing License costs $7.00.
Broken down as follows $3.00 for administrative costs $4.00 which
goes into the Saltwater Special Fund and is matched approx. 3 to1 by the Federal Government.
Rep. Filippi wants to change the cost of the Saltwater Fishing License
to $3.00 to cover administrative costs ONLY and do away with the $4.00 which goes into the Special Fund. ( By doing this we would lose all Federal matching money. ) I asked him if the State would include the money we are going to lose in the State Budget.
Of course the answer was no. Whats going to happen to all the money in the special fund now???????
His reasoning is the Federal Government is interfering to much in State politics. Every person at the meeting told him that he was way off base. He still thinks he is right.



Note to John, I tried to write this the best I could from my notes.
If you do not think it is proper to post this or if you want to change it in any way it is all right with me.

[iamskippy]

This is interesting...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Nope - no problem at all - go for it Jim

[MakoMike]

FWIW, NY and some other states have a free registry (license)

[JohnR]

So I just sent the following in to Rep Filippi - probably should have finished my coffee before trying to write something:

Good morning Representative Filippi.

I want to respond to comments on how Rhode Island should change the Saltwater Fishing license program. I have heard various concerns about your approach to revising the RI Saltwater License. This program is required by the Federal Government for each state to create their own license to meet Federal requirements or to adopt the alternate existing Federal license.

At this time the, Rhode Island Saltwater Fishing license meets the Federal licensing mandate.

While I am opposed to the overall concept of paying (yet another) fee, especially for a right included in the State’s Constitution, the existing license does offer a few benefits, The existing license does give reciprocity to other neighboring states so I can use my RI license in Massachusetts and Connecticut without needing to purchase a much more expensive non-resident license in those states. The RI License also provides funds to a restricted Rhode Island account that is used to get Federal matching funds to benefit saltwater fisheries in Rhode Island.

We all know that the state would not replace those lost funds with funding from the general fund to maintain matching Federal money.

Several years back, extensive meetings were put in place and many stakeholder groups discussed this licensing issue at length. The end result was an inexpensive license that met Federal mandates, provided some funds for Saltwater Fisheries, and offered reciprocity to other local states burdened with the same Federal requirement. Any effort to supplant that existing license without extreme diligence and review would be a significant loss to our meager management system.


John Redmond
www.Striped-Bass.com

Originally Posted by MakoMike

FWIW, NY and some other states have a free registry (license)

FWIW - RI would lose Federal Matching money as they would not replace what is lost - lousy position (as usual) to be in.

[bart]

Nicely stated, John

[BasicPatrick]

This proposal is even worse then is being stated here. What is the matching money that comes from the feds being spent on now. My guess is it is being used to collect the data required for a state to have its own license. There is no way in hell that at $3 or $4 per person and no federal money RI will be able to pay for its own data collection. A state could in theory fail to collect the data in an ongoing year but the next year the state will have to figure out how to meet the data requirement OR let the feds take over the licensing for that state.

Yes, some state have no charge for their license but those states use their budgets to collect the data and deliver much less angler services than states that have a reasonable fee driving income into their system.

My point to the legislature from RI is who is gonna pay the bill in two years. The answer to that question should be part of the discussion around his proposal.

The more I hear about what other states are doing the more grateful I am for the way we handled this issue in MA. .... It may be the one thing our state government has done right in twenty years.

[Roger]

Originally Posted by BasicPatrick

There is no way in hell that at $3 or $4 per person and no federal money RI will be able to pay for its own data collection.

Don't worry, the price was based on actual quotes from private contractors. IIRC, the actual quote was less than $3 per person. I'm surprised it's that much since the only data is related to who bought a license.

Statistical data regarding catches, etc are not the state's responsibility.

[MakoMike]

Originally Posted by BasicPatrick

This proposal is even worse then is being stated here. What is the matching money that comes from the feds being spent on now. My guess is it is being used to collect the data required for a state to have its own license. There is no way in hell that at $3 or $4 per person and no federal money RI will be able to pay for its own data collection. A state could in theory fail to collect the data in an ongoing year but the next year the state will have to figure out how to meet the data requirement OR let the feds take over the licensing for that state.

Yes, some state have no charge for their license but those states use their budgets to collect the data and deliver much less angler services than states that have a reasonable fee driving income into their system.

My point to the legislature from RI is who is gonna pay the bill in two years. The answer to that question should be part of the discussion around his proposal.

The more I hear about what other states are doing the more grateful I am for the way we handled this issue in MA. .... It may be the one thing our state government has done right in twenty years.

Come on Pat, you should know better. The only data the state has to collect is the name, address and telephone number of the registrant. It never has to be updated. Any high school kid could design a database to capture three fields of data that never needs to be updated. Many states along the coast provide anglers with a registry free of charge.

[timmah]

I'll take that database job any day for 3 bucks a person.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device