Saltwater fishing license……Why or why not?

[Swimmer]

What will we do if each state enacts a license? All of us will have to stop fishing at the next states border. We are not going to buy several licenses, I doubt. I am with Larry on this. Everything we buy fishing related has a 10% tax on it now. What happens to that money? Probably the only reason we doubt have one is the elected officials haven't figured out who is going to get what job yet. Sorry for the cynicizm.

[cow tamer]

Then there are many who would most likely fish without a license. The same group that enforcement has always had trouble enforcing.

[DZ]

Salt Water license – always a popular topic. I remember taking part in the discussions on this topic here in Rhody a few years back. One of the biggest issues was a dedicated fund – the state reps said they could make it a dedicated fund but when pressed further they also admitted that any Governor could declare a state of emergency and use the funds for something more important. Knowing what great shape Rhody is in financially at this time and you can see that the dedicated funds may not be dedicated for long.

There was also a question of offsetting DEMs budget – another words the state would use the money generated by a license to fund DEMs budget. This would then allow the state to take away the “general fund” money that would normally fund DEM. So it basically would be a wash.

And as Flap says those that just want to spend some quality time on the beach with family may not spring for it. But then again, spending quality family time in sweet (fresh) water already has costs associated with it in every state.

Some advantages – weeding the amount of fishermen - part timers may give it up.

Using the license to guarantee access: RI was very receptive to the idea of allowing a salt water fishing license to provide free access to all state parks and camping areas such as Charlestown Breachway, Fort Adams.

One more comment - if one New England State does go for it - we all will. It will be reciprocal at least in bordering states.

[Back Beach]

Originally Posted by DZ

There was also a question of offsetting DEMs budget – another words the state would use the money generated by a license to fund DEMs budget. This would then allow the state to take away the “general fund” money that would normally fund DEM. So it basically would be a wash.

Good point too.
I would counter with how big is the budget now, and what is the potential revenue associated with the license? It may be much larger than what the state currently allocates and thus not a wash, but incremental revenue.It may also, but not likely, be smaller.

[MikeToole]

I think we may be missing the point, in that having some form of saltwater license is no longer a question. By the end of 2009 we will have one in some form or other due to new federal regulations. The real issue now is how will it be implemented.

I do not think that the states will expect to see a real decrease in the number of vacationers who will fish due to the need to purchase a license. People are willing to spend 400 for a family of four to see a three hour ball game, what would make them think the same wouldn't be true for fishing.

[ridler72]

Agree with others. As long as the money stays in fishery management, education and enforcement and not in a general fund I am for it.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by MikeToole

I think we may be missing the point, in that having some form of saltwater license is no longer a question. By the end of 2009 we will have one in some form or other due to new federal regulations. The real issue now is how will it be implemented.

I do not think that the states will expect to see a real decrease in the number of vacationers who will fish due to the need to purchase a license. People are willing to spend 400 for a family of four to see a three hour ball game, what would make them think the same wouldn't be true for fishing.

What federal regs? The states control the waters out to a certain point, no?

The impact will be to casual fisherman, people who's family go to the beach for a day and the dad brings along his rod, stops at a bait shop for sandworms, etc. Look how many guys run out to a bluefish blitz, now they need a liscence?

[bloocrab]

I am against a SW Fishing License -

Whether is be that year or this year, the monies will NOT go where promised. We can discuss this all we want, but behind the scenes, the money will disappear...and nothing will get better for the TRUE fisherpeople -
It will not open access, nor will it stop from losing access to "spots".
Law enforcement, even if slightly increased...is not going to make the difference that one would think.
We all know we can poach/illegally harvest Bass without a problem....heck, look at the hours that most of us fish. Will it stop the weekend warrior??? ......maybe, will it make a difference in regards to the fish population/stock/status?.......what it will do is make the newspaper so it seems that this new license is in fact helping.....when in reality, it's not. And once they realize the revenue, more politicians will find ways to getting their piece of it.

We don't have a choice, it will happen -

...and when it does, I will illegally fish as long as I can.

[Pt.JudeJoe]

If you don't have legal status to be in the usa do you still have to buy a fishing license or will you be exempt?

[Motor Fish]

Not for any more taxes. I just don't trust the politicians, especially in MA. I'm already buying fishing licenses in MA, RI & NH. Where does that money go?

So what I'm hearing is that I'll have to buy freshwater license AND a saltwater license? No way. If there is going to be a license required, it should be applicable to both salt and fresh water.