Saltwater fishing license……Why or why not?

[BigFish]

We must aready pay .60 cents of every dollar we earn to the government for taxes......when will it end????

[Andy D]

I think the politicians will just add the cost on to a freshwater lic. and make it 1 lic. for both fresh & salt. I'm against it for the same reasons as posted by others. But I was against a 50% hike on my electric bill and all the protesting did not do sh!t. The same will happen here I think it's comming and no amount of argument against it will matter

[2boxers]

I am not for it or any lic for that matter dogs, firearms, fishing ect...... the only one I think is ok is a drivers lic. all others just a way to create money for the state then create a job to enforce it

[MikeToole]

Congress, through the recently reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act, called on NOAA to take the lead in creating a national registry of saltwater anglers. This requires a tracking system for people fishing in federal waters and in state waters when fishing for anadromous species (stripers). The law does not require a license but how else do you think the states will handle it. Below is from a document trying to explain the requirement:

"Don’t most states already have a saltwater fishing license?
Many states do have some kind of fishing license for saltwater anglers. In those states, the actual requirements for who has to have a license vary from state to state. States that are currently without any saltwater fishing license include Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Hawaii and the western Pacific and Caribbean territories.

Are there any exemptions from the federal registry requirement?
Yes, Congress gave anglers who are licensed or registered by the states an exemption from the federal requirement, but only if a state can provide NOAA with certain information about anglers in their state. The Magnuson-Stevens Act says that a state can get a pass on the federal registry if 1) it already has a program to count all of its saltwater anglers (e.g. through a comprehensive saltwater fishing license) or 2) “the Secretary of Commerce determines that information from the State program is suitable for the Secretary’s use or is used to assist in completing marine recreational fisheries statistical surveys, or evaluating the effects of proposed conservation and management measures for marine recreational fisheries.” In other words, the state has to be able to either account for their anglers themselves or provide information on their fishing activity to the federal government. "

[numbskull]

Documenting the numbers of voters involved in recreational saltwater fishing will likely have a huge ancillary benefit.

[tattoobob]

The only problem I have is it's a big ocean and I fish NH, Mass, & RI
Does this mean I have to buy 3 states Licenses? if so I am against it.

If it does work for multiple states and the money goes to the right place and fund the sportsman funds then I will want it.

Just think of all the extra money made buy fining none license holders

[Back Beach]

Originally Posted by numbskull

Documenting the numbers of voters involved in recreational saltwater fishing will likely have a huge ancillary benefit.

Exactly. People keep calling it "another tax" but it really isn't. Its ammunition for the recreational fishery. Its ammunition to eliminate habitat destruction and by catch in our waters too by commercial netters/draggers. It’s happened in other states like Florida and Texas already. Guess who the most outspoken opponents were to the license in those states? The commercials were due to the perceived threat (which later materialized into reality) to their livelihoods.
Bottom line is that it makes sense to support a license for our own good. What will happen is that eventually the federal registry will lead to a federal license for us. Our license dollars will go directly to the feds and never be seen again. Take this thing on a local level and keep the control on a local level with a state license. To me if you are a recreational fisherman and oppose a state license, you haven’t done your homework on the subject or you've been mislead.
Oh yeah, I'm not anti commercial, but the wrong gear usage in the wrong place at the wrong time is one of the things that needs to be addressed further. Look at our cod stocks, or what used to be cod stocks.

[MakoMike]

Its a done deal, the feds have already seen to that. Now we just have to work out the details. Reciprocity among all the atlantic states is paramount for me. I don't want to have to buy five o more seperate licenses. That should be doable, since the feds don't want to have the same people multiple times in their database, we need to get the feds to speficiy that the state licenses must be reciprocal in order for them to qulaify as exempting the state from the federal licensing requirements.

[EarnedStripes44]

i'd rather they bring back Atlantic Salmon. There used to be Salmon almost every river north of Long Island.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

i'd rather they bring back Atlantic Salmon. There used to be Salmon almost every river north of Long Island.

Wow.
you lost me on that one.

[RIJIMMY]

IM POd that the feds want to know if i fish or not, none of ther GD business!

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by MikeToole

"Don’t most states already have a saltwater fishing license?
Many states do have some kind of fishing license for saltwater anglers. In those states, the actual requirements for who has to have a license vary from state to state. States that are currently without any saltwater fishing license include Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Oregon, Hawaii and the western Pacific and Caribbean territories.

Those that do are Alaska, Alabama, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, California, and Washington

11 don't have them and 12 do, and Alabama isn't even a coastal state (their license is for Mobile bay only).....that Most States comment is a little suspect.

so that's a 50/50 split between the coastal states.

I prefer to keep my money in my pocket...I don't need to dish out yet another licensing fee. I already buy Freshwater liceneses for 3 state...I don't need to buy 3 or 4 more for the Saltwater access.

[MikeToole]

[QUOTE=The Dad Fisherman;550286]
11 don't have them and 12 do, and Alabama isn't even a coastal state (their license is for Mobile bay only).....that Most States comment is a little suspect.

You miss read what was posted. The site I got the information from was in a question/answer format. The question was " Don't most states already have a saltwater license?". The answer followed noting which ones don't.

Be that as it may, the feds gave the states an excuse to put a license in place and be able to blame someone else. So we will be getting them no later than the end of 2009.

[Mike J.]

Having been stationed with the Navy in alot of states that require a license to fish the salt, I have seen the Pro's and Con's. The biggest concern anywhere is where the money collected for the license will be utilized.

"Pro" if it will be used to improve the access points, Ramps and enforcement of recreational angling .

"Con" = it ends up in the general fund, the fishermen will never see a penny put into to recreational fisheries, enforcement etc.

I just left Virginia and they required a license, and by law, the money was soley used for the improvement and enforcement of recreational angling, You could buy a license for a boat and that license covered everybody fishing in the boat and the owner could go surf fishing and still be covered by the boats license. This helped the charter boat industry from having to increase their fees and adding on a 1 day license for each angler onboard.

Also the state owned boat ramps charged to launch a boat(Nice Facilities) but if you had a fishing license the fee was reduced. the jet skiers and pleasure boaters had to pay double to launch since they didn't contribute to the construction and maintenance of the Ramp.

It's coming, No doubt about it. One way or the other we all will be digging deeper into our wallets!!

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by numbskull

Documenting the numbers of voters involved in recreational saltwater fishing will likely have a huge ancillary benefit.

That's the biggest benefit to a license, and the one that 90% of the people don't realize

[piemma]

I realize that there is a fear of any regulatory body and a saltwater license in just one more example of Big Brother gaining another way to gain control. Never the less, it is coming and, if we are smart, we will have some say in how the resulting funds are used. The recreational fishing community has a lot of pull and can effect how the monies are allocated.

[Pete F.]

[QUOTE=MikeToole;550375]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

11 don't have them and 12 do, and Alabama isn't even a coastal state (their license is for Mobile bay only).....that Most States comment is a little suspect.

You miss read what was posted. The site I got the information from was in a question/answer format. The question was " Don't most states already have a saltwater license?". The answer followed noting which ones don't.

Be that as it may, the feds gave the states an excuse to put a license in place and be able to blame someone else. So we will be getting them no later than the end of 2009.

Not only that but in the states without Vermont is counted, I will have to go and check but I have yet to find any saltwater here, unless it's in the spaghetti pot.

[basswipe]

RI is simply on the verge of going broke.The state would be forced to funnel those funds generated by a license into the general fund.Hell RI wants to start tolling the Mt.Hope Bridge again!

RI taxes are some of the highest in the nation.I'll be damned if I have to pay to fish so that the state can pay for the I-WAY bridge,the so far non-existent new Sakonnet River bridge and freakin welfare programs.

Nah.I'm against it.

[Backbeach Jake]

My questions are "How Much?"
20-25 bucks, well that's ok by me, if they're asking for 100, that's another story. What will the fine for non-compliance be? Equal or greater than a license? I think it should be. I also think that one license should cover all US shores. We're already paying 10% on our gear, where does that go?

[Redsoxticket]

Originally Posted by basswipe

RI is simply on the verge of going broke.The state would be forced to funnel those funds generated by a license into the general fund.Hell RI wants to start tolling the Mt.Hope Bridge again!

RI taxes are some of the highest in the nation.I'll be damned if I have to pay to fish so that the state can pay for the I-WAY bridge,the so far non-existent new Sakonnet River bridge and freakin welfare programs.

Nah.I'm against it.

I agree.
If a license can be used in adjacent states I would get a MA license instead of supporting the crooked state of RI. The best part of RI is the fishing.

[BassDawg]

Originally Posted by Flaptail

Do we really need it? Take for example the guy who comes down to the Cape for one week a year and traditionally would spend one or two evenings casting for Bluefish at West Dennis Beach with his children or buy a box of seaworms and sit with his son on the jetty at Menahaunt for one morning of thier vacation.

Should a license be required so the two of them could spend a little time together just sitting and talking about things a Dad and his kid speak of when alone and just enjoying something a bit different than life back in the city and it really doesn't matter what they catch?

Should they have to pay to enjoy that memory?

Sadly, but truly, the answer is yes for several reasons................

The main conondrum facing our recreation/sport, as it moves forward, is what to do with the monies that licensing will produce? The fact that the feds won't stay out of this debate, and they will have their numbers ~one way or another~ alarms me more than just a little bit....................

That being said, if it truly is about finding out how many of us there are ~though we certainly suspect that it is much more than that, then why not put a box and a question on each IRS Form right next to the CREEP, Save a Tree, US Olympic Fund boxes that already litter those forms? I mean we ALL pay our taxes, right ???? Will such a method provide a national census of saltwater anglers? Yes.

Will it help with the vacationer's of Flaps above scenario? No.

For me to fish in FL, I must go to the local Bait shop/Wally world and purchase a non-resident rec license. It cost me $7.00 for three days access to ALL of Florida's salt last year!!! A mere pittance, imo! No snook stamp required, which I believe is still in the neighborhood of $25 anually for FL residents. I could have purchased a single day, seven day, etc. Not too much to pay and most reasonable considering the impact and pressure that non-resident anglers can apply to our local fisheries. Certain areas of FL get hammered by the "vacationing" fishing community just as hard as RI does; yet currently RI has no way to realize manageable impact dollars to help to off-set said impact. In my view this is what hurts the most.......................

People are going to impact the shoreline, the fishery, and the Bay/Ocean. The weekend warrior is responsible for pressuring our species and coasts in numerous ways, so I'll just take one of them, here. People are going to fish. People bring garbage with them ~stuff for them to feed their faces and "their" fishes with. And this is what damages our shores/oceans/fishery with stagerring frequence and detrimental consequence. We definitely need dollars for research and fisheries management and development related to fishing pressure from both ~resident and non-resident. So, let's use the 10% they already get. I am willing to pay between $5 and $15 to MA ~annually and reciprocally~ in order to help police and clean up our shores. A small non-res of NE fee (sorry NY'ers and beyond, but hey iffin ya have a beef with it, step up to the plate and move to NE ) should also be required to generate funds that could go to State Parks & Recreation budgets in the interests of shore access development/maintenance of both the old and some new facilities, alike. These funds must be, BY LAW, untouchable and allocated strictly and solely for the enforcement and enrichment of the Recreational Experience. Simply put, without whom the monies would not be there in the first place. Hell, I'd even purchase a yearly Resident Striper Stamp ($20) if I knew that the funds were being managed effectively. $10 to the fishery/conservation/public education side of the coin and $10 to enforcement/access/maintenance part of the equation.

Wouldn't it be nice to see 55 gallon trash barrels, or even a freakin' dumpster that gets regular service at say the East Wall, WHLT, CTown, The Q, or WKPG Bways? I removed so much garbage from all of those places it was sickening last year. At 3 of the 4 I had nowhere to put the garbage??? I ended up schlepping it in my feeshmobile to the nearest dumpster or barrel, that wasn't very close !! The Aves have trash barrels at least, and so aren't the beaches at Gansett and Scarbo set-up nicely. And this is why I think that we should beat the feds to the punch. Each state could collect a resaonable fee from their residents, reciprocate to the rest of NE, and go non-res license for everyone else, the key word being reasonable. Say, 3 bucks a day for the non-residents? This is some huge dollars, but AS LONG AS IT IS MANAGED PROPERLY, it could do us some real good.

As an example, FL has many State funded areas of access that are absolutely beautiful, well maintained and actually make one feel like much more than a third world citizen because one likes to fish. I am not saying that we'll get our Bass stands back (why not in your more general places?); but some of the State Parks in FL are well lit, provide ample parking, plenty of places to remove and place yer garbage (& heavy fines if you don't), places to leave a shat (and I doan mean porta-johns), boardwalks leading to the beach, playgrounds for kiddies, rinsing stations to remove sand and salt, and cafes even!!! Of course, none of the general public stuff would be available at night, but i cannot tell you how many times the porta-johns at singing beach have saved the night for this surfcaster .

While this is only one possible positive result of a regular stream of revenue, surely by our concentrated efforts and the resourceful minds of NE we could at least equal this level of results ~dependent upon effective leadership and smart supervision of such a revenue resource.

Just some ideas gentlemen, for as certain as BIG Eeeeeels brang tha BIG Gurls ~change is coming. So, why not effect the change ourselves on a local and regional level, restricting Big Brother to a tiny little box on the IRS forms and providing our own improvements designed to enhance the surfcasting experience? If done properly each state could dramatically effect the business and enjoyment of recreational fishing.

Are any of us even remotely pleased with the mountain of issues we see going unadressed each year along our magnificent stretch of The Striper Coast? More importantly, these issues will not improve/go away by themselves, as each one requires FUNDING. How else are we to generate these funds? A donations box at our parking lots? How's about a yearly car wash and paper drive to increase revenue?

I'm joking, of course, but I will gladly buy two less plugs, purchase two less rounds of eeeeeeeels, or pass on a coupla less pkgs of pogies to contribute to strictly targeted dinero. Consequently, if we see our licensing dollars at work, then won't we be more willing to comply and better able to pass our beloved sport and moonlit obsession on to our children and their children's children? One concern nags at me, though, does better access lead to undue pressure to our species and a possible return to the 80's?

[Tinslinger]

I was interviewed by a rep of the DEC ( the usual questions i.e. catch, time, frequency of trips, how much spent per trip) When I asked about a SW lic they said Maine was not willing to impose one in 2008 so the Feds will in 2009. I have no other verification of this.

If its a Fed thing will they also control the process of those states in compliance now?? Would it be like the duck stamp?? a fed stamp and individual state stamps??? I've bought FW lics for the last 40 years and I see where the money goes (hatcheries and stocking programs).

In MaineI have been checked 3 times in 16 years by wardens during duck season and 3 during 20 fishing seasons. How well will this process be inforced. Every member of this site will buy SW lic if required but I think we would like to see it inforced. There is not enough enforcement of the existing bag limits now will my-your 20$ make it any better?? I don't think so.
Will the money go to SW hatcheries and release programs??? The Atlantic Salmon Fish-farming in Maine has suffered because of the possibility of introducing diseses .What about the commercial guys???

[5/0]

I really don't know much on where the funds will "truly" go,now from what I've read here on this topic other State fisheries have benefited by implementing licence's that's great & I belive it should work that way.......But here in MA.It seems to me that MA. is one of a kind,the kind that "miss manages money",example the Big Dig or more relevant the Pike,now this roadway was paid off a looooooong time ago & has fell subject to the chopping block to stop paying,and every time it remains the same but this time around the rate's have gone up.Only in MA.WTF!

Deep down Mike, I don't have a problem paying,in fact I know this will be a real topic for all of us anglers down the road,sooner than later,so my beef is,there shouldn't be a joint fresh/salt water one. like the State implemented 19 yrs. ago. example,Fresh water fishing licence & water foul)I don't hunt so why should I pay for it,secondly I only fresh water fish "when I take my kids" & IM not really fishing,I just monitor it so for me shell out extra money for some thing I don't do is a waste,A waste of my $$.

The State should categorize licence's into 3 different licence's,example salt,fresh,water foul ,we work hard for our money so the State should spend a l'il time and curtsey on how to "Serve" us better,we will be the subscribers of this new law so we should have the right to "choose"what we want,if it's to be forced onto us to pay for a recreational sport,they shouldn't create a generic consolidated bill,something that some of us don't need or want,we shouldn't have to pay.
Open for debate down the road...........

Mike,the one thing that really burn's my Arse is,when I fished South Boston (yrs. ago) I remember watching these older Asian guys (I'am not stereo typing) fishing they were reaping tons of schoolies & I mean tons, they were catching & giving them to the runners (their own kids) they were running back and forth to there cars hiding them into coolers,now what they were going to do w/ them is beyond me & not the point,but the point is these guys wouldn't buy a licence nor keep legal bass or any legal fish,they'll keep anything they catch!!!!!!!!!!
Also I've seen some fish the Canal catch bass toss them in the rocks,then 1/2hr. goes by they catch a bigger one throw back the smaller of the 2.WTF!

IM not a whistle blower,but this is going to fall in the same scene of a "speeder" a lot of people do it,a lot of us see it,but do they/we drop a dime?No because it's so frequent and nobody's getting hurt......On the fishing aspect of it,some call some & some do nothing,but the bottom line is we all will suffer if something isn't done to control it.Something will be done when it's too late.

I like to play thing's by the numbers, I also expect other people to do the same.......People today have no respect for themselves & there not going to give a rats Arse about you(everybody)& anything down the road......


5/0

[Gunpowder]

ill move to antartica before i have to pay for a saltwater license

[Pete F.]

I'd gladly pay for one, just have a hard time justifying 5.
Might be better for me if I stuck to fewer spots anyways

[macojoe]

I for one will never pay!!

Everything cost all the time now!!

Is the ocean man made? NO!!

Are the fish stocked?? NO!!

Are the State ramps I paid for free?? NO!!

If I pay for a lic. will I get to use them for free?? NO!!

Are we going to get more state ramps?? Are they going to remain state ramps, or be given to the town after a while and then be for res. only??

I pay for a beach sticker that I can't use 1/2 the time because of birds, is that going to be free?? NO!!

Are we going to get more shore access? NO!!

Is the state going to band dragger's to the 3 mile limit to protect the inshore fishery so that we have fish to catch?? Cause at this rate we will be paying $$ to fish for nothing!!

So what am I going to get for my money?? Nothing thats what!! Just going to line the pockets of the state thats it!!
And once we say yes one time then we are going to have to pay increased fees all the time not to mention all the new fee's that will be made cause of this fee!

Nope you are never going to see me pay for my god given right to fish a god given natural resource!

This is a free country suposeably!! So I say let the people decide!! Thats the way it works!! Tired of all these taxes and stuff just shoved in are face and just have to lay down and suck it up!

FIGHT FOR ARE LAST FREE RESOURCE!! DON"T JUST LAY THERE AND TAKE IT!!

Ok I am getting mad now!

[WadingWill]

My problem with this is that they can't enforce the regulations they already have, how can they enforce this? How many times have you been to jetties in ri and seen guys with buckets full of 4 and 5" scup? You think those guys will buy licenses? You think they'll fish any less? I don't. Just another way for the gov't to fleece us. If getting licenses meant they'd have more people to enforce the laws, I'd be all for it, but as it is they're spread to thin. I'm dead set agianst this.

[5/0]

Originally Posted by WadingWill

My problem with this is that they can't enforce the regulations they already have, how can they enforce this? How many times have you been to jetties in ri and seen guys with buckets full of 4 and 5" scup? You think those guys will buy licenses? You think they'll fish any less? I don't. Just another way for the gov't to fleece us. If getting licenses meant they'd have more people to enforce the laws, I'd be all for it, but as it is they're spread to thin. I'm dead set agianst this.

That's how I feel about it too,there are alot of "these"people who supposedly don't speaka da english and poach away with everything & anything they catch,it makes me

If the state elects to pass this,will there be enough Badges to enforce it,or will Massachusetts pull the usual....line there pockets,then tell us we don't have enough to "Truly enforce"!

Sorry,IMI have No Faith for the politicians here in MA. C'ome on look @ Deval what a Fu(king joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


5/0

[wheresmy50]

I've vented about this before, so I'll be more concise for this thread.

If I lived in a land of fantasy, and the money from said license went to better enforecement, better research, stocking??, etc., then I'm all for it.

I've lived in RI and MA, and I don't trust either state with public money. I've never lived in NJ, but the same goes there. On top of that, I'm from PA and fish in NJ, RI, and MA, so what I am supposed to do, pay 3 for 3 licenses to fish in the same "pond"?

Federal is the only way to go, since at least then I'll only have to pay once, and I'm convinced the money will be wasted anyway.

[eagerangler]

You guys seem to have a lot of political views on the subject. As a CT residence my friends and I are all for a saltwater license. Right now the DEP of CT is putting regulations on Strippers that are basic guestimations of what would promote a healthy fishery and boy are things starting to turn into a mess. The stripper population is starting to make a serious come back in all our tidal rivers and as a result other fisheries are starting to be deplited.

The alwifes of our state are all but extinct due to wide use as a bait fish that went unregulated for too long and with strippers populations growing in these areas their almost all gone. The strippers are also believed to be eating other fresh water species such as white perch, the american eel and many of the predominant game species such as larger mouth bass. Can you believe that one of our nuceular power plants, as part of it's environmental contribution, is developing a lock system for the Housatonic river to keep them from being so severly depleted.
The point I'm making in all of this is the DEP in this state needs significant funding in order to observe and tabulate appropriate actions in this state to keep and maintain a healthy fishery. The stripers are great no complaints here but if the bait fish aren't around then how long will they stick around for. Hell, even seeing a school of bunker around here is becoming a fluke as opposed to the everyday occurance that I remember growing up. I think a saltwater license is the least that I can do on my part.