Can u believe CT?

[Mr. Sandman]

Fishermen don't want a "Fund" of any kind. They want FISH in the water, not money in some fund that will have little effect. This collection of money is already done thru the 10% tax on all fishing tackle.

Fishing in the SW should be free. I understand the FW issues and they are different. This lic will have just as much impact on fishing regs as the HMS lic does for tuna now... I don't care about putting money in a Fund...if I want a fund I will contact fidelity.

From the tuna permit website:
Q: What do I get when I pay for my permit?
A: Unlike many state permit programs, the permit fees go directly to the General Treasury and not to the managing agency (NMFS). The fee is set, in accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook, to recover the cost of administering the permit program, including maintenance of the public website and the toll-free phone system.

I ask you: This lic cost about 20 bucks...what is the purpose of having a website that collects money so it can fund it's website to collect money and not fund any fishing related business? This is something akin to a ponzi scheme. This should be illegal to operate. I know the state plan is different but if it costs 20 bucks/head to operate a website just imagine what it will cost to operate a website + put money in a fund to actually do something.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

Fishermen don't want a "Fund" of any kind. They want FISH in the water, not money in some fund that will have little effect. This collection of money is already done thru the 10% tax on all fishing tackle.

Fishing in the SW should be free. I understand the FW issues and they are different. This lic will have just as much impact on fishing regs as the HMS lic does for tuna now... I don't care about putting money in a Fund...if I want a fund I will contact fidelity.

From the tuna permit website:
Q: What do I get when I pay for my permit?
A: Unlike many state permit programs, the permit fees go directly to the General Treasury and not to the managing agency (NMFS). The fee is set, in accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook, to recover the cost of administering the permit program, including maintenance of the public website and the toll-free phone system.

I ask you: This lic cost about 20 bucks...what is the purpose of having a website that collects money so it can fund it's website to collect money and not fund any fishing related business? This is something akin to a ponzi scheme. This should be illegal to operate. I know the state plan is different but if it costs 20 bucks/head to operate a website just imagine what it will cost to operate a website + put money in a fund to actually do something.

The license is a dead issue. It's here whether you or I like it or not. It's either pay Mass for a SW license and have the funds put into fisheries issues, or pay twice the amount to the federal registry and have the money go into Bobby Byrd's next pet pork project in West Virginia.

Maybe you can get Bawney Frank and/or Delehunt's successor to work for repeal of the amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Act that forced the choice of either a state license/Federal registry down our throats?

Or maybe you and all the rest of the moaners can just go on bitching about it here and wasting bandwith, wringing your hands over what's a dead issue and a done deal.

The topic here is CT violating the law and raiding SW license fees to close budget shortfalls in their general budget, and what CT anglers should be doing about that---not about whether there "should" be a SW license. That horse has left the barn.

[Jay Dog]

Couple of Statements from The Ct DEP web site

"Does the revenue from this license go back to my sport?
Yes. State and federal law requires that all revenue from hunting and fishing licenses be used exclusively to support fish and wildlife conservation programs."

"What is a reciprocal license privilege? (Is there reciprocity with any other states?)Connecticut law allows non-resident anglers who hold a marine waters fishing license in New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire or Maine to fish in the marine district and land marine fish in this state without a Connecticut license provided the state issuing the marine license affords the same privilege to resident Connecticut marine license holders"

So it appears all funding from liceneses (fines are another matter) go back to DEP to retain eligibility for Federal Funds

Licenses will be reciprocal with other states if other states grant CT the same privelege. Why such a high non resident fee I haven't a clue

[SeaWolf]

last year, CT increased the license fees across the board in all areas 100%, not just hunting and fishing. there has been challenges and debates since last fall on changing those licenses, at least on the fishing and hunting side of it. i have heard 2nd hand several times that the laws will change. last i heard the fishing and hunting licenses would be increased 20% from the original prices before the 100% markup. i have not heard on the updated status. here is that bill - AN ACT CONCERNING RECENT INCREASES IN HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES AND AMENDING CERTAIN MOTOR VEHICLE FINES.

[CowHunter]

Dont sweat it, Im sure the regular licenses will catch up to the charter licenses... I have to pay, rather be taxed, $600 to run charters in NY waters....

[Mike P]

And after all is said and done, CT just rolled back non-resident SW license fees, from $60 back to the $15 it was originally.

I wonder what could have made them decide to do something like that????

[piemma]

ah, who F%$#K cares about fishing in CT anyway. All the good spots are closed by the rich land owners. You can't get near the water if you try.Fish RI & MA and screw CT.

[WoodyCT]

Originally Posted by piemma

ah, who F%$#K cares about fishing in CT anyway. All the good spots are closed by the rich land owners. You can't get near the water if you try.Fish RI & MA and screw CT.

Got that right!

If I really want to take long walks to reach good spots there are plenty of those in RI, and the spots are WAY better!