When I announced what I knew about the RI Licensing proposals based on the limited information I had at the time, I jumped the gun a little reading too much into the negative side. We were having a debate on the subject in a meeting at a club I belong too and all I had heard was the negatives of this issue. I also heard some outrageously high dollar amounts for license fees. After looking into the issue further, seeing some more of the documents and talking to more of the people, this appears to be a serious proposal that may offer benefit as opposed to a "Grab for cash" as I had stated earlier.
There will be a lot of issues that come up with this proposal and there will be a lot of debate to follow - some informed and some not so. What I am seeing is much less a grab but more of how can the state come to terms with what they've been doing about marine management and what they can and should do. The issue was raised by the
"Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Management Modernization Act of 2001" which determined "Marine fisheries management methods currently used in Rhode Island are not adequate to achieve desired levels of sustainability of certain species of the state's marine fisheries and their commercial and recreational use", among many other items. Much of this act involves an increase in data collection, monitoring, marine licensing plans, and overhaul of all of the marine recreational and commercial management of Rhode Island, including introduction of a Recreational Saltwater license.
I am seeing a positive effort by those involved to do this the right way. I am trying to keep an open mind on this and I am trying to become better informed. I will relay as much as I can on what I see with this issue. I also want to add that some the fee amounts first tossed about here and other places, like "$130" for a non-resident license appear way out of line. Much of the discussion about potential fees reflect around the average of the coastal states, which is $15 for residents and $38 for non-residents. Certainly more reasonable that $60 for a resident and $138 for non-res (Louisiana is the highest non-res at $110 for a rec non-res license). They realize how important fishing is to RI and to RI tourism. It was mentioned that there was more out of state anglers fishing Rhody waters every year than residents but that number includes all of the people that fish one day on a party boat or one day of their vacation, not anglers that frequent the Rhody Shores.
There is also a good amount of documentation available online:
http://www.ci.uri.edu/projects/rifis...mittees/SC.htm
http://www.ci.uri.edu/projects/rifis...creational.htm
http://www.ci.uri.edu/projects/rifis..._Licensing.htm
There were several focuses to last night's meeting resulting in a lot of discussion. At first, a wish list was developed by DEM on what they would like to do if the license, and associated funds, came through. Many things were mentioned between better ramp facilities, data collection, land acquisition, shore access, PARKING, enforcement, protecting raised funds and have them fully directed back into fishing instead of other items of the legislature, fees derived from license infractions going back into the fund and so forth. There were also additional wishes added by others from the recreational sector like access, education, and enforcement as well as the potential for a recreational advisory group that could assist in allocation of funds and review of the program itself. Also brought up were the negatives that a license could have. Items like, a negative impact to tourism, no control over the funds, mismanagement, quickly raising fees, later redirection of funds, protection of the system from the legislature and that list goes on and on.
Again, I am seeing a positive effort to make some changes that could benefit the rec sector and the environment/fisheries and not as was stated in the past, a pure grab for money by the legislature...
In preparation for the next meeting, a list is being developed of reasons for a license and reasons against a license. They are encouraging people to add to this list. If you have anything you would like to add to reasons for or against a license, submit those reasons for or against to this thread and I will forward them to the individual compiling this list.
Again, I am seeing a positive effort to make some changes that could benefit the rec sector and the environment/fisheries and not as was stated in the past, a pure grab for money by the legislature...
So again, if you could furnish me with a list of valid pros and cons to a license, I'll see that any new items not previously noted on their list will be forwarded to the individual building the list.
Thanks,
John
RI Licensing proposals
Hybrid Mode
