MA Saltwater License... [Archive] - Fly Fishing Forum

: MA Saltwater License...


jimS
11-20-2009, 12:27 PM
Looks like a saltwater license will be required, beginning Jan 1, 2011. Projected cost for residents is $10. No word on the cost for non-residents. Here's a link:

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091120/NEWS/911200325/-1/NEWS01

Rip Ryder
11-20-2009, 12:34 PM
Sounds like another excuse to bite the bullet Jim and find the Cape house sooner than later:hihi:

FishHawk
11-20-2009, 04:11 PM
Well here we go . I just hope the money goes to Marine fisheries and not in the general fund. FishHawk

Paxton
11-20-2009, 07:58 PM
I've read that most of the $ will go to hire people to manage the process................at least a few more people will get jobs. The article I read said that by getting permits, the state/gov will know where people fish...........that should be interesting as I live in Central mass........143 miles from Keith's shuttle......of course, given the global warming issue, maybe in a few years the cow pasture next to me will become the new NM :hihi:
Another govererment program that wastes time and $!!!! I am sure that with the little $ left over, in 20 yrs they will determine that the commercial dragging is eliminating baitfish...by that time there will only be one striper left for all of us to share.
Hey...look at the bright side....anyone 60 or older has to get a permit, but there is no fee. I knew if I lived long enough there would be some benefit for being an old f _ _ _
Hopefully this new program will be as successful as Amtrak, the U.S. Postal Service, our wars, Social Security, Medicare, and God forbid, a gov run health care system.
OK...you are free to say that I am a synical old F _ _ _ ........but it has been a while since I have ever seen any good done by our lovely politicians. Actually, at the moment, I can't remember anything good....but then again, it might be demetia.
This kind of reminds me of an article I recently read where the state of california is spending multiple millions of dollars to try and discover where to find a source of water. It astounds me that with 3,000miles of coastline on the Pacific...no one has looked west and thought.....desalinization. Maybe if I write they will give me $5 for the idea.
My apologies in advance for my negative response. I need to fish and get in a better mood. I am suffering from SWS (Striper Withdrawl Syndrome) as you can tell :)

Ron

Stevo
11-21-2009, 11:18 AM
I wonder what they'll charge ex colonials!? :hihi:

$10 doesn't seem much and if all it's going to do is give a paper pusher/license checker a job, what's the point?
Hey-ho, it seems you've got similar problems to us over here on the other side of the pond - mainly lip service from politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something (look good) without actually ruffling any feathers within the commercial sector.

Paxton
11-21-2009, 12:07 PM
Stevo....I forgot to mention in my previous post that the newspaper article on the saltwater permit requirement also mentioned that income generated would not allow to hire additional staff to actually enforce the need for a permit. They presently have significant cuts in personnel and don't even have enough staff to monitor fresh wader licensures.
If no one is there to enforce the need for a permit...it serves no purpose.
The permit is cheap, but I would be willing to pay triple if it actually paid for research to improve the fishery. My problem is not the permit, it is that the permit just pays for the permitting process and is non enforceable.
re your question on your cost.............they probably have not even thought about it. If asked, just say that you left your permit at home :) You can borrow mine.
Somehow I can't imagine the state to pay $20 for a shuttle ride to NM to see if I have a $10 permit.

striblue
11-22-2009, 01:53 AM
"The state license fees would go toward the Marine Recreational Fisheries Development Fund to support programs for improved public access points with better lighting and dock facilities; stepped-up conservation efforts; stock improvements; and better data collection about recreational fishing." According to the paper. Absent a dislike about fees and taxes as a gut reaction,,,,projected $10 is no big deal to me. IF it goes for that stuff. I did not see in the article that there was any discussion between residence and non residence.... unless that has not been worked out yet. Is there any difference in that for freshwater? My recollection is that there is...but the "seashore" maybe treated differently than landlocked freshwater.

BigDave
11-24-2009, 09:35 AM
I am all for it. Any policy that proves the amount of money spent on recreational fishing in this state is a good thing. Any policy that helps fund enforcement (almost non-existent at the moment) will be good too. It will be interesting to see how MA will interact with our neighboring states. CT is already charging an arm and a leg for non-residents. Since most fishermen I know fish MA, RI, CT and NY salt over the course of a season, it would be nice to see some cooperation between the states instead of turning this into a money grab.

Adrian
11-24-2009, 11:49 AM
I believe CT will honor reciprocity with neighboring States for the Marine license so Ma should be o.k.

NY is complicated and reciprocity only applies to LI Sound Waters so I guess I won't be fishing the odd days on the Hudson or Jamaica Bay in 2010!

RI is totally screwed currently since their Governor vetoed the State's approval of a $7 resident marine license. The RI Gov. citied a bunch of constitutional arguments/freedoms etc. but in fact he's shafted his constituents and now RI residents will have to pay the $25 federal marine license or risk getting busted by the US Coast Guard (or other enforcement agencies). Plus they will not have any reciprocity with neighboring states. There is a possibility the the veto will get overturned - I hope so!

Various expletives spring to mind but for now, I'll just state that ,overall, this has not been handled particulary well. :roll:

jimS
11-24-2009, 12:50 PM
Adrian, I understand that the non-resident saltwater license for Conn. is $60. Is there reciprocity for this license with neighboring states? I think not. If I decide to have non-resident licenses for MA, RI & Ct, we are probably talking real money. In the scheme of things, I wouldn't have a problem with costly non-resident licenses if the funds went to support the resource.

Adrian
11-24-2009, 01:26 PM
Adrian, I understand that the non-resident saltwater license for Conn. is $60. Is there reciprocity for this license with neighboring states? I think not. If I decide to have non-resident licenses for MA, RI & Ct, we are probably talking real money. In the scheme of things, I wouldn't have a problem with costly non-resident licenses if the funds went to support the resource.
Jim

You raise an important point that I had overlooked. Folks coming to the Northeast to fish from outside of the 'reciprocity area' could face some hefty fees. Not sure what the plans are for shorter period licenses? Daily, weekly, monthly etc.? And how easy/accessible these would be? That might make it a bit more bearable...

One unexpected consequence of this could be fewer anglers visiting and a significant hit on State's revenues.

Here's the latest from CT DEP Website

http://www.ct.gov/Dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2696&q=443060&depNav_GID=1630

Dble Haul
11-24-2009, 02:30 PM
It was my understanding that the original purpose of requiring a marine liscence was to better track the number of salt water anglers. If there isn't reciprocity with neighboring states, then that goal will be lost.

If I get a liscence for CT, NY, RI, and MA, I will be counted four times....I'm sure that other anglers would get into a similar situation to fish multiple waters. The number of salt water recreational anglers would be grossly overestimated without reciprocity.

Smcdermott
11-24-2009, 06:40 PM
If I get a liscence for CT, NY, RI, and MA, I will be counted four times....I'm sure that other anglers would get into a similar situation to fish multiple waters. The number of salt water recreational anglers would be grossly overestimated without reciprocity.

I am not sure but I think a SSN was a required field when I got the CT license for this fall (only $16 for non-res at the time). If thats the case it would be pretty easy to weed out the duplicates in a combined data set.

I agree that this could be a really good thing if managed properly. For me, not a big deal to pay the fees if they are not outrageous but it will be challenging to take a friend out for just a day or two a season that doesn't normally fish saltwater if we fish out of state which is a pretty normal event for me.

gunner
11-24-2009, 06:45 PM
Check this out for some help or more confusion:

http://www.countmyfish.noaa.gov/mrip/



Joe

DanD
11-25-2009, 06:11 AM
This is just another excuse to take money out of our pockets. There will be exactly zero funds spent on anything that will help the fisherie. Strip all the bureaucratic bullshit out about the need to track everyone fishing and you got nothing.

FishHawk
11-25-2009, 06:37 AM
Effective: January 1st, 2011

1) Massachusetts

Source: http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/sena...02/st02200.htm

The Department of Fish and Game will propose an individual permit fee of $10 to take effect in January. The revenue will be deposited in the state's Marine Recreational Fisheries Development Fund.

Provisions of the new marine fishing license include:

(1) a non-residentholding a valid recreational saltwater fishing permit from a coastal state; provided, however, that the director shall determine that: the requirements of such other state permit are substantially the same as the commonwealth’s permit requirements; and the privileges granted under law to the resident of the other coastal state are similar to those permitted by the commonwealth;
(2) a person under 16 years of age;
(3) a disabled person, as defined in section 1 of chapter 19C; or
(4) a person fishing as a passenger on a for-hire vessel; provided, however, that the owner of the vessel has a valid permit from the director as provided in subsection (c).

2) Maine

Maine Anglers are currently subject too federal registry.

3) New Hampshire

New Hampshire Anglers are currently subject too federal registry.


4) Connecticut

Source: http://www.ct.gov/Dep/cwp/view.asp?A=3605&Q=442940

Provisions of the new marine fishing license include:
••A cost of $10 for residents and $15 for out-of-state visitors,
•Required for anyone 16 years of age or older,
•Free for anyone 65 years of age or older but must still be obtained annually
•Reciprocal to marine fishing licenses issued by New York, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Maine provided that state offers the same privilege to holders of a Connecticut Marine Waters Fishing License.
5) Rhode Island

R.I. Governor Veto's Lic. Legislation on 11/4

Rhode Island Anglers are currently subject too federal registry.

This was posted on stripersonline.com/surftalk/ FishHawk

Adrian
11-25-2009, 07:47 AM
CT Fees were increased on October 1st to $10 resident and $60 non-resident respectively. To me, $60 is totally outrageous!

http://www.ct.gov/Dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2696&q=322716&depNav_GID=1630#MarineLic

Gseries69
11-25-2009, 10:29 AM
NY increased it's NR FW license from $40 to $70 this year. What can you do?

Dble Haul
11-29-2009, 03:15 PM
I am not sure but I think a SSN was a required field when I got the CT license for this fall (only $16 for non-res at the time). If thats the case it would be pretty easy to weed out the duplicates in a combined data set.

I agree that this could be a really good thing if managed properly. For me, not a big deal to pay the fees if they are not outrageous but it will be challenging to take a friend out for just a day or two a season that doesn't normally fish saltwater if we fish out of state which is a pretty normal event for me.

Thanks for that info, Sean. Good to know. Pardon the pun, but I'm in the same boat as you, fishing out of state quite often.

If I remember correctly, the reciprocity that NY has with CT is only for Long Island Sound waters.

Warren
12-01-2009, 05:43 AM
I hate to be cynical, but DanD had hit the nail on the head. The whole thing is a money grab by a government out of control. Someone prove me wrong

rooster
12-11-2009, 02:37 PM
I agree with Warren-if the $s went into a designated fund that would be one thing, but it's just a money grab...,:mad:

Redfisher
12-11-2009, 05:11 PM
Rooster

The regulations specify that the saltwater license fees will be deposited in the states Marine Recreational Fisheries Development Fund. But at some point I'm sure they will try to find a way around that requirement.

Dan

coldwater
12-19-2009, 04:49 PM
If any of the states offer a lifetime permit like NY I would sggest getting one while they're still affordable. The price of licenses have gotten out of control, if you hunt and fish expect to to drop a couple hundred dollars a year for your resident state alone!
This is just another tax!

Stevo
12-20-2009, 03:10 PM
Are these 'out of state' licences annual fees or will there be a weekly/monthly alternative for overseas visitors such as myself I wonder?

jimS
12-21-2009, 08:39 AM
Stevo, I don't think they have thought that far ahead. However, most states do have freshwater licenses that cater to the daily, weekly fishermen. The requirement for MA doesn't go into effect until Jan 1, 2011.

FishHawk
12-21-2009, 05:10 PM
Stevo there is a general registration fee of $10 this year which is required by the Feds. The Environmental Police will enforce this general license registration .
In 011 the individual states will each have their own license fees and regulations.
What's happened is there is a lot of politics and a need to raise lost revenue going on here . A famous politician lost a presidential election by saying "Read my lips no new taxes" He lost that election because he had to raise taxes, so now what has happened is fees are raised instead of raising taxes. FishHawk

PopnesetBay
12-21-2009, 09:49 PM
I thought the registration for 2010 thru Federal Registry was NO CHARGE and then somewhere between $10 and $25 for 2011 and beyond. Will not replace State Lic./Permit, nor can it be used in place of State Lic/Permit but if State does not have Lic/Permit then must have Fed Registry. Am I confused, per usual? If so please correct me, thanks.
Pete Readel

FishHawk
12-22-2009, 05:33 AM
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20081223_registry.html
Pete you are correct there will be no fee for the registration in 010 but anglers must carry the registration form. FishHawk

polareyez
12-22-2009, 06:16 PM
The registration will be free the first year but, you must carry it in a clear plastic holder $29.95..... :chuckle:

gunner
12-23-2009, 11:02 PM
The registration will be free the first year but, you must carry it in a clear plastic holder $29.95..... :chuckle:


And you need a new holder every year!!!!

flydoc
12-24-2009, 11:16 AM
And you need a new holder every year!!!!

Mmmm.... I smell a new black market...maybe I should quit medicine and figure out a way to manufacture these things in my basement:lildevl:
Flydoc

Stevo
12-24-2009, 11:34 AM
How does a visiting angler register? Will it be done on arrival in the U.S - at a Post Office or tackle shop?

Stevo
12-24-2009, 11:36 AM
Mmmm.... I smell a new black market...maybe I should quit medicine and figure out a way to manufacture these things in my basement:lildevl:
Flydoc


Hey Doc... just stick to methadone production - it's easier! :hihi:

polareyez
12-24-2009, 03:36 PM
Mmmm.... I smell a new black market...maybe I should quit medicine and figure out a way to manufacture these things in my basement:lildevl:
Flydoc


Flydoc,

I don't think you can re-cycle your used exam gloves as holders.....:tsk_tsk:

PopnesetBay
12-24-2009, 08:15 PM
Stevo, there is supposed to be an internet site that you can go to, soon after the first of the year and register. As soon as someone knows that it is up and running I am sure that it will be posted here and on other sites. If I see it and it is really working I will be sure to post it here. So far there has been nothing official about the yearly costs, resident or non-resident, that I have seen for Massachusetts but that 'permit' will not take effect until 2011 so 2010 will be the federal registry. Have a happy holiday season.

Pete Readel

gunner
12-25-2009, 11:02 AM
Here's an interesting article regarding the license and how it's being fought in parts of NY.

http://online.wsj.com:80/article/SB125780880181039741.html

Joe

Stevo
12-27-2009, 04:20 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125780880181039741.html

I see similar things bandied about in the UK and quoting things from nearly 400 years ago is very small minded in my opinion. The world has changed dramatically over the past 20 years alone and we really must move with the times and stop bleating on about draconian by-laws from an almost forgotten era.

There, that's my 2 cents worth!

DanD
12-29-2009, 10:25 AM
Hooray for the Long Islanders! Hope they win.
I'm in Massachusetts, and it appears we are being "required" to register with the Federal government before we can fish our waters. I'm going to ignore this latest intrusion of the Feds on our lives and see how it plays out. I encourage others to do the same. This should be a state issue, if an issue at all.
We should all be cynical and suspicious of any action of government that requires registration and tracking of our activities. Way too many unanticipated outcomes can occur.

flydoc
12-29-2009, 12:21 PM
From reading the article from the NOAA, it seems that the federal registration will be required only from saltwater anglers whose states do not implement/already have implemented a state saltwater fishing license- and I doubt the Communistwealth of Taxachusetts would give up a golden opportunity to impose another tax...I mean, LICENSE....on the sportsmen and sportswomen of this state (as well as on visitors from other states or across the big pond).
As for the article regarding the Long Islanders, the old salter leading the charge comes across as nothing better than a poacher- he is most definitely NOT a sportsman, and seems to think he can take as many fish out of the ocean as he pleases and sell them for profit without even having to pay for the commercial fishing license. I'm sorry, but I just don't agree with that. It's one thing to take 1-2 fish for personal use, but to haul in nearly 500 lbs of fish without a license? That's poaching, pure and simple.
Flydoc

juro
12-29-2009, 12:30 PM
On a related note, I hope the management of striped bass (and other species including menhaden) reaches a federal scope - the individual states are simply too parochial in their thinking to be effective as stewards of a moving biomass that spans many states.

Perhaps a multi-state consortium of some kind would suffice as well but in any case recreational and commercial regulations ranging so widely based on human boundaries does not serve a natural resource without any such state lines any good.

If there is any unification of actual management on a broad scale from this I would be for it completely. I'd be curious to see if there is anything presented at the upcoming shows on this topic.

flydoc
12-29-2009, 12:40 PM
Juro- at least in theory (according to the NOAA article), the saltwater angler registry will hopefully serve a similar purpose for management of saltwater fisheries that the USFWS's Harvest Information Program now serves for management of waterfowl populations. Most years I receive a survey from the USFWS asking me about how many days I got out duck hunting during the recent waterfowl season, and how many ducks from each subgroup (geese, sea ducks, regular ducks, etc) I harvested. A similar survey for saltwater anglers would help researchers get the data they need to assist with management of marine fisheries, PROVIDED the moneys raised by the registration/licenses was actually used for that purpose and not diverted to some state/federal "general fund" that governors like ours can plunder at their will.
Flydoc

DanD
01-04-2010, 12:09 PM
Anybody know what happens of you don't register? Is there a penalty if you get caught (gasp!) fishing in the ocean in MA and are not duly registered or do not have proof of same?

desmobob
01-30-2010, 05:12 PM
Anybody know what happens of you don't register? Is there a penalty if you get caught (gasp!) fishing in the ocean in MA and are not duly registered or do not have proof of same?

Your choice... walk the plank or be keel-hauled. Arrrgggghhhh! :tsk_tsk:


Civil disobedience lives! :smokin: :biggrin:


Good fishing,
desmobob
(It was -10F here this morning and I was daydreaming about the "good ol' days" on South Beach.....)

PopnesetBay
01-30-2010, 07:26 PM
Altho I have never fished for stripers in NY waters I do live here so I went ahead and paid my $10 to NYDEP - Marine Div and got my SW License. Had 2 different expiration dates and after a couple of emails to and from a couple of people was advised that the Dec 31 date was the one that counted. Now I find out that NY is not reciprocal with Mass (which does not have lic yet) so to be covered I should also register with Feds as most/all my fishing will be in Mass. Still don't know if I can legally fish in RI. Massive confusion and the enforcement will be very inconsistent, if at all. End result of double registration is that some 'bean counter' will count me as two different persons. So much for accuracy! Temps hovered at 0* this AM and never got to double digets ... Where is SPRING!

Penguin
01-30-2010, 07:41 PM
One for...
Dopey
Grumpy
Doc [that one may already be taken... 'will that be one or two?]
Sneezy
and so on and so on...

Gseries69
02-01-2010, 10:30 AM
On a related note, I hope the management of striped bass (and other species including menhaden) reaches a federal scope - the individual states are simply too parochial in their thinking to be effective as stewards of a moving biomass that spans many states.

Perhaps a multi-state consortium of some kind would suffice as well but in any case recreational and commercial regulations ranging so widely based on human boundaries does not serve a natural resource without any such state lines any good.

If there is any unification of actual management on a broad scale from this I would be for it completely. I'd be curious to see if there is anything presented at the upcoming shows on this topic.

I thought that was what the ASMFC was supposed to be. The problem I think is that it falls under the commerce department versus US F&W. The MSY approach does not seem to be based on conservation from my understanding of it.