Forum Navigation

New Posts

Search


Go Back   Reel-Time Forums > Fly Fishing Topics > Conservation and Ecology

View Poll Results: Should Massachusetts Institute a Saltwater Fishing License?
Yes 87 63.04%
No 41 29.71%
Undecided 10 7.25%
Voters: 138. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-04-2005, 11:57 AM
David Churbuck's Avatar
David Churbuck David Churbuck is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 1995
Location: Cotuit, Cape Cod
Posts: 1,471
POLL: Saltwater Licenses

Are you for, against, or undecided about a saltwater fishing license for recreational fishermen?
__________________
David Churbuck
co-founder Reel-time
http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-04-2005, 12:02 PM
David Churbuck's Avatar
David Churbuck David Churbuck is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 1995
Location: Cotuit, Cape Cod
Posts: 1,471
This debate rages on ...

Here's one point of view -- Ted Williams writing in April's Fly, Rod and Reel Magazine

http://www.flyrodreel.com/index.php/...005_04/id/2069

And here is the discussion thread on Reel-Time.
http://www.reel-time.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41882

Don't debate the issue here. This is a poll. If you want to post your reasons why, then feel free. But take off the gloves and debate the point in the thread above.

Me? I'll state my opinion later.
__________________
David Churbuck
co-founder Reel-time
http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-04-2005, 12:06 PM
Ray's Avatar
Ray Ray is offline
If It Swims I'll Catch It
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Buzzards Bay, Ma.
Posts: 4,669
I am for a reasonably priced ($20 - $30) SW license….only if I am assured that 100% of the the funds go directly to SW fishing resources and specifically related needs.

License revenue going into the general fund that may be used for SW fishing resources is not enough for me.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-04-2005, 12:21 PM
Squidly Squidly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Plymouth, MA
Posts: 197
Exactly what Ray said. Well Put Ray.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-04-2005, 12:35 PM
CMP's Avatar
CMP CMP is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: NH/E. Orleans/Islamorada
Posts: 1,544
And the chances of getting a license with guaranteed (or even promised) for specificity as to the revenue stream in the people's republic of taxachusetts are exactly ZERO. Unfortunately, the concept is DOA and hardly merits a discussion...

CMP
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-04-2005, 01:15 PM
David Churbuck's Avatar
David Churbuck David Churbuck is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 1995
Location: Cotuit, Cape Cod
Posts: 1,471
I am in favor because:
  1. I've had to purchase them when fishing in Florida and it was a slight inconvenience.
  2. I pay for a license for the right to fish for trout in this state, and that is an annual but slight inconvenience.
  3. If the funds can be directed into the fisheries and not the general fund then I am in favor because, it might (and a big "might" given The People's Republic of Massachusetts) mean better enforcement.
  4. It finally puts some wood behind the bat for a recreational fishing lobby in this state.
  5. I think the past attempt by Gov. Romney to raid the bank was averted thanks to p.o'd recreational fishermen screaming long and loud and I am confident a paid coalition of anglers would do the same if similar shenanigans were attempted in the future.
__________________
David Churbuck
co-founder Reel-time
http://www.churbuck.com/wordpress
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-04-2005, 02:19 PM
SamRiley's Avatar
SamRiley SamRiley is offline
Spoiled by Tuna
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMP
Unfortunately, the concept is DOA and hardly merits a discussion...
You never know until you try.... and try again.... and yet again if you must.

I'm with Ray and Dave on this one. Also, I think that fines for poaching and such should go up and I'm talking way up. $1K per illegal fish sounds about right. Have the funds from the fines go directly into the DEM payroll so they can hire more people.
__________________
When fishing is a part of a friendship, you can skip right past the preliminaries
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-04-2005, 02:21 PM
LandlockedinMI's Avatar
LandlockedinMI LandlockedinMI is offline
Salt Obsessed in Detroit
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: West Bloomfield, MI
Posts: 459
I'm w/ Churbuck

I fish FL all the time and they have their act together. Fishing down there gets better all the time- it's incredible. WHy can't NE-er's unite for their waters?
__________________
"Fishing isn't life and death; it's more important than that."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-04-2005, 02:35 PM
aws aws is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Woods Hole
Posts: 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by LandlockedinMI
I fish FL all the time and they have their act together. Fishing down there gets better all the time- it's incredible. WHy can't NE-er's unite for their waters?
I wonder if it could be made for multiple state's waters..i.e the northeast coast. If it was associated w/ multiple states, perhaps that would better protect the funds...but also make implementation and fund allocation more difficult and might just add to the squabbling. I dunno.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-07-2005, 09:29 AM
ChuckD ChuckD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chucktown, MA
Posts: 459
I'd buy a saltwater license...

but agree with someone else who mentioned that it would be a pain in the neck if you had to buy them for every New England coastal state...for me that'd be at least three(Mass, NH, Maine). I fish out of the mouth of the Piscataqua occasionally with BradG and in one session we might be off the coast of all three...perhaps they could come up with a coastal New England license?
While these monies could be subject to political finagling, I believe the funds would immediately show the importance of recreational angling and have to turn some politician's heads in our direction.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-07-2005, 11:40 AM
Slappy's Avatar
Slappy Slappy is offline
The truth is out there...
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington MA
Posts: 3,063
I'm for it if there is a test, like getting a drivers license or better yet passing the bar.

Make people recite the regs, take a fish off a hook and let it go alive, then cast a fly/surf rod 60 feet/100 yards.

Who cares about the money, let's make it fun!
__________________
Slappy the baitshop boy
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-26-2005, 03:58 PM
riptide riptide is offline
Sponsor
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: Bourne
Posts: 3,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray
I am for a reasonably priced ($20 - $30) SW license….only if I am assured that 100% of the the funds go directly to SW fishing resources and specifically related needs.

License revenue going into the general fund that may be used for SW fishing resources is not enough for me.

EXACTLY!!!!
__________________
Good Luck,

Capt. Terry Nugent
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-26-2005, 04:02 PM
Strat Strat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 479
100% for it if the $ goes to enforcement.

Long overdue considering the number of out of state anglers that visit here annually.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-26-2005, 06:17 PM
RogerStg's Avatar
RogerStg RogerStg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Before Nov. 1999
Location: RI
Posts: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strat
100% for it if the $ goes to enforcement.
While I agree with you that we need more enforcement, the argument from the pols the we need a license to provide the $$ is bull$hit. One of the purposes of taxes is to fund law enforcement - for all laws. It's for the protection of resources for the benefit of the citizens, not just the ones currently using it.

If you follow the logic that relative users need to fund law enforcement, pharmacists should pay for a hefty license to cover the cost of enforcing drug laws, motorists will need a hefty annual license to pay for enforcing traffic laws, companies will need a special licenses to pay the cost of enforcing trade and environmental laws. How about a license to walk in the park, since that needs to be patrolled too. And heck, if you go running on the street, should you get off Scot free? See what I'm getting at?

We sportsmen should stop giving politicians a pass when they say they need licenses to fund enforcement. Theirs is a classic specious argument.

BTW, don't we have a license for fishing for tuna? My understanding is that the $22 fee just about covers the administration of collecting the $22 fee.
__________________
Best regards,
Roger
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-26-2005, 06:59 PM
stripah's Avatar
stripah stripah is offline
Fishing...It's what I do.
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: New Bedford
Posts: 256
I have a feeling the money would go towards other "projects". If and only if it was dedicated to better sportsfishing throughout the state would I be for it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
saltwater license? RIBill New England 81 03-04-2007 07:23 PM
Hi...New saltwater fly fisherman here... Nashoba393 New England 0 05-19-2002 08:52 AM
Rotary vs. non-Rotary vise for new saltwater tyer? hoodzies Fly Tying Forum 4 01-11-2002 11:57 PM
Clarification- Saltwater Edge Updates PeterJenkins New England 0 08-03-2001 06:54 AM
The Ray's Fly Tournament in Newport - RT & Saltwater Edge Sparky New England 5 05-02-2000 01:15 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 AM.




vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.


Copyright ©1995-2013, Cahill Digital