NJ Saltwater Fishing Articles
- Details
- Category: Fishing Articles
- Published: Thursday, 10 December 2009 15:03
- Hits: 33803
?IF NEW JERSEY DOESN?T GET A LICENSE, THE FED WILL MANDATE ONE?
The federal government does not require states to implement a saltwater license. The Magnuson-Stevens Act - the law which governs the management of our federal fisheries - was recently reauthorized and includes a new mandate that a phonebook of saltwater anglers to be created in every coastal state; it does not require states to implement a license for funding purposes. This new amendment was included as effort to improve the quality of information generated by the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS), which is the ?fatally flawed? (according to the National Research Council) survey system that federal regulators now use to determine how many fish are harvested by recreational anglers during a single saltwater fishing season.
Currently, MRSS uses coastal phone books as a data source for contacting households at random to conduct harvest surveys on recreational harvest, a grossly inefficient method of data collection. MSA requires that a national saltwater registry of anglers be created, with name and contact information stored in a database for each coastal state in America. Such a program will provide surveyors with the contact information of actual saltwater anglers, and in theory should help improve the harvest information.
A new federal data collection system is currently being devised in conjunction with this coastal registry initiative called the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP), which will utilize the names and numbers of saltwater anglers fishing within each coastal state. Similar to the Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program (HIP) which provides the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a national registry of duck hunters for select harvest surveys, a similar Fisherman Identification Network (FIN) would provide marine surveyors access to the phone numbers of actual saltwater anglers for actively collecting recreational harvest information. Learn more about the HIP at www.fws.gov/hip.
Online and telephone registration for the new federal registry will begin January 1, 2010. Register online for free at www.countmyfish.noaa.gov or call toll free 888-674-7411. As of 2011, the federal government may impose a charge for registration, which is expected to range from $15 to $25 per angler. It should be noted that the federal government?s registry was supposed to have been in place as of January 1, 2009 in order to improve the effectiveness of reporting in MRFSS.
?BUT WHERE WILL THE MONEY COME FROM FOR A FREE REGISTRY??
According
to the American Sportfishing Association which lobbied to include a fee
for the federal registry in the Magnuson Stevens Act starting in 2011,
New Jersey ranked 5th among coastal states in 2006 in terms of retail
sales in saltwater fishing. Anglers here spent over $643 million in
2006 on tackle alone, contributing more than $68 million in state and
local tax revenues. Another $92 million was raised in federal tax
revenues. Out of the $68 million in state and local taxes, our
governor allocates a paltry $1.5 or $1.8 out of the general fund for
marine fisheries. Allocating a few more dollars into a successful
profit model is called smart investing, you?d think a Goldman Sachs
veteran would understand that relationship. http://www.asafishing.org/statistics/saleco_trends/2006sr_salt_sales.html
?LOOK AT THE STATES THAT HAVE A LICENSE, THEY?RE IN GREAT SHAPE!?
Federal
delays in implementing the registry components of the new harvest
collection system are causing considerable data collection issues up
and down the coast with resulting closures on sea bass, amberjack and
red snapper. Ironically, even with a saltwater license in place in
states like North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, the
federal fisheries service has still mandated these stifling closures on
recreational anglers, from black sea bass to red snapper and
amberjack.
Anglers should remember that our coastal fisheries are
managed by federal and interstate councils, and states have no
authority to supersede federal allocations of migratory coastal
fisheries, even with an expensive saltwater license. While I can
appreciate some folks belief that a freshwater and hunting licenses in
New Jersey are cool, the fact is that freshwater fishermen don?t have
to share largemouth quotas with commercial draggers, and there aren?t
trap lines running across the Flat Brook.
In California as
another example, sportfishing supports more than 40,000 jobs and
roughly $2 billion in sales annually for sport-fishing equipment alone,
according to the Sportfishing Association of California. California
charges residents $41 a year to sportfish in marine waters, and hunting
and fishing licenses combined generate about $72 million annually for
Fish & Game activities, supporting salaries of 200 or so officers
to cover 1,100 miles of coastline. Because the state can?t afford to
pay enforcement officers any longer, a new voluntary $5 tag has been
implemented to help pay for salaries.
http://www.presstelegram.com/business/ci_13941758
?BUT AREN?T THOSE LICENSE MONIES DEDICATED??
Sure,
they?re dedicated to conservation. And conservation includes officers,
secretaries, accountants, managers, desks, chairs, cars, boats, pens,
lunches, gas and tolls, scotch tape, you name it. I know that the
hard-working folks in the Division of Fish and Wildlife have been on
the short end of the stick for years because of bureaucratic
indifference from the top ? but it?s time for this state to reinvest in
our marine resources without shuffling the bill off to the sporting
community (see what happened in California for example, where angling
participation is off 30% in the past 10 years of a saltwater license).
The question remains, are these funds really dedicated? In New York,
after implementing a first-ever saltwater fishing license, the
powers-that-be in Albany chose to offload departmental salaries out of
the state?s general fund and place them directly into the marine
dedicated account. That means essentially that the new saltwater
license starts $2 million in the hole as license monies must first pay
off salaries before paying a benefit to the resource. A new lifetime
saltwater license ($150) won?t be dedicated into the marine account
either, but will be used for the general conservation fund which also
pays for upland and freshwater projects. Certainly not a violation of
any laws, but is this truly dedicated? Some legislators in New York
say no! http://www.bignews.biz/?id=823372&keys=Senator-Charles-Schumer-Anglers
Finally
gents, while a saltwater license in a utopian society might be able to
improve access and pay for parks and dredging and enforcement and
division salaries, will it really help us get more access to fish?
North Carolina has a saltwater license ? their sea bass fishery is
still closed. Florida is often cited as a license example ? their red
snapper and amberjack fisheries are still closed. NO matter what could
do with more money at the state level, we?re still at the whim of what
seems to me to be a Pew controlled NOAA fisheries who is hell bent on
closing fisheries and denying access for recreational anglers.
While
I appreciate the work done by enforcement officers in this state,
they?re also monitoring commercial harvesters (shellfish and finfish)
while locking up poachers too. I feel a strong need to dedicate money
to addressing these issues, same as you ? but are you really willing to
foot the whole bill for this without any control over or oversight in
how the money is spent, knowing full well that the federal government
and inter-state agencies still have the final say in the management of
our coastal fisheries
Visit the marine enforcement site and
you?ll see our marine division needs assistance for enforcement, that?s
for sure. Hopefully, our new administration will embrace this need and
release a few million dollars extra in monies owed to our marine
resources.
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/lawhome.htm
RFA
supports Senator Van Drew's efforts, as well as those by Assembly reps
Albano and Milam, for working so hard to try to legislate a saltwater
registry in New Jersey to (A) count up the number of saltwater anglers,
(B) comply with the federal law, (C) begin coordinating efforts in
order to get better data, and (D) recognize that sportsmen are voters
and shouldn't be burdened with yet another bloated user fee.
By the way folks, thanks for all your support of RFA and especially the RFA Legal Defense Fund!
Your Can Read More Here and Comment on the NJ Saltwater Fishing Registry
Jim Hutchinson
www.joinrfa.org