NJ Senate to Hear Saltwater Registry Debate

[Leif]

NJ Senate to Hear Saltwater Registry Debate:
RFA-NJ In Trenton This Week to Testify

On Thursday, December 3 at 10 a.m., the New Jersey Senate Environment Committee will meet in Room 10 on the third floor of the State House Annex in Trenton. At the top of the day's hearing agenda is Senate Bill 2194 sponsored by Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May) and co-sponsored by Sen. Christopher "Kip" Bateman (R-Somerset), a bill which create a free recreational saltwater registry in New Jersey in order to comply with new federal fisheries guidelines for data collection.

As written S2194 would specifically direct the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), in consultation with the Marine Fisheries Council, to establish and implement a registry program for saltwater recreational anglers modeled on the registry program to be established by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

This bill specifies that the State cannot charge a fee for registration under this program, and also directs the DEP Commissioner to apply to the federal National Marine Fisheries Service for "exempted state designation" so that New Jersey's saltwater anglers do not have to participate in the national registry of saltwater anglers.

As reported in last Wednesday's Atlantic City Press, State Sen. Jeff Van Drew is rallying support for a proposal to establish a free state registry for saltwater fishermen, a bid which would keep state fishermen from having to pay federal fee in 2011.

"The people of New Jersey are being taxed and fee'd to death," Van Drew told the AC Press on November 25. "The least we can do is give them a chance to do a little saltwater fishing without having to pay another fee for the privilege." Van Drew said he opposed a fee out of fear that future lawmakers would raid the fund, and explained that putting forth a free saltwater registry could help boost coastal tourism by not charging a fee to those who come to New Jersey in order to fish.

Van Drew who is vice chairman of the Senate Environment Committee proposed the legislation in October 2008. An Assembly version of the saltwater registry legislation has already been passed successfully out of the Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee in a unanimous vote, though that bill (A3252) is now resting with the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Van Drew has indicated that Senate Committee chairman, Sen. Bob Smith (D-Somerset) would prefer to see anglers pay the administrative costs associated with such a registry program, which is estimated to run at $1 to $2 per person.

The Recreational Fishing Alliance supports Sen. Van Drew's effort to establish a free registry, and is asking RFA-NJ chapter members to make plans to be in Trenton on Thursday at 10 a.m. in support of the S2194. "We would really like to see the state do what Senator Van Drew wants to do," said RFA Executive Director Jim Donofrio. "We all agree the registry should be free. This should not used to fund the Division of Fish and Wildlife, it should be about getting better data to do better science and research. This is not the time to be taxing people."

RFA-NJ and RFA-PA members who would like to see New Jersey set an example for other "license-free" states are encouraged to get to the State House early on Thursday to show your support of the registry legislation. The State House is located at 125 West State Street in Trenton, NJ 08625. Metered, on-street parking is available along West State Street, while there are several pay lots located within walking distance. Handicap parking is available in the parking garage and on West State Street in front of the State House and Annex and across the street from the State House.

On July 30, the Senate Environment Committee and Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee held a public hearing in Forked River to hear testimony from the public and invited witnesses on the impact in New Jersey of the new federal saltwater registry. Click here to read the official transcript (registry testimony begins on page 115.)

While there was no open opposition to the registry legislation at the July 30 hearing, it's expected that handful of registry opponents will be in Trenton on December 3 to speak out against Sen. Van Drew's legislation, including representatives from the New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs (Federation). According to the Atlantic City Press, Ed Markowski, Southern Region Vice President of the Federation said his group is backing a fee to help support what he called the "grossly underfunded" state Bureau of Marine Fisheries.

Saltwater anglers in New Jersey who are passionate about the future of this important registry legislation are encouraged to join the RFA-NJ chapter in Trenton on Thursday.


New York Legislators Look to Repeal Saltwater License

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer announces plans to repeal the saltwater license in New York in place of a 'free' saltwater registry, while RFA's Jim Hutchinson looks on.

Click here to read more about New York's saltwater license problems and the efforts by Long Island legislators to repeal the "onerous" fee.

Photo by Joel Lucks (www.JoelLucks.com)



About Recreational Fishing Alliance
The Recreational Fishing Alliance is a national, grassroots political action organization representing recreational fishermen and the recreational fishing industry on marine fisheries issues. The RFA Mission is to safeguard the rights of saltwater anglers, protect marine, boat and tackle industry jobs, and ensure the long-term sustainability of our Nation's saltwater fisheries. For more information, visit www.joinrfa.org.

[Kensdock]

I hope the Honorable Senator Van Drew will take a closer look at the salt water license issue. The fear that the money raised from a salt water license will be raided by the Governor is not justified. A salt water license can not be compared to dedicated accounts like the arts or the beach replenishment. Money collected from a salt water license is protected by Federal law. The money from the salt water license would be matched by federal funds. The money raised through NJ hunting and fresh water licenses has never been used for anything other that fish and wildlife in over ONE HUNDRED YEARS. Noaa reported salt water angler numbers alone at one million four hundred thousand! Depending on the price of a saltwater license the NJ salt water license would raise about 40,000,000.00 dollars annually to enhance our salt water fishing. We could build the salt water hatcheries, create green jobs and ensure the future of our salt water game fish. The alterative is we keep the statuesque and our salt water fishing will continue to decline. Charter boats, Tackle shops and salt water guides service will cotinue to go bankrupt!

[Kensdock]

New Jersey had no shot at this money due to the fact we have no salt water license!

Saltwater hatcheries seek part of stimulus package






It’s unknown whether President Barack Obama has ever cast a gold spoon at a school of tailing redfish on a shallow Florida grassflat.

But one day, his signature could ensure that millions of future anglers enjoy a better chance to experience that sportfishing thrill.

The Florida Marine Fisheries Enhancement Initiative is a public-private partnership working to sustain one of Florida’s largest industries — recreational fishing.

Recreational fishing in Florida nets the state more than $5 billion a year and maintains more than 130,000 jobs. A whopping 39 percent of all the saltwater fishing in the United States takes place in Florida waters and the number of anglers coming to Florida to fish each year is increasing by 7 percent, according to figures researched by the Wildlife Foundation of Florida.

The initiative contends the construction of a network of seven saltwater hatcheries spread around the state will help sustain those jobs and will continue to maintain Florida as the nation’s No. 1 saltwater fishing destination.

A proposal to secure almost $150 million in funding for this effort has been submitted to Congress, as well as to Gov. Charlie Crist’s office.

The money requested would come from Obama’s stimulus package through the state Legislature.

Brett Boston of the Wildlife Foundation of Florida believes the proposal will be well received at the state and federal levels.

“We did our homework and we’re ready for this money,” Boston said. “We already have the property, we have bright colorful people who know hatcheries and we have the partnerships.”

Boston said seven hatcheries are needed because Florida has 1,365 miles of coastline and varied ecosystems. Plus many popular game fish, such as redfish and snook, have slightly different genetics in east coast and west coast waters.

Boston said 3,129 immediate construction jobs would benefit local economies near hatchery sites.

Upon completion, 169 permanent green jobs would exist in the form of biologists and other hatchery personnel.

Three facilities will be on or near the Treasure Coast — Florida Institute of Technology’s Vero Beach Marine Laboratory, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute at Florida Atlantic University in Fort Pierce and 3 miles north of Sebastian Inlet is the Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute.

At a cost of $18.1 million, the plan would add a 10-acre saltwater fish stock enhancement center to Harbor Branch’s 20 acres of existing fish-rearing facilities, said Megan Davis, Harbor Branch director for aquaculture and stock enhancement. The facility would be able to raise and release 7 million fingerling

redfish into Florida’s estuaries and bays. An estimated 400 construction jobs and 12 permanent jobs would be generated there.

The Vero Beach Marine Enhancement Center on 5 acres would create 248 construction jobs, 16 permanent jobs and would cost $10.8 million. East and west coast broodstock would be raised there to produce millions of larvae for transport to facilities like Harbor Branch, Hubbs SeaWorld and New Smyrna Beach.

GOALS OF THE INITIATIVE

• Florida will provide global leadership in marine fisheries enhancement, via production, habitat restoration and adaptive management of enhancement and restoration impact.

• Maintain a balance of genetic quality and marine enhancement center output.

• The best available science will drive the production and enhancement processes. Knowledge gained will be applied to increase efficiencies and marine enhancement center output and effectiveness.

• To focus on viable production of recreational fish in the most cost-effective manner possible.

GREEN JOBS

• The construction of these hatcheries would produce “green” jobs, including biologists, habitat restoration specialists and research positions.

• They would be high end science-related jobs and the people would be working there long term helping to sustain what is a $5 billion resource for the State of Florida

• Partnerships with universities link these jobs to environmental managers. The strategy is to create our own long term industry

•To learn more visit Support Florida Sportfish

Source: Brett Boston of the Wildlife Foundation of Florida

FISHING IN FLORIDA

• Commercial and recrea´tional fishing generated more than $185 billion in sales and supported more than 2 million jobs in 2006

• Recreational fishing generated 131,000 jobs in Florida and $7.6 billion in sales

• Texas was a distant sec´ond with $2.2 billion in sales and 34,000 jobs

• Commercial fishing in Florida accounts for $5.2 billion in sales and 103,000 jobs, second only to California with $9.8 billion and 179,000 jobs.

Source: Fisheries Economics of the U.S., 2006,

[CaptTB]

Originally Posted by Kensdock

The money from the salt water license would be matched by federal funds.

Wrong, it is not a dollar for dollar matching fund. Perhaps you need to learn a bit about Wallop-Breaux. Here is a little tidbit for you: "“Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1952 (Sport Fishing and Boating Enhancement Fund or the Wallop-Breaux Trust Fund): This fund is derived from fees, taxes, and duties imposed on (recreational) fishing equipment, (non-commercial) motorboat fuel, imported watercraft, and fishing tackle. The revenues are allocated to the States, on a formula basis, and are used to protect natural resources and enhance recreational (fishing and boating) opportunities for millions of Americans. " NJ already receives Wallop-Breaux funds, but yes it would receive more funds if the number of registered anglers was greater. Difference is the "federal funds" would not "match" the money from a salt water license. Accuracy Ken, you need to be able to support what you say, and to date you cannot.

Noaa reported salt water angler numbers alone at one million four hundred thousand!

Now now Ken, we already discussed this in another thread. You continue to use the highest number on record, even though it is from the year 2007. You said that you had seen that number quoted in the past and that was why you used it. Yet, after being corrected on the accuracy of the number and told that the more recent number from NOAA is some 200,000 anglers lower, you continue to use only that one.

Let's try and be both accurate AND current with our data shall we?

Depending on the price of a saltwater license the NJ salt water license would raise about 40,000,000.00 dollars annually to enhance our salt water fishing.

That number has also been proven false. If you bothered to ask the state itself (or even bothered to read any of the numerous FACTS and ECONOMIC STATISTICS FROM STATES WITH LICENSES you'd know that number is a lie, unless you charged several hundred dollars per person.

Even the state of NC, which by the way is estimated by NOAA to have more anglers than NJ, gets a fraction of the number you post as being possible for NJ.

Facts Ken, not rhetoric or supposition. You've already shown in the other thread that you have nothing but Grimm's Fairy Tales to back up your statistics, let's try to be accurate shall we?

Charter boats, Tackle shops and salt water guides service will cotinue to go bankrupt!

yes, and we all know how concerned you are for those in the industry based on your comments here and elsewhere.

[Kensdock]

Capt.TB, Please, I said ABOUT 1.4 million anglers,as you know the number swings from 800,000- 1.4 million NJ anglers depending on the year. No it is not a dollar for dollar match, New Jersey Anglers have lost about 100 million dollars of their far share of the funds due to the fact that New Jersey lacks a salt water license. Just this last year we lost millions of dollars in stimulus money and all the benefits to salt water fishing that went with it. Please read the earlier post in this thread. Please take a look at states like Florida,SC and others that have had a Salt water fishing license in place for a minute.You will find excellent fishing and economic benefits that you will not find in NJ!! Why, because they have invested wisely in their recreation fishing resource via a salt water license. I am not surprised that the recreational fishing alliance {RFA}is opposed to a New Jersey salt water license as they always go for short term economic gain. It is time for New Jersey Anglers to invest in the future by supporting a salt water license. As the polls indicate NJ anglers would not mind kicking in a few dollars to improve their salt water fishing.

[Kensdock]

Here is the law:
Any State fish and wildlife agency desiring to avail itself of the benefits of the Acts shall notify the Secretary within 60 days after it has received a certificate of apportionment of funds available to the State. Notification to the Secretary may be accomplished by either of the following methods. In either method, the document must be signed by a State official authorized to commit the State to participation under the Act(s).
(a) Submitting to the regional director within the 60-day period a letter stating the desire of the State to participate in the Act(s); or,
(b) Having an approved Application for Federal Assistance which contains plans for the use of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program funds during the period of the apportionment.
[47 FR 22539, May 25, 1982, as amended at 73 FR 43128, July 24, 2008]

§ 80.10 State certification of licenses.

(a) To ensure proper apportionment of Federal funds, the Service requires that each director of a State fish and wildlife agency:
(1) Specify a license certification period that:
(i) Is 12 consecutive months in length;
(ii) Is either the State’s fiscal year or license year;
(iii) Is consistent from year to year; and
(iv) Ends no less than 1 year and no more than 2 years before the beginning of the Federal fiscal year that the apportioned funds first become available for expenditure;
(2) Obtain the Director’s approval before changing the State-specified license certification period; and
(3) Annually provide to the Service the following data:
(i) The number of persons who hold paid licenses that authorize an individual to hunt in the State during the State-specified license certification period; and
(ii) The number of persons who hold paid licenses that authorize an individual to fish in the State during the State-specified license certification period.
(b) When counting persons holding paid hunting or fishing licenses in a State-specified license certification period, a State fish and wildlife agency must abide by the following requirements:
(1) The State may count all persons who possess a paid license that allows the licensee to hunt or fish for sport or recreation. The State may not count persons holding a license that allows the licensee only to trap animals or only to engage in commercial activities.
(2) The State may count only those persons who possess a license that produced net revenue of at least $1 per year returned to the State after deducting costs directly associated with issuance of the license. Examples of such costs are agents’ or sellers’ fees and the cost of printing, distribution, and control.
(3) The State may count persons possessing a single-year license (one that is legal for less than 2 years) only in the State-specified license certification period in which the license was purchased.
(4) The State may count persons possessing a multiyear license (one that is legal for 2 years or more) in each State-specified license certification period in which the license is legal, whether it is legal for a specific or indeterminate number of years, only if:
(i) The net revenue from the license is in close approximation with the number of years in which the license is legal, and
(ii) The State fish and wildlife agency uses statistical sampling or other techniques approved by the Director to determine whether the licensee remains a license holder.
(5) The State may count persons possessing a combination license (one that permits the licensee to both hunt and fish) with:
(i) The number of persons who hold paid hunting licenses in the State-specified license certification period, and
(ii) The number of persons who hold paid fishing licenses in the same State-specified license certification period.
(6) The State may count persons possessing multiple hunting or fishing licenses (in States that require or permit more than one license to hunt or more than one license to fish) only once with:
(i) The number of persons who hold paid hunting licenses in the State-specified license certification period, and
(ii) The number of persons who hold paid fishing licenses in the same State-specified license certification period.
(c) The director of the State fish and wildlife agency must provide the certified information required in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section to the Service by the date and in the format that the Director specifies. If the Director requests it, the director of the State fish and wildlife agency must provide documentation to support the accuracy of this information. The director of the State fish and wildlife agency is responsible for eliminating multiple counting of single individuals in the information that he or she certifies and may use statistical sampling or other techniques approved by the Director for this purpose.
(d) Once the Director approves the certified information required in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the Service must not adjust the numbers if such adjustment would adversely impact any apportionment of funds to a State fish and wildlife agency other than the agency whose certified numbers are being adjusted. However, the Director may correct an error made by the Service.
[73 FR 43128, July 24, 2008]

nd 179,000 jobs.

[Taxman]

This is New Jersey we are talking about. When all is said and done, they will find it cost $12 to collect a $10 fee

[Reelron]

To get back on track for a minute, is anyone from the Middletown/Red Bank area going to this meeeting? Is this something we should have a presence at?

[Leif]

Ron,

From the original post....

The Recreational Fishing Alliance supports Sen. Van Drew's effort to establish a free registry, and is asking RFA-NJ chapter members to make plans to be in Trenton on Thursday at 10 a.m. in support of the S2194. "We would really like to see the state do what Senator Van Drew wants to do," said RFA Executive Director Jim Donofrio. "We all agree the registry should be free. This should not used to fund the Division of Fish and Wildlife, it should be about getting better data to do better science and research. This is not the time to be taxing people."

RFA-NJ and RFA-PA members who would like to see New Jersey set an example for other "license-free" states are encouraged to get to the State House early on Thursday to show your support of the registry legislation. The State House is located at 125 West State Street in Trenton, NJ 08625. Metered, on-street parking is available along West State Street, while there are several pay lots located within walking distance. Handicap parking is available in the parking garage and on West State Street in front of the State House and Annex and across the street from the State House.

[Kensdock]

This bill will keep NJ in step with its reputation for investing in short term economic solutions. It will not provide the smart investment in the future of salt water fishing that a salt water license will provide.