New York Possible Fee Based Saltwater Fishing License Survey

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

Posted this in the June thread regarding slot stripers and will post it again here to clear the air how this funding and process works:

Believe the regulation you're referring to is the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fishing Restoration Act which relates to fresh and saltwater fisheries as well as the Pittman-Robertson Act which covers hunting.

The tax for fishing is on specific fishing related purchases at 10%, not 11%, and motorboat gas purchases at 18.4 cents per gallon. 70% of the overall funds generated by the Act comes from the gas tax on motor boats and small engines which was included under the Wallop-Breaux Act, not tackle purchases as your posts imply. I believe the Wallop-Breaux Act also partly funds the ASMFC, MAMFC or both.

All states have general funds, even Florida. When Dingell-Johnson was enacted, states were required to enact laws prohibiting the diversion of license fees paid by anglers (salt or fresh water) for any purpose other than the administration of their state fisheries agency which all 50 states agreed to. So New Jersey is no different than Florida or any other state in that respect. Difference is Florida and certain other states generate revenue from saltwater fishing licenses, New Jersey doesn't. But if they did, those funds are not earmarked exclusively for saltwater improvement, they're spent on a myriad of both fresh and saltwater projects at the discretion of the state fisheries agency. Nowhere did I see that list include increased salt water enforcement or free ramp access. You can see the uses yourself in the attached link.

In 2022, total funds paid out by Dingell-Johnson was $399 million. Every state gets something, so New Jersey did benefit by receiving $3.99 million. The allocation formula is 60% based on number of licensed anglers (both salt and fresh water) and 40% based on geographic size on a weighted average basis relative to all 50 states involved in the allocation. Every state gets a minimum 1% of the overall annual payout and no individual state gets more than 5%. In 2022, twelve states got the 1% minimum of $3.99 million including NJ, Ct, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, Puerto Rico, and West Virginia meaning based on the allocation formula they didn't meet the minimum allocation but based on the law received the 1% minimum regardless. Only two states got the 5% maximum, Alaska and Texas followed closely by California which got 4.67% of the $399 million payout obviously due to their population and number of licenses sold each year, both fresh and saltwater.

A salt water license would however obviously generate revenue, that revenue would not be allowed to go in the general fund (legally) but it wouldn't at all be restricted to salt water improvements as you state.

Everything anyone needs to know about how this works or is supposed to work is in the attached link.

https://wildlifeforall.us/resources/...ry%20equipment. Halfway down the first page, click on Dingell-Johnson at a Glance and it walks through funding, how the money is spent along with details about some of the programs funded.

My point to your post is NJ gets it's fair share of excise taxes (70% from gas purchases and not tackle sales) just like every other state. In New Jersey's case, we qualify along with 11 other states for a 1% so we actually get more than what the allocation formula calculates. A saltwater license based on the salt water registry statistics wouldn't provide New Jersey more than the minimum 1% it's already getting. You could probably quadruple the registry number and New Jersey would still get it's 1% minimum so NO CHANGE to excise funds received by the state from the adoption of a salt water license. A salt water license would generate additional revenues but those revenues will be used at the discretion of state wildlife agency which makes no assurances those funds would be used for saltwater related projects or free boat ramps. I'm not saying IF 138,000 anglers purchased a saltwater license for $20 or generated $2.76 million in incremental revenue there might not be good uses of those funds, what I'm saying is there's no guarantees a penny of those funds would be spent on enforcement, free ramps or saltwater initiatives as your post states.

You can choose to dispute this all day long but that's what the laws stipulate.

I posted other links back in that other thread you apparently didn’t read .
Your understanding of much of the excise tax as well as its returns is partially correct , but far from entirely correct as you think .
I never said license moneys would be used for any of what you suggested gere .
As a matter of fact I stated NJ told FG they would not allocate funds towards more CO

Here’s an easy break down you should take time to review .

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small...chery-products

[Broad Bill]

We are speaking English here right? I read everything you posted in the prior thread, would never reply without doing so. And your suggestion to simplify things is sending a link to a 50 page IRS memo dated 7/7/06.

I think we all get it and if you conducted a poll here you'd be lucky to get 10% of members here to vote for a salt water license because of unknown benefits and zero impact on excise tax rebates to the state.. And fwiw, every point I made about excise taxes and how the process works is 100%
correct. If you disagree, specify what I said that was wrong as opposed to speaking in broad generalities.

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Broad Bill

We are speaking English here right? I read everything you posted in the prior thread, would never reply without doing so. And your suggestion to simplify things is sending a link to a 50 page IRS memo dated 7/7/06.

I think we all get it and if you conducted a poll here you'd be lucky to get 10% of members here to vote for a salt water license because of unknown benefits and zero impact on excise tax rebates to the state.. And fwiw, every point I made about excise taxes and how the process works is 100%
correct. If you disagree, specify what I said that was wrong as opposed to speaking in broad generalities.

You don’t need to read the entire link , the beginning has the info on actual amounts of excise tax paid per item .

The 10 percent who want a license probably have fished in other states having one and saw its benefits .
Or are in the 10 % that catch 90% of the fish .

Unlike the 90% who will never do anything to benefit or protect the fisheries they supposedly love .
Just like the turn outs for the fisherman’s march , and every other challenge to protect what little we have left .

Won’t need a license once we lose the remaining scraps we still have .

.

[Broad Bill]

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

You don’t need to read the entire link , the beginning has the info on actual amounts of excise tax paid per item .

The 10 percent who want a license probably have fished in other states having one and saw its benefits .
Or are in the 10 % that catch 90% of the fish .

Unlike the 90% who will never do anything to benefit or protect the fisheries they supposedly love .
Just like the turn outs for the fisherman’s march , and every other challenge to protect what little we have left .

Won’t need a license once we lose the remaining scraps we still have .

.

Hammer I appreciate your passion for this, I sincerely do. But I've fished for years without the need for proceeds and supposed benefits from a saltwater license and experienced some incredible fishing in this state, both fresh and salt water. I've also seen, as most who have been around have, too many fisheries decline over the years through mismanagement. If management wants credit, which they deserve, when stocks rebuild they have to take responsibility when stocks decline. The problems we're experiencing, in my opinion, weren't started by the lack of a saltwater license and won't be corrected by the adoption of one. As I said, there might be some good from SW license proceeds if New Jersey elects one but 99% of our problems won't be addressed and there's no guarantee salt water license fees will be spent on salt water initiatives at all and as I said, excise taxes won't be effected in the small demographic state we live in one bit.

[Gerry Zagorski]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree here Dan. If you want to prove to others here that a paid licence has merit and no one is with you on it, you need to do better than paste a link to an IRS site...

[hammer4reel]

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

I think you're barking up the wrong tree here Dan. If you want to prove to others here that a paid licence has merit and no one is with you on it, you need to do better than paste a link to an IRS site...

The link for the irs site was to show how many things we are paying the excise tax on , and the explanation of how it’s used .

Nj fishery management continues to allow the feds to always chip away here , why aren’t other states seeing the same happen ?
Because they actually let the fisherman have a voice , because their money matters .
Here in NJ they don’t give a shit if you ever fish again

.

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

That money will go straight to the general fund to be used for the cities where the handout dependent voters are... Will they built free ramps in salt water zones?... Obtain more land on tidal waters and the ocean so fishermen can gain access?? No.. It will go into the pork barrel slush fund to buy votes from the city dwellers... Thats what NY does...

Exactly !! General fund. Charter and PB have pay a fee every year to fish in NY waters. NJ does not charge NY for hire boats. Go figure???

[bulletbob]

Originally Posted by Capt Sal

Exactly !! General fund. Charter and PB have pay a fee every year to fish in NY waters. NJ does not charge NY for hire boats. Go figure???

So a NJ party boat has to pay to fish on the NY side??.. I guess I didn't know that.. How does that work?. Yearly tax of some sort?.. I Have been on boats here in NJ, right close to the beach with NY boats close enough to hit with a very short underhand cast.....

[Capt Sal]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

So a NJ party boat has to pay to fish on the NY side??.. I guess I didn't know that.. How does that work?. Yearly tax of some sort?.. I Have been on boats here in NJ, right close to the beach with NY boats close enough to hit with a very short underhand cast.....

You have to buy the Permit every year and out trips and catch reports.

[NJSquatch]

they extended the survey to 10/15

_________________________________________________
New York State is exploring the potential for a fee-based saltwater fishing license to provide revenue to enhance recreational saltwater fishing and management.

Currently, 23 of the 26 U.S. coastal states have a fee-based saltwater license, however, there are many factors that must be considered if New York were to pursue a similar license - most importantly, feedback from anglers.

Your input matters! Anglers are encouraged to complete this short, anonymous survey as one of the first steps to help determine how New York could pursue a license. Your responses will help gauge interest in developing a recreational saltwater fishing license and provide information on how a potential license could be used to support fishing efforts important to you.

Please complete the online survey by Sunday, October 15, 2023.
https://survey123.arcgis.com/share/2...e807c322605f04

We appreciate your time and value your feedback in further enhancing saltwater fishing experiences in New York’s marine waters. If you have any questions or additional comments about this survey, please email us at fw.marine@dec.ny.gov.