Sportsmen are about to lose one of their last privileges, one they've enjoyed since literally time immemorial, but they appear to be resigned to the inevitable.
Gov. Deval Patrick this week signed legislation that will require all saltwater fishermen to obtain a license to fish in state waters in 2011. Fishing in fresh water has been licensed for years, but saltwater angling has been license-free since Colonial days.
The law will require anglers to obtain a permit from the Department of Fish and Game, with revenues deposited into a state Marine Recreational Fisheries Development Fund. The revenue will pay for data collection and administration of the permitting program, programs to improve public access for recreational fishing, and better fisheries management.
The bill exempts those under 16 and over 59 and the disabled. It also sets aside two days a year to fish license-free. Those who fish on chartered boats will not need a license; only the captain will be licensed.
The legislation pre-empts a move by the federal government to establish its own permitting system, with a license fee of $15 to $25. If a state doesn't require licensing, federal guidelines will be enacted in January 2010.
They will require a permit for anyone fishing beyond three miles from shore or those fishing for striped bass and other anadromous species.
Anadromous fish breed in fresh water but spend the rest of their lives in the ocean. Striped bass are among the most popular species sought by sport fishermen.
State and federal conservation officers and the Coast Guard will be responsible for enforcing the federal license requirement, which will be free in the first year. Violators will just get warnings next year.
The state legislation allows money collected for licenses to be invested in the commonwealth's saltwater resources. If the federal government sets the fees, the money goes to the U.S. Treasury, with no promises on how it would be spent.
Hamilton resident Kalil Boghdan owns Downriver Charters and is a past president of the Massachusetts Wildlife Federation. He also fishes recreationally and said he approves of the new requirement, conditionally.
"If the money is truly used for fisheries research, I'm all in favor of it," he said.
But he's not sure how many other anglers are aware of the coming requirement, saying he's heard little talk of it.
The freedom to fish is largely confined to New England. Of the 23 states with ocean coastlines, only Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Virginia and Hawaii do not already require licenses.
The Rhode Island Legislature recently passed a bill that would have established a state registry for saltwater fishermen, but Gov. Donald Carcieri rejected it.
Swampscott angler Kent Garland sees himself as a recreational fisherman, but he's good enough at it that the state considers him to be a commercial fisherman. He's chasing tuna now and will go after stripers in the spring.
Like Boghdan, he supports the new requirement, but he's leery of its long-term impact.
"It's a good idea in theory for the statistics," he said. "But it will probably turn out to be just another tax."
Republican state Rep. Brad Hill of Ipswich shares his wariness.
"That's something we're always concerned about," Hill said. "But we were very clear about keeping the money in the fish industry."
He went on to say plenty of his fellow legislators are also anglers, and they would likely challenge any move to divert the fees.
Boghdan hopes some of the money will be spent studying the decline of the striped bass population. The return of the stripers has long been hailed as one of the great stories of conservation, but in recent years their numbers have declined.
"I'm out there every day, I see it," Boghdan said.
If that's the kind of thing the money is used for, Garland will be satisfied.
"There's probably some good somewhere down the line," he said.


