Saltwater Fishing License Repealed for Select Towns

The New York State Supreme Court struck down a state saltwater fishing fee on Tuesday for anglers fishing in the waters of the Towns of , East Hampton, Southampton, Shelter Island, Brookhaven, Huntington and Oyster Bay.

Southold Town officials joined forces with representatives from the six other Long Island towns to fight the fishing fee, which would have required all fisherman older than 16 to buy a $10 yearly saltwater fishing license from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, who intends to appeal the ruling.

Joseph Lombardo, Southampton Senior Assistant Town Attorney and lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said that the towns challenged the state using a colonial land grant, or patent, dating back to the 1600s.

"The patent grants the respective Towns the authority and the sole control over all the fisheries, fowling, sand, weed, and waters within the said Town," the attorney said.

The state enacted the saltwater fishing law in 2009 to generate revenue that was supposed to be spent to enhance local fisheries. Instead the money was used to reduced the Department of Environmental Conservation's budget by $3 million.

"The money should go back into local communities and not into a state-controlled general fund," said Bill Czech of Jamesport Tackle in Mattituck upon hearing of the court's decision. "The money should be used to fund the construction of things like boat launching ramps and artificial reefs."

At the trial held at the State Supreme Court in Central Islip, Lombardo argued that it is the "sole right of the towns to regulate fishing within their borders, and not the right of the state to do so."

State Supreme Court Justice Patrick Sweeney agreed.

"Concerning the issuance of salt water fishing license, the statute as applied to the respective Towns is in violation of the rights of the people of the respective Towns and may not be enforced upon those who seek to fish in the waters regulated by the respective Towns," he said.

The state's attempt to regulate local waters was very controversial when first proposed in 2009, as saltwater anglers in New York were for the first time in history required to register with the state and purchase a fishing license. 

Still, the Department of Environmental Conservation plans to appeal the decision, said spokeswoman Maureen Wren, arguing that although the decision lifts the state fishing license requirement for fishing in the marine waters of the seven plaintiff towns, it does not remove the federal registry requirement — which is more expensive.

"As of Jan. 1, 2011, any person fishing in the marine waters of the seven plaintiff towns who does not possess a state marine fishing license must carry proof that they have registered with the National Saltwater Angler Registry," Wren wrote in an email to Patch this week. "The state license is the less expensive option — the federal registration cost is $15; the state license fee is $10."

Wren added that anglers need to participate in the Federal registry only if they plan to catch anadromous fish, such striped bass, but not for non-anadromous species such as fluke, scup and bluefish.

Back at Jamesport Tackle, Czech — though he said he was happy about the court's decision — added that he felt sorry for those who purchased annual or lifetime saltwater licenses and for his transient customers from other Long Island townships.

"They will still be unfairly required to purchase saltwater licenses," he said. "And I would rather see local license fees generate revenue to help fund recreational fishing in our area."

Lombardo said that Tuesday's decision was a step in the right direction in protecting the rights of municipalities.

"We must continue to be vigilant in our protection of the rights of the various Towns to regulate the waters bordering the Towns," he said. "These rights were granted to the Towns dating from the 1600s, long before the State of New York existed. If we had not challenged this state law, we would have seen a continuous erosion of Town rights to regulate their waters, a scenario which we were just not willing to accept."