Ocm39986872-1964-HB-3550.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HOUSE No. 3550 dje CommontuealtJ) of e^assadjumts SPECIAL REPORT OF THE DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME RELATIVE TO TEE ISSUANCE OF SPORTING LICENSES, THE TAKING OF FISH AND THE MOLESTING OF DEER BY DOGS IN CERTAIN COUNTIES Under Chapter 64 of the Resolves of 1963. January, 1964 BOSTON WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., LEGISLATIVE PRINTERS 32 DERNE STREET 1964 Cfte Commontoealti) of e^assadnisetts Division op Fisheries and Game 3 Tbemont Street, Boston 8, December 18, 1963 To the Honorable House of Representativ In accordance with chapter 64 of the Resolves of 1963 I herewith submit a report of the Division of Fisheries and Game relative to a study of the issuance of sporting licenses and certain related matters, to the taking of fish, and to the molesting of deer by dogs in certain counties. There is incorporated also a report from the Director of Marine Fisheries on commercial fishing, pertaining to House Bill No. 1286, Acts of 1963. Respectfully submitted ) FRANCIS W. SARGENT Director y Cfie CommonUiealtJ) of 00aggad)usetts REPORT OF THE DIVISION OF FISHERIES AND GAME RELATIVE TO A STUDY OF THE ISSUANCE OF SPORT- ING LICENSES AND CERTAIN RELATED MATTERS, } TO THE TAKING OF FISH, AND TO THE MOLESTING OF DEER BY DOGS IN CERTAIN COUNTIES. To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives of Massachusetts in General Court assembled: In accordance with the provisions of chapter 64 of the Resolves of 1958, the Division of Fisheries and Game submits herewith a report on the Resolve providing for an investigation and study on certain matters related to fish and game. Chapter 64 of the Resolves of 1963 is as follows: Resolved, That the division of fisheries and game, in the department of natural resources, is hereby authorized and directed to make an investigation and study of the subject matter of current senate document numbered 447, relative to lowering the age at which a sporting, hunting, fishing or trapping license shall be issued without a fee, and of current house documents numbered 297, relative to pro viding for the issuance of certain sporting lie enses to persons over the age of sixty-five years without the payment of a fee; 749, relative to making persons on social security eligible for free fishing licens is; 753, relative to establishing an open season on trout fishing; 1286, relative to prohibiting the taking of fish for com- mercial use in Quincy Bay, Hingham Bay, Weymouth Fore River and Weymouth Back River; 1518, relative to the molesting, attacking or killing of deer by dogs in Worcester county; 2310, relative to requiring that hunting licenses bear upon their face the blood type of the licensee; 2548, relative to prohibiting the issuance of sporting or hunting licenses to any person who is color blind; 2550, relative to requiring all applicants for a sporting and hunting license to be examined as to ■eyesight, for color blindness and ability to handle firearms; and 2778, relative to providing that applicants for hunting licenses furnish evidence that they are not color blind. Said division shall report to the general court the results of its in- vestigation and study, and its recommendations, if any, together with drafts of legislation necessary to carry such recommendations into effect, by filing the same with the clerk of the house of representatives on or before the fourth Wednesday of December, nineteen hundred and sixty-three. 6 HOUSE No. 3550. [Apr. ISSUANCE OF FREE LICENSES Introduction. Since Senate document 447* and House documents 297 and 749 all deal with the issuance of free hunting, fishing, sporting or trapping licenses, they will be considered jointly in a study of free license policies in Massachusetts and other states. Existing Laws Regarding Free Licenses The last paragraph of clause (1) of section 8 of chapter 131 of the] ) General Laws, as amended by chapter 466 of the Acts of 1959 provides as follows; “No fee shall be charged for any license issued under this clause to a person over the age of seventy or for a fishing license issued to a person seventy years of age or one who is a recipient of old age assistance granted under Chapter One Hundred and Eighteen A, or to a person who is blind, or to a person who is a paraplegic.” In 1962, 16,215 free licenses were issued in the aforementioned categories. The licenses, if purchased, would have contributed $111,173 to the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund. Bills Referred to this Study. The net effect of Senate bill 447 and House bills numbered 297 and 749 would be to further expand the number of persons eligible for free licenses. Senate document 447 would issue free all three types of licenses to those over the age of 65, to a person who is blind, or to a person who is a paraplegic. The net effect of this bill would be to lower the age from seventy to sixty-five, and automatically would include those not on old age assistance. It would also make the blind and paraplegics eligible for free hunting and trapping li- censes. House document 297 would issue a free license of all types to those over sixty-five, while the intent of House document 749 is to make persons collecting social security benefits eligible for a free fishing license. Persons in the sixty-five to seventy-year bracket currently con- tribute to the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund by their purchase of a hunting or fishing license at $4.25, or by the purchase of a com- bination license at $7.25. The texts of bills referred to in this study are contained in Appendix A 1964.] HOUSE —No. 3550. 7 Free Licenses Issued in Other States. Questionnaires were sent to 49 states requesting information regarding the issuance of free licenses. Completed forms were returned by 36 states. Of the 36 states replying, 17 issued no free licenses based on the age of the recipient, nine issued them at age seventy, while ten set a free license minimum age below seventy. Blind persons received free licenses in 14 states, as is done in the case of fishing licenses in Massachusetts. Three other states had provisions for welfare recipients. Seven states issued no free licenses to anyone, while a few others offered free licenses to severely dis- abled veterans, etc. The majority of respondents were against issuing any free licenses, only two implying they looked upon them favorably. The principal objection voiced was that the funds lost to the resource agency by the granting of free licenses were substantial and reduced their ability to perpetuate and enhance the fish and wildlife resource being used by the license holder. While the cost of a license to the individual was but a small percentage of the amount spent by the hunter or fisherman during the course of a year, the effect on the state agency was severe. This loss of revenue was especially serious in those states relying solely on license sales for their source of state funds as is the case in Massachusetts. The following brief comments contained in the completed ques- tionnaires illustrate the trend of thought on the subject of free licenses in other states: “Plan to abolish free licenses to old and blind and require regular license’ Utah. ‘Should be kept to a minimum” Vermont. ‘Class distinction” South Dakota. ‘Decided negative impact on revenue” Oregon. ‘Costs us revenue” Georgia. ‘5300.000 loss in revenue, but still desirable” Texas “Free licenses to elderly unjustified . such a small concession to each one but total penalizes agency trying to improve sport the elderly enjoy” Virginia. * “Undesirable” Indiana. “Not in favor as granting free licenses to one group creates requests from other groups, resulting in progressive loss of revenue” Arkansas. ” “Should be held to a minimum West Virginia “Any increase in free licenses seriously affects operations” New Jersey. “Giving free licenses to everybody over 65 automatically assumes they’re all ready for the relief rolls, which isn’t so” Michigan. 8 HOUSE — No. 3550. Apr. “Legislature reimburses us for all ‘free’ licenses” Maine. “Cuts into our sole support” Arizona. “Free licenses to elderly persons a detriment” New Hampshire. “Would be a drastic reduction in revenue” Maryland. “Against free licenses as they lead to costly extensions of the privilege to other groups” New Mexico. “Young people and oldsters receiving free licenses is an excessive dram on re- ources for which they are not paying. As longevity is increasing, we feel minimum age for old folks’ free licenses should be increased” Idaho. “Oppose free licenses as a matter of principle” California “Do not use free licenses and don’t intend to” Kansas. “Not desirable; decreases revenue” Washington. ) “Opposed on principle; anyone using resources should help pay costs of manag- ing those resources” Missouri. Discussion„ The laws in Massachusetts presently in effect grant free licenses to persons over seventy, to persons on old age assistance, to the blind, and to paraplegics. A nationwide survey indicates that two out of every three states follow similar or less liberal policies relating to free licenses. The Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Game re- ceives no appropriation from the General Fund, relying on the sale of hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses for its state appropriation. A serious drop in revenue would occur if persons between sixty-five and seventy years of age were granted free licenses. This loss of revenue would become increasingly serious because elder citizens will in the future make up a larger proportion of the population. There seems to be no real justification for granting free licenses to any group solely on the basis of age or physical condition.