On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:30:18 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Nope, California has an overpriced fishing license now. Needed for salt of
fresh water fishing.

snipped

Yup. I just found this:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...elicensing.jpg

That explains it. Got it he

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories..._registry.html


--

John H

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:31:31 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:30:18 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Nope, California has an overpriced fishing license now. Needed for salt of
fresh water fishing.

snipped

Yup. I just found this:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...elicensing.jpg

That explains it. Got it he

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories..._registry.html

Thats' part of it. I called my buddy who in on the Advisory Committee
and Maryland is a special case because it has both the Bay and
shoreline.

For this year only, Maryland is exempt from the state licensing
requirement to avoid the Federal permit status - that's why it's free
until Jan. 1, 2011. As of Jan 1, 2011, Maryland will be required to
have in place a state license structure to cover salt water fisherman
both for the Bay and the Shore - if not, then it's a $25 annual
Federal fee to be able to fish sal****er.