Shellfish licence

Flush Release · 02-28-2005, 01:05 PM

Here is a good one, according to what I have read in the Legislation for a Shellfish licence in section 4 page 4 of the linked document I do not need a additional licence to harvest Shellfish IF I have my angling licence. Clue me in here, am I reading it wrong or is ODFG interpeting it wrong?

http://hmsc.oregonstate.edu/odfw/reg...censeSB597.pdf

Beefcake · 02-28-2005, 01:21 PM

I would interpret that the same way you did, but the fishing regs seem pretty clear in the synopsis that you need a shellfish license (pg.9, "Licenses, Tags and Permits:", Item #3).

"All persons 14 years or older must have in posession a valid Oregon Shellfish License to take any shellfish for personal use, except:
- During "Free Fishing Weekend" (June 11&12, 2005)
- When taking crayfish or freshwater clams
- Oregon resident landowners and members of their immediate family may take shellfish on land they own and reside upon."

Flush Release · 02-28-2005, 01:24 PM

Yea I know, read them also but it seems to contradict what the Legislators passed as Law.

lost_sailor · 02-28-2005, 01:27 PM

Instead of reading the Senate Bill, better to read the amended law http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/497.html

That section is about valid licenses for the Ocean around the OR/WA border - angling AND shellfish licenses.

I tried to find the shellfish license requirement but I got lost, I'll check...

Near as I can tell the Regulations define the exact rules. The statute (law) grants the authority to make those rules.

Joe Schwab · 02-28-2005, 06:02 PM

You are reading too much into the rules. It says in order to angle or take shellfish (two different activities) you must have an angling license or a shellfish license (two different licenses). Legislators normally pass broad laws and ODFW refines them into workable regulations. Intent of the legislature is the key. The commisssion ultimately sets the regulations you and I must abide by.

garyk · 02-28-2005, 07:44 PM

Well written summaries there L_S and CaptHook!

Regarding the new shellfish licenses, it's high time for ODFW to report back to us what benefits have been created? I'm sure some good has been accomplished, however, it'd be nice to hear that from the agency. Especially since we've not been given anything obvious; like a commercial crabber exlusion zone at the bay mouths.

Me thinks ODFW could use some positive spin after giving themselves such a black eye with the recent, embarrassing lets-let-gillnetters-triple-the-ESA-steelhead-kill.

ron m · 02-28-2005, 08:21 PM

Check p. 2, section 4 (2). I think it says ODFW gets to make the rules and set the requirements for licenses. Regardless of how I read what is in there, I'm going to follow the regulations and license requirements set up by ODFW.

ron m

STGRule · 03-01-2005, 04:39 AM

Garyk, that was Washington that was supporting the triple steelhead ESA take.
And ODFW used some of the money to hire a full time, dedicated shellfish bio. Department employees also drove to the coast from all over the state to stand at the access points to give information and educate clammers as they arrived to clam. I believe they have been able to do at least one census of clam density too. As with any other program, they will be responible for an annual report of some sort. Ask for it if you want to know what they have done.

Steelie28 · 03-01-2005, 06:34 AM

Can someone please tell me why the shellfish license does not come with the Sports Pac. I would be willing to pay an extra $6.50, or whatever the shellfish tag runs this year, on top of the cost of the Sports Pac. Makes absolutely no sense to me that it is not included

Steelie28

Draggin' Bait · 03-01-2005, 06:48 AM

Best to have the appropriate license in-hand and not play word games with the judge. Only thing I'm upset about is the lack of a handicapped clam season these days...I always enjoyed hunting for handicapped clams.

RiverRogue · 03-01-2005, 08:37 AM

I for one believe that the shellfish license should be included in the SP. They put all the other extranious tags included, but see fit to exclude that one

:whazzup: It is all about the $$$. So you are all aware, ODF&W, the only agency in the state I believe, has $1.6 mill bucks extra due to those fees. Those funds are in danger of going back into the Gen fund!!!!!! If that money does get transferred back, Oregon will lose several million bucks in federal matching funds. :whazzup:

tunaorlater · 03-01-2005, 09:15 AM

You MUST have a shellfish lic. even if you have a fishing lic. I have no idea why its not in the sports pac but it would be nice :whazzup: The whole shellfish lic has me confused. Why are we always getting double tapped? Does anyone know where that money goes? I'm having more and more problems forking over cash to enjoy my recreation. Im not the type of person that complains when its tax time because I like smart kids,good roads, and the other services my tax dollars provide. However it seems that sportsman get hit in the pocketbook at every turn. Forest Pass, Shellfish Lic.,application fees,boat fees,trailer fees,etc. i would just like to know where my money is going it makes handing over the cash a little easier

garyk · 03-01-2005, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Garyk, that was Washington that was supporting the triple steelhead ESA take.

In reality, certain staff from both ODFW and WDFW advanced the proposal, earning those staff and their supervisors my "Knuckleheads-of-2005" award.

It was indeed the ODFW COMMISSIONERS on a split vote that ultimately deep-sixed the increased kill.

Don't forget that it was former ODFW Steven King who fathered the proposal last year - but it failed on the initial go around with NMFS.

Yes, I'm sure ODFW will issue a report...however it would be politically savy for the agecny to be more proactive and simply do a press release reporting back to the public what fees from this new tag accomplished. As you can see from this thread, probably everyone who's purchased the shellfish tag is wondering the same thing.

bucketmouth · 03-01-2005, 01:40 PM

Weren't the funds from the Shellfish licence fees originally earmarked for a specific habitat enhancement program? Why would these funds be in danger of going back to the general fund? I'm asking because I simply don't know. Thought ODFW had an intent for the funds at the outset.

Since the fees inception I have personally stepped the number of trips I make anually to the coast for crabbing and clamming.

Clamman · 03-01-2005, 05:37 PM

Recreational shellfish license revenue goes to a dedicated subaccount with ODFW, not the general fund. The Oregon Department of Agriculture, Oregon State Police and ODFW are to use the funds for shellfish health testing, enforcement and resource management. Department of Agriculture receives the largest section, OSP next and ODFW gets the least.

The license was not included in the Sport-pak because the angling license increase package had already made it so far into the legislative session that to change it (by adding the shellfish license fee) would have jeopardized the increase. That could have thus jeopardized hatcheries and other necessary programs.

The new recreational shellfish biologist was hired this past month, about 14 months after revenue started being generated. In 2004 the shellfish license generated over twice what ODFW anticipated (over a million $)though in their defense they had little information to make anything more than an estimate.

It would be interesting to know what projects have been supported by this new revenue. My sources haven't told me much.

Clam

RiverRogue · 03-01-2005, 05:48 PM

As I understand it, it isnt specifically Shellfish license funds, but the total accumulation of all fees that were collected to give ODF&W an "overage". But there is sooo much pressure to put every penny back into the Gen Fund, those "extra" bucks could go away. Memory escapes me as to where I originally heard, but I believe the Shellfish license was away to continue funding the biologists positions or face cutting them. Their work had all along involved research and managing shellfish stocks, but there was never and dedicated funding for it.

SalmonSeason · 03-01-2005, 07:36 PM

Capt Hook has answered your question correctly...

As for the comments regarding the license being included in the Sports Pac..I agree

Since it is NOT included I will NEVER Buy one...This state gets plenty of my money Why not give us the benefit of being allowed to crab/shellfish for FREE and actually charge the out of state folks??? That's another topic in itself sorry to highjack your post