Maine’s supreme court has agreed to hear challenges against the state’s fly fishing only regulations, which were the subject of a recent lawsuit. Plaintiffs who want the fly fishing only regulations overturned succeeded in appealing a lower court ruling that sided with keeping the state’s current regulations in place.
Why The Fight?
Some of Maine’s wild brook trout and landlocked salmon fisheries are under fly fishing only regulations to help reduce fish mortality and protect fragile populations, according to the state. However, when Maine’s legislature passed a constitutional amendment in 2021 that guaranteed a right to food for all citizens, the plaintiffs decided that the constitutional amendment should override any gear restrictions on harvesting fish.
The couple, a family with the last name of Legendres, says that fly fishing is only accessible to those in a higher income bracket. Therefore, fly fishing only regulations in Maine unfairly target and “discriminate against working-class people.”
When the Legendres filed their initial lawsuit, plenty of anglers within Maine spoke out against their logical fallacy, including Bob Mallard.
The Ruling
Since a lower court sided with the state, the Legendres have challenged it to the state supreme court, which has agreed to hear the case. Whether the court agrees to a full hearing, or simply sides with the lower court ruling, remains to be seen.
The Fight
Some of Maine’s best native brook trout waters are currently under fly fishing only regulations to preserve and protect this native species. One family—Joe and Samantha Legendre—has filed suit against the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife to remove those regulations and allow any fishing tackle to be used statewide. Not doing so, they argue, runs afoul of the Right to Food law, which was passed in 2021.
Bob Mallard, a former fly shop owner in Maine, rebutted that point by recounting his own experiences there in the state.
“My fly shop customers were mostly working-class people, and certainly not what you would call wealthy,” Mallard wrote. “They worked in the woods, trades, retail, services, and the two local paper mills. Many were self-employed. They fly fished because they enjoyed it. And most ice fished during the long Maine winter, while many did at least some level of spin fishing.”
Mallard also didn’t mince words when offering his opinion on Maine’s Right to Food law, either.
“When a law is passed that doesn’t address any real issue, as was the case regarding Maine’s Right to Food law, I always worry how it will be used up the road,” he said. “In this case, the first thing that came to mind was fishing and hunting. Unfortunately, my concerns proved correct as the law has now been used twice to try to undermine Maine’s hunting and fishing laws. And if it is not abolished or amended to provide absolute clarity, it will inevitably be used again.”