Monday, August 20, 2012

NC Fisheries Agencis Accepting Public Comments on Reorganization

COASTAL FISHERIES REFORM GROUP (CFRG) ALERT
Section 2. of Chapter 190 of the 2012 NC Session Laws (SB 821) requires the Director of the Wildlife Resources Commission, the Director of the Division of Marine Fisheries, and the Commissioner of Agriculture to study the organization and function of the fisheries management programs in NC and to report their findings and recommendations for improvement to the NC General Assembly in October of 2012.

 As a first step in this process, the agencies have set up several public meetings to receive public comment on the subject of reorganization of the fisheries agencies in NC. The times and places with maps are given below:

Public Meetings to receive public comments on reorganization of the fisheries agencies in NC 6 p.m., Aug. 22 and 9 a.m., Aug. 23 N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission Meeting Brownstone Hilton DoubleTree Hotel 1707 Hillsborough St., Raleigh (Map) 5 p.m., Aug. 29 N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission Committee Meetings 1751 Varsity Drive N.C. State University Centennial Campus, Raleigh (Map) 6 p.m., Sept. 5 Craven County Cooperative Extension Office 300 Industrial Drive, New Bern (Map) 6 p.m., Sept 6 Dare County Administration Building Commissioners Meeting Room 954 Marshall C. Collins Drive, Manteo (Map) All comments offered on this issue will be presented for joint consideration by all three agencies.

Attend one of these meetings if you can and send the notice to all your fishing friends so they can attend too. Also, a website has been set up to receive public comments: http://www.ncsenatebill821.org/default.htm

Visit this site and send your comments directly to the three agencies for consideration. CFRG can identify no role for the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to play in the management or administration of fisheries resources. Their charge is to manage farm commodities and assist farmers, of which they do a very good job. No efficiency or economy could be gained by involving NCDA&CS in any of the fishery programs, except aquaculture, which they already handle.

In fact, delegating reporting harvest statistics and monitoring fishery catches through NCDA&CS would add an element of uncertainty and additional bureaucracy to the current process, which is working quite well. There are elements of redundancy and overlap of responsibilities between WRC and DMF that, if eliminated, would improve delivery of services, law enforcement, and management of fisheries resources and would save significant overlapping funding requirements through consolidation of those functions.

The present evaluation should focus on items that would improve efficiency and cut redundancy and include recommendations for change to eliminate overlapping activities. Finally, the WRC has a total of 19 members and the Marine Fisheries Commission has 9 members. As close as the missions of these two agencies are, it seems plausible that policy making and regulatory duties of the two Commissions could be consolidated and reduced in a way that would preserve the unique focus on marine and inland fisheries and save a lot of unnecessary administrative costs in the process. If you agree, pass these ideas for savings and efficiency along to the agencies for their consideration in their deliberations. Thank you, NC Coastal Reform Group

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

REPORT TO SUPPORTERS OF THE COASTAL FISHERIES REFORM GROUP


Actions of the General Assembly in the Short Session, 2012 related to marine fisheries

The Marine Fisheries Study Committee was established after the 2011 General Assembly failed to act on the game fish bill HB 353.  That bill would have made striped bass, speckled trout, and red drum game fish that could not be taken except by hook and line and could not be sold.  Below is the charge given to the Marine Fisheries Study Committee.  The Committee met four times between January and April without significant progress and very little discussion on any of the pressing issues given to it for study. 

Marine Fisheries Study Committee – Study issues related to marine fisheries.  Specifically, the Committee may study the following:

1.      The potential impact to both the State’s fisheries resources and the State’s economy related to the designation of Red Drum, Spotted Sea Trout, and Striped Bass as coastal game fish.

2.      Changes to the appointment process and qualification for membership on the NC Marine Fisheries Commission.

3.      Creation of a hook and line commercial fishery.

4.      Elimination of the trawl boat fishery in NC.

5.      Entering into cooperative agreements with other jurisdictions with regard to the conservation of marine and estuarine resources; and regulating placement of nets and other sport or commercial gear in coastal fishing waters with regard to navigational and recreational safety as well as from a conservation standpoint.

6.      Entering into agreements regarding the delegation of law enforcement powers from the National Marine Fisheries Service over matters within the jurisdiction of the Service.

7.      Potential modification of the Fisheries Reform Act of 1997.

8.      Whether Marine Fisheries should be a division of the Coastal Resources Commission o the Wildlife Resources Commission.\

9.      Other findings that promote the allocation of the State’s resources to the optimum use.

Chairs: McCormick (Brown)

Members: Ingle, Samuelson, McComas, Spear, Holloway, McElraft, Murray (Preston, White, Goolsby, Rabon, Tucker, East, Jackson.)

Their final report resulted in introduction and final passage of SB 821 in the Short Session of 2012.  SB 821 is summarized below.  The most positive provision to come out of this bill is elimination of the menhaden fisheries in NC waters and a super majority requirement for passage of any rule by the Marine Fisheries Commission related to overfishing or recovery of overfished stocks over the recommendation of the staff of the Division of Marine Fisheries.

  • Senate Bill 821.  An act to consolidate several issues raised in the Marine Fisheries Study Committee.  The several issues are addressed below:
    • Directs the agency heads of Agriculture, Marine Fisheries, and Wildlife to study the organizational structure and function of the various fisheries management programs of NC and to report their findings and recommendations for change to the General Assembly in October, 2012.
    • Directs the agency heads of Transportation, Wildlife, and Marine Fisheries to study all available sources of funds to create a new fund to be used for boat navigation projects including channel dredging.  Specifically mentioned are fishing license fees, gasoline taxes, and boat registration fees.
    • Prohibits fishing for menhaden using a mother ship and purse seine runner boats in NC waters after January 1, 2013.
    • Requires a supermajority vote of the Marine Fisheries Commission to override a staff recommendation related to eliminating overfishing or restoration of overfished stocks.
    • Consolidated several of the marine fisheries advisory committees for efficiency.
Another bill coming out of the Marine Fisheries Study Committee that never got heard was SB 850, which would have recreated the Joint Legislative Commission on Fish and Wildlife.  This is a very bad idea and we were able to kill the bill by pointing out some of the problems to sponsors. 

·         Senate Bill 850.  An act to create an oversight committee of 16 legislators to oversee fish and wildlife management programs.  This was a very bad idea, which never got any legs due to conversations with Senate leaders.  Once the problems were explained to sponsors, they decided not to move this bill.  Fish and wildlife management programs do not need legislative oversight, in fact, a system like that would have serious negative effects.  Another good move for sportsmen. 

CFRG is gearing up for another full-fledged effort to make meaningful changes to the management of our marine fisheries.  Announcement will be forthcoming shortly.  The Marine Fisheries Commission meets in Raleigh on August 22-24, 2012.  We will be there representing the interests of sound management and resource protection.  Stay tuned!

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Report of the Marine Fisheries Study Committee - Squandered Opportunity

This special study committee was established after the 2011 Session failed to take up the issue of game fish status for red drum, speckled sea trout, and striped bass and was to examine and make recommendations for improvements in management of marine fisheries for consideration during the short spring session of the General Assembly.  A whole list of subjects was laid out for their review, including game fish, joint law enforcement authority, merger of the fisheries agencies, and other issues related to management of marine fisheries.  The Study Committee met four times since January. 

A great opportunity to reform and improve protection and management of our marine fisheries was squandered by failure of the Study Committee to seriously examine or analyze the current situation relative to management of marine fisheries or ways to improve it.  Pertinent information about the current declining status of marine fisheries stocks and the inherent value of marine fisheries to the state and local economies as compared to its meager value as a commodity were not presented and not discussed.  Political paralysis set in early in the process resulting in stagnation of any meaningful discussion or action. 
The final report is an orchestrated, last minute surprise that contains not one valuable recommendation to improve North Carolinas coastal fisheries.  Game fish was never mentioned nor was joint law enforcement authority for Marine Patrol Officers; commercial interests did not want these.  Merger of the fisheries agencies became a new study kicked down the road until October 1, 2012; now the study on merger will include the Department of Agriculture; commercial seafood interests would prefer to be considered as a commodity not subject to strict control as a natural resource.  

Additionally, and perhaps the worst idea to emerge in many years, is a recommendation to establish a sixteen member legislative oversight commission to oversee every detail of, not only marine fisheries issues, but also all wildlife resources issues as well.  If this oversight commission is enacted, it will politicize fish and wildlife programs and set back professional, science-based management to the dark ages.
So, not much positive to report from the touted Marine Fisheries Study Committee.  The next step along this tortuous road to improve management of our marine fisheries will be the actions to come from the short session.  The game fish bill, H353, is still alive in the House and can be taken up.  Also, the recommendation of the Marine Fisheries Study Committee may be acted upon.  The oversight commission for fish and wildlife deserves swift and certain action to see that it never sees the light of day.  We will watch carefully for positive signs of support for improvements in the way we protect and manage our marine fisheries in the short session.  We will give you our analysis in early July.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Coastal Fisheries Reform Group Press Release

For Immediate Release

North Carolina Fisheries Reform Group Seeks Coastal Net Ban

Over the last four years, the Coastal Fisheries Reform Group (CFRG), which is composed of thousands of dedicated sport fishermen with the common goal of improving North Carolina's marine fisheries, has worked  diligently within the established system to promote a more equitable and effective fishery management program.  After running into a blank wall at the Maine Fisheries Commission, CFRG carried its concerns to the North Carolina General Assembly in 2009.  Our bill to give coastal game fish status to speckled trout and red drum was derailed by a few coastal legislators even though significant support was present in the public arena and in the legislature.  Our bill never even got a fair hearing and no vote was ever taken. 

In 2011, recreational fishermen came back to a Republican legislature and promises of action on the coastal game fish issue.  House Bill 353 was introduced by a bipartisan group of over 20 Representatives and hope was alive.  At the end of the session, HB 353 was sacrificed on the altar of overriding the Governor's budget veto with the promise that a special study committee would look into this question and other aspects of the marine fisheries program in NC and report legislative changes to the spring session of the legislature.  This special study committee has met twice now without any discernable progress or even meaningful discussion of the most critical issues.

Time is running out and no progress is in sight.  We are hearing that the coastal game fish issue is just too volatile to bring up in an election year.  We are tiring of this same old story that just kicks the issue farther down the road.  We need action now and we will be heard.

With the legislature continuing in its meek course paralyzed into inaction by the loud noise of commercial fisheries interests, CFRG plans to act.  We have retired our effort toward compromise and are rededicated to the cause to eliminate all gill nets from the waters of North Carolina as a conservation measure to protect our marine fisheries and the other aquatic life in our sounds and estuaries.

CFRG is developing plans to unite with all other fish and wildlife conservation organizations and agencies, private, state, and federal, to rid our waters of this destructive gear that has taken and continues to take a terrible toll on our marine resources.

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

"Visiting" fishermen say Gamefish Protection would benefit Coastal Tourism and Economies by Jerry Dilsaver

‘Visiting’ fishermen say gamefish protection would benefit coastal tourism and economies
Out-of-state tournament fishermen promise they won’t return until net conflicts are resolved; tournament trail eliminates annual visit

By Jerry Dilsaver

Even in the current depressed economy, fishermen plan their vacations around catching fish. It’s the opinion of many fishermen that North Carolina is losing out on plenty of tourist dollars that could wind up in the state’s economy if the legislature designates red drum, speckled trout and striped bass as gamefish.

Proponents of gamefish status for those three species believe that having them in abundance would be good for economies in coastal areas, that a healthy recreational fishery would bring more anglers to North Carolina, creating jobs and providing an economic boost. This belief is shared by many fishermen from North Carolina and other states. What is certain is that constant conflict over saltwater fisheries is in no way positive, and several fishermen whose travels to the coast have been changed have no problem explaining why North Carolina won’t be a destination until the situation changes.

James McManus of Sylva, N.C., guides fishermen in several lakes, rivers and streams in North Carolina’s western mountains and is a former competitor on the Inshore Fishing Association (IFA) redfish tour. He enjoys fishing for red drum and speckled trout and would like to do more of it in North Carolina, but his experiences on the IFA Tour have him heading to Florida for his red drum and speckled trout.

“I am a North Carolina citizen and would love to fish here more, but I can’t take the chance that I could drive from the mountains and then find my fishing area wrapped up in nets or fished out when I arrive,” McManus said. “I go tuna fishing on the Outer Banks once or twice a year, and I would love to take my bay boat down and stay a few extra days. However, the fishing is too uncertain for the expense and taking time off work. 

“When I vacation, instead of heading for the North Carolina coast, I pack up my family and drive to Steinhatchee, Fla.,” McManus said. “Florida gave gamefish status to red drum about 20 years ago and doesn’t allow gill nets in inshore waters. I can go there and fish unobstructed water and catch fish. It’s a longer drive and costs more, but it’s well worth it.”

          Rob Beglin of Pawley’s Island, S.C., is another IFA redfish pro who has had some negative experiences fishing tournaments in North Carolina. He said he doesn’t plan to return to North Carolina until the fishery laws change.

          “The North Carolina coast reminds me of Louisiana, and I was expecting a fishery that was similar when I first went there for a tournament several years ago,” Beglin said. “My fishing partner and I went a week early to familiarize ourselves with the waters and locate some fish and were happy the night before the tournament. We found some upper-slot reds in a bay on Wednesday, and they were still there Thursday and Friday, so we felt good about our chances for the tournament.

          “When we got to the shallow bay on Saturday morning, it was criss-crossed with nets, and a commercial fisherman was at the mouth crossing back and forth as if to dare us to try to go in,” Beglin said. “We left and didn’t challenge him. Later, someone told us the fisherman was probably fishing for flounder. We said ‘No way’ to that. We had fished there Wednesday, then went back Thursday and Friday just to be sure the fish were still there, and (we) never caught a flounder. We catch some flounder fishing for reds, but hadn’t there.  That bay was loaded with 25- to 27-inch redfish.”

          Beglin said that in September 2011, he was in contention for Angler of the Year honors in the IFA’s Atlantic Division, and against his better judgment, he and his partner returned to North Carolina try to win the division. This time, they didn’t find the fish until Thursday, but again on Saturday morning, a netter had several nets spanning the bay.

          “Fish had been scarce this year, so we decided to try and fish the mouth of the bay and catch fish that would be leaving,” Beglin said. “We managed to catch one nice fish, but found out where the others were later in the morning. When the netter picked up his nets, they were loaded with redfish, and they were large enough we could hear them thumping as they hit the deck. I was told the netter’s limit was 10 fish, but this fishermen put many more than that in his boat, and we never saw him throw any back. 

          “That afternoon after weigh-in and awards, I voiced how upset I was to the IFA officials, and several other fishermen had similar stories,” Beglin said. “I told them I wouldn’t fish in North Carolina again until something was done. For 2012, they have eliminated the North Carolina tournament from the Atlantic Division. I enjoyed the Surf City area and hate that for them, but it needed to be done.” 

          Bart Schad, director of the IFA Redfish Tour, confirmed the IFA had restructured its trail for the 2012 season and did not have a tournament scheduled for North Carolina. IFA has brought tournaments to North Carolina the past five years and fished two there in 2008 – out of Beaufort and Surf City. Schad said he remembers some fishermen were upset about incidents while fishing tournaments in North Carolina.  

          “In restructuring the IFA Redfish Tour, we weren’t specifically looking to cut the North Carolina tournament out,” Schad said. “We reduced each division from three to two tournaments and added some regional tournaments for multiple divisions. The Surf City tournament had the lowest participation in the Atlantic Division for the past two years, and that was the basis for our decision.  We know some of the fishermen had bad experiences, but the issue of nets and the pending gamefish status weren’t used in our decision. Perhaps those issues influenced the participation numbers, but we based our decision solely on participation.”   

          Chris Floyd, an IFA redfish pro from Charleston, said he had also made the decision not to return to North Carolina for any tournaments. He said he had made several trips to North Carolina for IFA tournaments and had commercial fishermen move in on large schools of drum he had found and disrupt his fishing.  He said IFA officials knew he did not plan to return to after the Surf City tournament last fall. Floyd’s estimate was that 90 percent of out-of-state fishermen said they wouldn’t return to North Carolina for another tournament.

          “I don’t really understand this,” Floyd said. “It was explained to me that the commercial fishermen can only land a few redfish, so why would they be allowed to wrap up a bay with nets and interrupt a tournament that brings 50 to 100 boats with anglers and family members? Most of the tournament fishermen arrive by Wednesday before the tournament on Saturday, and a good number are there for the entire week before to the tournament. 

“The economics just don’t add up,” Floyd said. “When we go to a tournament, we are renting motels or cottages, spending money at restaurants, local tackle shops, doing entertainment things, buying gas for boats and trucks and spending money in many other ways. Then, when we finish the tournament, all the fish are let go to stay in the area. Certainly, this has to be worth more to the local economy than the few drum the commercial fishermen can sell.”

          Bobby Sands is an avid fisherman who lived in several Gulf of Mexico states before retiring to Southport. He said he initially judged the area by all the estuary and marshes around it and thought the fishing would be as good as Texas and Louisiana. He said after several years here, he still thinks the fishery has the habitat to recover and prosper, but the fish badly need the protection of the gamefish bill to do it.

          “I was living near Corpus Christi, Texas, in the 1980s when the inshore fishery there bottomed out.” Sands said. “It was in bad shape, but after less than 10 years with gamefish protection and no gill-netting for reds and trout, it became a premiere fishery. The entire Texas coastal lagoon now has excellent fishing, and Baffin Bay has become a place where 5-pound trout don’t even raise eyebrows, and 8- to 10-pounders are surprisingly common.

          Louisiana also had similar issues,” Sands said. “The demand for blackened redfish had all but destroyed the red drum populations in the Louisiana marshes. Now, after being protected for about two decades, the Louisiana marshes are once again actually the Sportsman’s Paradise they proclaim on their license plates. The limit for redfish is five per day, and the limit for speckled trout is 25. Here, our limits are a single redfish and four trout.  That’s a big difference. 

“I know that given the opportunity, the North Carolina fishery would rebound quickly and could be as good as either Louisiana or Texas, if maybe not better. We have the habitat; we just need the fish to be protected from the constant pressure of commercial fishing, and gamefish status would do that. We would also find the fish are worth a lot more to everyone in the area as a recreational fishery. Many of the guides in Texas and Louisiana are former commercial fishermen, and they will tell you they are far better off now than when they were fishing commercially.”