Still floundering
Published October 23, 2015
By Tom Campbell
by Tom Campbell, Executive Producer and Moderator, NC SPIN, October 23, 2015.
Unfortunately for North Carolina, a handful of large commercial fishermen and 13 coastal legislators are blocking an honest discussion about the dwindling supplies of flounder and other fish in our waters. Equally unfortunate, our state’s environmental regulators and the Marine Fisheries Commission, charged with protecting our waters, come off looking little more than pawns in blocking action.
After publishing my column about this topic in September, a coastal newspaper that had long printed my offerings immediately said they would no longer publish me. Unknown vandals at Sneads Ferry destroyed 27 tires of recreational vehicles. One member of the Marine Fisheries Commission returned from a meeting to find the control box on his boatlift unbolted and dumped in the river.
The Marine Fisheries Commission was set to consider a “supplement” to current flounder regulations, but the MFC chairman postponed a vote after 13 legislators threatened legislative intervention if the commission took action they considered unfair to commercial fishermen. The MFC is an executive branch board and many were miffed when legislators tried to insert themselves in commission actions. Even more confounding, the chairman of the MFC dragged his feet in the timely calling of another meeting to consider the matter, even after the requisite number of board members requested he do so.
Intimidation is common. An outspoken critic of current policies has had threats made on his life and a Down East artist who spoke about concerns was told his work would no longer be displayed in area galleries.
North Carolina is the only southern state that allows a net-base commercial fishery on southern flounder, red drum and speckled trout. One would think that all fishermen, commercial or sports anglers, would want to ensure the protection of supplies of fish that provide their livelihood. The obvious conclusion to be drawn from what has transpired to date is that some, not all, are unwilling or unable to self-regulate, want little or no regulation and don’t seem to care about future supplies. Concurrently, it appears our state regulators are more interested on advocating for special interests than regulating.
To be fair, the issues are not so cut and dried, as “Net Effect,” an hour-long documentary explains in an excellent examination airing Monday night, October 26th on television stations WRAL in Raleigh and WILM in Wilmington.
What is the harm with holding an honest and open discussion about the supplies of fish in our waters? If the issues are complicated and conclusions are difficult wouldn’t it also seem reasonable to err on the side of caution and restraint?
We want and need commercial fishermen in our state and do not want regulations for them so onerous that they cannot make a living. They provide valuable jobs, make a significant contribution to our economy and we need to protect their rights, but their rights are not more important than the thousands of sports anglers who rent motel rooms, eat in restaurants, buy bait and tackle and shop in our coastal stores.
The Marine Fisheries Commission, tasked with the duty to balance the rights of both, will hold another meeting on the subject in Nags Head next month. Let us hope they demonstrate more of a willingness to conduct a serious conversation in good faith. So far, they are just floundering.
October 23, 2015 at 12:01 pm
m w yorke says:
This i real hardball stuff going on right here in middle of the road NC.
I imagine some of those involved in this dispute know exactly where Jimmy Hoffa rests !
October 23, 2015 at 2:52 pm
Len Russ says:
As a recreational fisherman, I thank you for refusing to give in to the intimidation tactics, and thank you for calling for an open dialogue.
We need to put the resource first. A resource that's owned by all of the citizens of North Carolina, not just by the few who make them most profits from it.
October 23, 2015 at 3:41 pm
Mac Currin says:
Excellent editorial that captures very well the nature of the situation regarding Southern flounder except for the important history of managing that species. I was serving on the MFC when the first Southern flounder plan was implemented (2007?). The science indicated that we needed roughly a 50% reduction in harvest- over 90% of which was landed by commercial fishermen. As best I remember, only me and one more commissioner opposed the management measure that put in place a roughly 25% reduction- only half what was needed. And we were to look at progress in 3 years and act further if needed. Three years later (2010/11), the Southern flounder stock was still in bad shape but as the MFC was beginning to act, DMF was sued by some folks over excessive sea turtle mortalities. Interestingly, large mesh gillnets that are used to catch mostly flounder, have the greatest interaction with sea turtles. AS a result, to address the lawsuit, the MFC implemented restrictions on fishing large mesh gillnets that we were told would be more than enough to reduce Southern flounder harvest to sustainable levels and address issues with turtles. So now, 4-5 years later, we still are overharvesting Southern flounder and still have fishing closures due to interaction with sea turtles.
It is time to act allow the MFC to do its job by implementing needed and long overdue harvest restriction to reduce the take of Southern flounder.
Mac Currin
Raleigh
October 24, 2015 at 7:54 am
Keith Thomson says:
The NC legislature will simply amend the law prohibiting sea level rise to include prohibition on declining fish populations. They will pay for it with off-shore oil drilling.
October 24, 2015 at 6:16 pm
Rick Sasser says:
I want to thank Tom Campbell for another great article concerning the current debacle in managing our important Southern flounder stock. There is one important piece of information missing and that is the influence of Dr. Louis Daniel, Director of The Division of Marine Fisheries, on the supplement process.
Recreational anglers, conservationists and statewide business interests who not only support sustainable fisheries but also understood the $1.6 Billion dollar economic impact of a healthy coastal recreational fishery had successfully killed the existing amendments supporting the commercial fishing lobby. The House had stripped all fishery related attachments from the budget. Daniel began a lobbying effort with a few coastal House members and the Senate Leadership to get his measures inserted into the budget through the Chairs or as attachments to another bill.
It was up to MFC Chairman Corbett to schedule the supplement meeting for a MFC vote, which he promised at the August MFC meeting to do. As your article clearly states, Corbett has broken that promise. He has done so as a delaying tactic.
The record clearly shows that the Dr. Louis Daniel, Director of The Division of Marine Fisheries, orchestrated the letter of 13 and the letter that Senator Berger's office forced upon Sec. van der Vaart to threaten the MFC. Today, Daniel continues to undermine the supplement process by working with Corbett to prevent a special called meeting to vote on the supplement. Through his subversive actions in undermining the authority of the MFC, Dr. Daniel has embarrassed the Secretary and the Governor. He has put the spot-light on the Senate Leadership and the Republican Party.
The problem with fisheries management in NC is that Dr. Daniel has made it a Political Science.
Fisheries Science is clear. Per Director Daniel's own comments at the August MFC meeting:
The Director needs to stop playing politics with our important coastal resources and start using the best available science to manage those resources as sustainable fisheries.
So why is Dr. Daniel fighting against removing unmanageable gillnets from this fishery when data and history shows that pound nets and gigs can commercially harvest every pound the southern flounder stock can afford to give and do so using sustainable bycatch friendly gear?
Many believe that as much as 50% of Dr. Daniel's staff at NCDMF is being used to manage NC's gillnet fisheries. NC is the only state on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts that has a commercial gill net fishery of this magnitude. NC's gillnet fishery is so unique that we have a Federal Incidental Take Perment (ITP) for both endangered sea turtles and Atlantic sturgeon killed in this fishery. While Dr. Daniel is a great biologist, he is first an accomplished bureaucrat.
January 15, 2016 at 7:02 am
Capt. Charles Schoonamker says:
Tom, why not do a program on the economic impact of Recreational fishing verses Commercial fishing. As industrys that compete for the same resource, comm is about 400 million tops. Rec is close to 2.3 BILLION DOLLARS..... Even a blind man can see where we as a state should be putting our focus. This would make for an interesting show plus look at who relishes the resource as opposed to raping it? Recreational industry getting short end of a very long and corrupt stick.
Just a thought.
Any ideas feel free to contact me for further information.
Capt. Charlie Schoonmaker.
