- Beachbook
- Coastal Review Online
- Dare County
- Duck
- Island Free Press
- Kill Devil Hills
- Kitty Hawk
- Manteo
- Nags Head
- Nighthawk News
- Southern Shores
- Bill's OBX Beach Life
- N.E.S.T Online
- Natural Outer Banks
- Red Headed Beach Girl
- Rosie Hawthorne
- See more local blogs »
Watermen wary about combining wildlife agencies
Coastal Review Online
Though the turnout was low, emotions ran high.
About 20 people showed up earlier this month for a meeting in New Bern intended to find out what people think about reorganizing the two state agencies that manage fish and wildlife.
Other meetings were held over the past three weeks in Raleigh and Manteo. It’s all part of a study mandated in a bill passed last session by the N.C. General Assembly.
Legislative leaders say they want to save money, and merging the state’s Division of Marine Fisheries and the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission is one possibility they will consider. The division manages all commercial and recreational fisheries in the coastal waters, while the commission regulates freshwater fish and administers hunting, trapping and boating laws.
“That’s a bad, bad idea,” Ron McPherson, a charter boat captain in Atlantic Beach, told agency representatives at the meeting. “The merger won’t save anyone a dime.”
“I say no, no, no,” Bertie Potter, who owns a fish house in Hobucken, said rather emphatically. “Commercial fishermen are hurting and this is our livelihood.”
“This will be the end of commercial fishing,” said Sandra Gaskill, a commercial fisherwoman from Stacy in Carteret County.
Other comments followed the same the drift. None of the five speakers had anything good to say about the merger idea.
Neither did the Marine Fisheries Commission, an appointed body that sets saltwater fishing regulations and policies. It voted 8-1 last week to oppose any merger. The lone dissenter doesn’t want to see the agencies combined but supports moving marine fisheries intact to the N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, said Rob Bizzell, the commission’s chairman.
“The other eight commissioners, including myself, can’t see how either the resource or our state will be better served by changing our agency’s assignment,” Bizell said in the Carteret County News-Times. “We have the scientists in place, the enforcement in place and there’s a cost involved in restructuring that would be hard to justify.”
A marine fisheries division has a long history as a separate agency of state government. The division can trace its roots back to 1822, when the legislature imposed gear restrictions on oyster harvests. That was later followed by separate fish and shellfish commissions, which were combined in 1915 to form a commercial regulatory body. In 1965, the scope of the commission was expanded to include regulatory authority over recreational fishing activities in coastal waters.
The division now does a lot more, including inspecting fish houses. Louis Daniel, the division’s director, warned earlier this year against shifting that responsibility. There are more than 700 fish dealers in the state, he said, and keeping track of the catch means constant contact with them.
“We have a tremendous amount of interactions with fish dealers,” he said at a commission meeting in June.
Information from the dealers, he said, is the state’s main method of managing fish quotas, which is essential to complying with Atlantic fisheries regulations and quotas.
“It has the potential to have extraordinary consequences to our industry,” he said.
Gaskill and Pam Morris, a commercial fisherwoman from Harkers Island fear that a merger would destroy the industry.
“We’ll get the shaft,” Gaskill said after Thursday’s meeting. “The reason for all of this is to get the commercial fisherman out of the water. They don’t want us in the creeks; they don’t want us in the rivers; they don’t want us in the sounds.”
Commercial fisherman, Morris said, view the potential merger with great suspicion. The idea is being driven by inland legislators, who have no particular knowledge of the industry or empathy with those who work in it, she said. They are more sympathetic to recreational fishermen, Morris said and more comfortable with the Wildlife Resources Commission.
“This is all being done under the guise of saving a dollar, but that’s not what this is all about,” she said.
Many recreational fishing groups have for years lobbied the state to follow the lead of other Southern states and ban gill nets, a common type of commercial fishing gear, from inshore waters, Gaskill noted.
“They want the nets out of the water,” Gaskill added. “That means, we’ll be out of the water, too.”
The fisheries division and the wildlife commission must submit their report to the legislature by Oct. 1.
See what people are saying:
Join the discussion:
- MOST READ
- MOST DISCUSSED
ekim says:
Someone help me, the state combines 2 units into 1 saves the tax payer $$$$ How does it put the fisherman out of buisness???
OBX Local says:
There must be some reason that comemrcial fishermen are so worried about switching from one regulatory body to another? Could it be that the commercial fishermen have the Division of Marine Fisheries and local politians paid off and in their back pocket? The Wildlife Resource Commission hasn’t been corrupted like the Division of Marine Fisheries. Other states banned the practice of netting inshore because it’s extremely harmful to our fragile ecosystems and “bycatch” species? These states that banned gill netting when the Wildlife Resource Commission took over STILL HAVE COMMERCIAL FISHING. In fact many NC commercial boys go down to Florida, where nets are banned, TO COMMERCIAL FISH. This will not be the end to commercial fishing. It will be the beginning of a more prosperous way of life for watermen in the future.
marty says:
The DMF’s management of marine resources has been an abject failure. They’re lucky they are even being considered for merger rather than abolition. The WRC, on the other hand, does an excellent job of managing inland resources. The commercial fishing interests (which were the only side quoted in your one sided article) fear the prospect of real management.
junkman says:
These guys are probably the first to complain about too much government. Now there’s a proposal for less and they’re still complaining. Not sure what they’re looking for but the constant whining and complaining isn’t winning them any support.
Sandy Semans Ross says:
Nets weren’t removed from the Florida waters based on science – there was never a pretense of that. It was a political move to appease the Florida arm of the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) which has long held the position that fish are more valuable to the recreational industry than to the commercial industry.
The CCA isn’t a conservation organization, but an allocation group that thinks that all should be given to them for their enjoyment. This can easily be verified through the State of Florida or from the chefs who tried to get the ban overturned because it hurt their own businesses.
The problem with the CCA’s position is that marine life in state and US waters is a public trust resource and belongs to all, even those who choose not to fish. Commercial fishermen don’t actually sell fish, they are charging for delivery to the folks who own a share of them but don’t wish to catch them themselves.
North Carolina’s commercial fishing industry is regulated by rules coming out of the New England Fisheries Management Council, Mid Atlantic council, South Atlantic council, Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, ICCAT and the Division of Marine Fisheries – oh, and the North Carolina Department of Agriculture – I may have left out one or two. The WRC would have a severe learning curve trying to learn all the levels regulations and how/when they are applied. The science, data collection, enforcement, seasons, etc. are totally different from WRC so that too would be a problem.
Bycatch is anything caught that isn’t targeted. When a recreational fisherman catches drum while aiming for trout, then the drum is ‘bycatch.’ When fish aren’t the legal length and have to be tossed back, they are ‘bycatch.’ Funny how no one ever talks about this bycatch which, based on the number of recreational fishermen in the state, is far greater than that caught by commercial fishermen.
I for one don’t care to eat imported seafood raised in its own filth and shot with antibiotics. And I don’t want my tuna shot with carbon monoxide so that it looks fresh.
There are few if any industries that are as regulated as commercial fishing. If you really want to put them out of business, stop eating fresh, locally-caught seafood. If you want to see how important locally-caught seafood is to the local economy, see if any of the restaurants are willing to post on their marquees that they serve only inferior, frozen, farm-raised imported seafood. Visitors don’t come here for that but who knows, maybe someone will enjoy it.
And to suggest that the Division of Marine Fisheries staff is less trustworthy that those who work for WRC, shows a lack of knowledge of the system and the transparency that comes with it.
KDH Rezident Evil says:
Merge, baby, merge.
If you want to be fair to the fisherfolks, come up a FAIR system where catch regulations don’t change between the time a boat leaves port in the morning and returns in the evening.
Harkers Island Tailfisher says:
Take a look at other states, NC is either smarter than every state from Texas to South Carolina or the Basnight led Democratic party in NC has kept us as dumb as a hammer!
Every state from Tx to SC has commercial fishing going on today, and La provides the most shrimp of any state in the USA and every one of those states have gone through fisheries management changes similar to what NC is considering.
There has been no mention of banning nets, no mention of banning commercial fishing, only a way to make the state run a more efficient operation, whether NCDMF & NCWRC become one agency or simply find areas of possible joint effort. This is about spending tax dollars wisely and has nothing to do with harming hard working commercial fishermen.
To the poster that pointed out that commercial fishermen and their masters, the fish house dealers, are just never happy with anything —- well said!
NC now has a chance to finally properly manage our state’s saltwater public trust resources or continue to be “dumb as a hammer”!
Not one comment from anyone but commercial folks, what a fine unbiased article!
Take care
Allan2 says:
The rational for doing this is strong. The objections probably center around the view expressed by OBX local and junkman’s to the point as well. It’s a selfish world. That’s the central problem with most “government”. If it don’t suit us, we oppose it even when it’s a good idea which will serve the best interest of the total.
OBX Local says:
To Sandy Semans Ross:
1. “The CCA isn’t a conservation organization, but an allocation group that thinks that all should be given to them for their enjoyment.”
Response: That group fights for EVERY U.S. citizen who wants to enjoy fishing and the outdoors in NC. Everyone has the ability to get a $15 to $30 fishing license and go fishing in NC. 0.0357% of NC’s population has the ability to buy a commercial license becasue they are limited. Every commercial can buy a $15 license and go fishing. So the CCA DOES fight for everyone. If someone can afford a $29.99 flounder dinner at a local restaurant then they can afford to fish.
2. In response to your “bycatch comment”. I have set nets before and when I set a net and catch illegal size drum, trout, rock, etc they usually are chewed in half by crabs or already dead from drowning in the net. In my personal experience 1 in 100 fish survive being released from a gillnet. When you catch a fish on hook & line then release it the fish shoots off into the water to swim away. If all these fish die that are caught on hook and line then how in the world are there fish left in land locked ponds where every fish in the pond is caught three dozen times? I’ve seen bass in ponds that we’ve caught the same one for 10 years. So to answer your bycatch comment the recreational bycatch is thousands if not millions times less than the commercials. In my nets I would catch 50 to 100 fish to only keep 2 or 3 good fish then throw everything else that had rotted or I didn’t want back. What a great use of our Public Trust!
Sandy Semans Ross says:
There always is a way for government agencies to become more efficient and cost effective – but combining these two unlike agencies will not work without creating even more expense.
Here is just one of many examples: a year or so ago the General Assembly decided that every agency had to go through one office to design and place ads. The reasoning was that it would be more cost effective and the volumn of advertising being handled by the new office would be a good bargaining tool when negotiating prices. After just a few months, the office had to be shut down and another agency was assigned to clean up the mess. It added cost because an agency in Raleigh doesn’t have insight into marketing in Ashville or Nags Head.
The changes in fisheries management in Florida and several other states included instituting a net ban so by referencing one, the other also is being referenced. Many use ‘fishing’ as a general term but there is a difference between actually catching fish and shrimping. And docking a boat in Florida doesn’t mean that state waters are being fished. Many go there to fish in the EEZ which is under federal, not state control.
OBXlocal – I’m sorry you needlessly killed so many fish while trying your hand at netting. That is exactly why recreational fishermen shouldn’t – as a general rule – be allowed to use nets. A commercial fisherman can’t afford to waste fish and their effort and gas, so know how to tend to their nets. It would make no sense to spend a half a day placing the net and hours pulling it up only for a couple of fish. Their famlies would quickly go hungry.
And it might make some feel good to think that only 1 in a 100 fish released die but that doesn’t hold up when compared to the volumns of studies that have been done. Although a fish may swim away, they can still die from the stress of being caught. The mortality rate varies widely based on species, time of year, type of hook and other factors. Gray trout, aka weakfish, are nicknamed such because they are weak and the mortality rate is high. The mortality rate for some species is in the single digits; for others it is significantly higher. Due to the very high numbers of recreational fishermen compared to commercial operations, this produces a high total for bycatch mortality. And these untargeted and/or unwanted fish are bycatch whether they survive or not. For those who want to know more, there are many agency and university studies posted online. With that said, catch and release is still a plus.
And access to a public trust resource should never be allocated to just one group and, in some cases, can be a violation of the North Carolina Constitution. There are many reasons why someone may not fish our coastal waters but that doesn’t take away their right to enjoy what they, too, own.
Harkers Island Tailfisher says:
“Gray trout, aka weakfish, are nicknamed such because they are weak and the mortality rate is high.” From Seamans
Which mortality, the C&R, natural, commecial discards, total, which one??? The rec limit now is 1 fish per day and the commercial limit is very low, so what’s keeping the “mortality” high???
You pretty much had a decent post going, but credibility took the day off with your above words, so you may want to Google that while checking out C&R mortality or commercial discards.
Just for starters, the ASMFC uses 8% for the C&R mortality of striped bass COAST WIDE, from Maine to SC.
NCDMF uses 10% or less for spotted seatrout, the cousin to that “weak” gray trout you mentioned.
As to all those other states from Tx to SC, some have had the option to do a vote by the public to make the choice on how they manage fisheries, the NC statutes do not allow us to vote on issues like this, if so we wouldn’t be posting about it today, now would we?
Merger of any state agency poses no threat to commercial fishing, the continuing mis-management that has occurred under the FRA97 with Basnight’s control will however impact commercial fishing and in the end the votes of the fish house dealers appointed to the MFC, in lieu of real hard working “bibbs & boots” commercial fishermen, will put more comms out of work that any group known to man.
Take care
Sandy Semans Ross says:
Harkers Island Tailfisher, my post
“Due to the very high numbers of recreational fishermen compared to commercial operations, this produces a high total for bycatch mortality. And these untargeted and/or unwanted fish are bycatch whether they survive or not.”
It was in response to OBX local who wrote: “So to answer your bycatch comment the recreational bycatch is thousands if not millions times less than the commercials.”
You are correct that only 1 gray trout 12 inches or larger can be taken per day by recreational fishermen. However, first you have to look at how many fish the fishermen had to catch before landing a keeper. How many were regulatory discards, aka, bycatch? There is more than a million recreational fishermen in the state and a substantial number of those fish coastal waters so if you add up the total discards of all recreational fishermen, even if gray trout mortality was only 5 percent, that is significant bycatch mortality.
Allan2 says:
Seamans: You speil sounds impressive but you blew it when you said the weakfish name is a referance to the naturally high mortality. The name weakfish comes from the mouth tissue being weak and easily torn when hooked. It’s in just about everything down there on fishing. Hide you head! If you are that far off on something so simple the rest of your “opinions” are certainly suspect.
KDH Rezident Evil says:
And Allan2, if you can’t even bother to spell “Semans” correctly after it appears in several posts, you better check the thickness of the glass before you throw stones.
In any case, studies by DMF show that “weakfish are in an extremely depleted state” which is the essential point here, not nomenclature.
Harkers Island Tailfisher says:
At least somebody knows where the name “weakfish” came from and yes they are listed as being in serious trouble for reasons that are hard to put a finger on, but tem being weak and dying easily ain’t even in the room!!!
So a million saltwater recreational anglers in NC have basically had no voice in the management of saltwater public trust resources for 20 years of Basnight’s reign and now people expect the new leadership to just continue down Marc’s path —- just not gonna happen.
If the economics shows that a merger of NCDMF and NCWRC is the best for all the citizens of NC, then so be it. Most of the citizens should be more concerned with the move by the large fish house dealers to try and move the regulation of commercial fishing to the NC Dept of Agriculture as if commercial fishing is like a farming operation — what a slight to farmers!!!
Good try by the fine folks that have kept real commercial fishermen as basically indentured servants for decades, but that ain’t gonna happen either. Change is already arriving daily in NC. Who would have ever thought Omega Protein’s menhaden fleet would be sent packing from NC waters or that a rule was put in place to require a super majority vote of the MFC to override the science based management of the NCDMF.
Not sure if commercial fishermen will embrace the merger we’re discussing, but they better embrace change and the fact that all things commercial are not gonna get a pass like they did under Basnight.
Take care
Sandy Semans Ross says:
Allan2, if their mouth is weak and easily tears when hooked, then I can’t imagine that you would disagree that this weakness affects the mortality rate – perhaps I should have phrased it in a different manner but it doesn’t negate the bottom line.
I stand behind what I have said while posting under my name – not an alias.
The original conversation topic is whether DMF and WRC should merge. My opinion is that they should not, and I also stand behind that. WRC’s expertise is regulating a sport, not an industry – there’s a vast difference.
The commercial fishing industry is just that – an industry that affects much of the coastal economy. There has long been a resistance to reporting the monetary and jobs impact of commercial fishing. Only the dockside value is considered, not the extrapolated numbers that come from following the fish through the commerce chain from fishermen to the consumer. The number of jobs that it helps support is amazing even when doing just back-of-the-envelope calculations – fishermen, boat mechanics, gear companies, grocery stores where they buy provisions and that often also sell the catch, restaurants that depend on the availability of fresh-caught seafood, delivery drivers, accountants, engine and boat dealers, fish cutters, box companies, fuel suppliers and the list goes on. In addition, they pay a significant amount of sales tax on some items and, of course, income tax. And of course, they spend their profits in the community as they go about their lives just as other business owners do.
It is time that its true value is recognized in the appropriate manner. The Department of Agriculture may very well be the right place for overseeing the industry since this type of consumer product is that agency’s mandate to protect and promote – just as they do agricultural products.
I’m glad that the Voice allows these back and forth conversations – I think that they are healthy as long as they don’t become personal. I only wish that folks who post would use their real names because when I see an alias, it always makes me wonder why they don’t want anyone to know who they are. When I see an alias, I wonder if it is Chuck or John or…
OBX Local says:
To Sandy Semans Ross,
I do not feel safe listing my name due to the fact that commercial fishermen have a history of violence to people that speak up against them and I fear my home or self would be in danger if I posted my name to any pro fisheries regulations in such a small community. I know FIRST HAND of friends who have been in fist fights instigated by commercials after fisheries meetings against people speaking up for resource protection and I know one guy who had a cross burned in his yard the night after a heated debate in a meeting. The guys who did this told my friend that if he ever showed his face at a meeting again that they would kill him. You won’t see this irrational behavior from a recreational or pro resource person. So, don’t act all big and bad because you listed your full name on a website.
Harkers Island Tailfisher says:
From Sandy —– “The problem with the CCA’s position is that marine life in state and US waters is a public trust resource and belongs to all, even those who choose not to fish. Commercial fishermen don’t actually sell fish, they are charging for delivery to the folks who own a share of them but don’t wish to catch them themselves.”
Now if this is the new track commercials are taking, I’d scrap the idea of having The Dept of Ag manage y’all and see if the Dept of Transportation will suit y’all better!
As to who I am or ain’t, I doubt anybody on this planet that is involved in these issues has any problem knowing full well who I am.
Take care
OBX Local says:
To Sandy Ross,
If NC’s saltwater fishery is a “public trust” then everyone should be disgusted at how our DMF and commercial fishermen have handle what’s supposed to belong to everyone. Shrimp trawls killing 10lbs of juvenile fish to every pound of shrimp, gill nets being equally as destructive as the shrimp trawls, oyster beds being eradicated causig our water quality to suffer, and our offshore trawl boats causing massive striper kills every winter. (And Sandy you know good and well that wasn’t just a one time issue in 2010. I’ve seen it happen every year since i’ve been fishing on the OBX.)
Under this same line of thinking then I should be able to go into our parks and public lands and cut down all the trees to sell as fire wood. After all it is a “public trust” or resource for everyone to enjoy, not just those fortunate enough to be able to walk through the park or forest. How well would that work?