By Morty Gaskill
As many of the readers of this publication are aware, there is currently a bill before the NC House of Representatives, HB442, that would ban shrimp trawling in all inshore waters out to half a mile from the beach.
Considering that the vast majority of shrimp in North Carolina are harvested within these areas, if passed, this bill will all but end shrimping within North Carolina waters.
In this letter, I intend to explore how and why this bill has made it this far, along with why the logic behind the bill is faulty and as such should not be made into law.
HB 442 originally concerned only restoring access to flounder and red snapper. After this bill was passed in March, it moved to the NC Senate for consideration.
It was only on Monday last week that an amendment to this bill was added on, which would prohibit all shrimp trawling in the sounds and ocean out to half a mile.
This bill was somehow shepherded out of both the Ag Committee and Rules Committee in less than a day and half before being brought before the full Senate for a vote on Thursday.
There was very little opportunity for public input on this bill before it was passed.
Of 17 people who showed up to Raleigh on Wednesday, only four were allowed to speak about their opinions of the bill before it was voted on.
Within the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, the Division of Marine Fisheries is tasked with managing the marine resources of the state of North Carolina. This agency is governed in accordance with the Fisheries Reform Act of 1997, which mandates setting policies that achieve sustainable harvest while ending overfishing.
To achieve this, the Marine Fisheries Commission is a nine-member board appointed by the governor to set and maintain rules governing the marine fisheries of the state.
This board consists of three representatives of commercial fishing interests, three representatives of recreational fishing interests, a member of the scientific community, and two at-large members.
In the last few years, these bodies have established increasingly stringent regulations governing what can be harvested, when it can be harvested, how much can be harvested, what gear can be used to harvest, etc.
Now I am going to attempt to address why, at the eleventh hour, some members of the legislature have decided to bypass the entire state regulatory process in order to attempt to ban trawling.
They say that shrimping is taking place in some wild outlaw realm with neither regulations nor regard for the natural environment. These claims are simply not rooted in facts.
HB 442 is not the first attempt to end trawling and other forms of net fishing within state waters, but all previous attempts were denied both by the state regulatory agencies and in court when the state has been sued over the matter.
Within my relatively short commercial fishing career, I can recall at least four or five instances where advocacy groups have petitioned either the Division of Marine Fisheries or the Marine Fisheries Commission to further restrict or even outright ban trawling in various waters of the state.
These attempts have largely been spearheaded by well-funded sportfishing/”environmental” groups that claim that shrimp trawling is destroying both habitat and fish stocks.
On every occasion to date, the state has found no scientific basis to do away with shrimp trawling. Now these groups are claiming that the Legislature has to ban shrimp trawling because the state regulatory agencies are inherently biased in favor of commercial fishing interests. This is absurd as just in the last five years the state has severely restricted commercial access to several important fish species such as southern flounder, striped mullet, and spotted sea trout even in the face of declining commercial effort.
The groups advocating for the elimination of shrimp trawling paint this picture of shrimp trawling as destructive to critical habitat while also being incredibly wasteful in terms of bycatch.
They say that shrimping is taking place in some wild outlaw realm with neither regulations nor regard for the natural environment. These claims are simply not rooted in facts.
No one who is trawling for shrimp would do so over submerged aquatic vegetation or live bottom as doing so would clog or damage their nets.
Approximately 50 percent of the state’s waters are already permanently closed to trawling to protect critical habitat. As mandated by state law, multiple
by-catch reduction devices, along with a turtle excluder device, are required on each shrimp trawl.
These measures alone have been shown to reduce bycatch by 40-70%, including upwards of 90% reductions in bycatch of key species such as flounder, spot, croaker, and weakfish; according to the state’s own data.
Additionally, a lot of the shrimpers I know have also stopped dragging at night and are towing smaller nets in order to further minimize bycatch.
No shrimper wants to have to deal with bycatch as it slows them down and decreases their catch.
Some fishermen have also switched to skimmer trawls, which are even less disruptive to the bottom and can be emptied while still being actively fished, allowing bycatch a greater chance of survival. However, that gear would also be outlawed by HB 442.
Where this all hits home is that the commercial fishing industry in this state has been struggling for years due to a confluence of several factors: Regulations, fuel prices, changing market dynamics, hurricanes and climate change.
What the fishermen get paid for their shrimp has remained relatively flat since the 1980s before even accounting for inflation, largely due to foreign imports depressing the prices.
As my predecessors in commercial fishing have aged out or left for better paying and more reliable jobs, the commercial fishing ranks in have thinned considerably as few people in my generation have opted for this career.
All over the state, places where fishermen once docked or spread their nets have been replaced with condominiums and rental homes.
Ocracoke has dwindled from having multiple fish houses and almost 50 fishermen when I was young to one fish house and barely a dozen fishermen.
Fewer commercial fishermen are fishing in this state than ever before, yet somehow we have been given the brunt of the blame for why fish stocks are not where they need to be.
The people pushing the ban on shrimp trawling claim to be doing so largely out of some concern for the environment. Yet these same people were largely silent as the state legislature has rolled back environmental protections for the same wetlands and estuaries that they claim to be saving by banning shrimp trawling.
The fact is that if HB 442 is adopted into law, it will probably decrease most shrimpers’ landings in the realm of 90%.
This will create an even bigger market void that will be filled largely with imported shrimp from parts of the world with even fewer environmental and food safety standards.
Restaurants are not going to stop serving shrimp and people are not going to stop eating shrimp; they’re just going to be supporting even worse environmental and human rights degradations by relying on imported shrimp.
By supporting the commercial fishing industry in this state, you are ensuring a stable supply of healthy and responsibly harvested seafood for everyone in this state.
Instead of focusing on the fact that only 300 people are still shrimping, focus on the fact that these 300 people are providing millions of pounds of shrimp for all 11 million people and visitors in the state of North Carolina.
Every pound of shrimp harvested in this state supports more than just the shrimper. It also supports the workers at the fish house, the people who sell the fuel for the boats, the mechanics who repair the boats, the people who make the nets for the shrimper, the truck driver who transports the shrimp to market, the people working in markets and restaurants serving the shrimp to consumers, and many others.
HB442 is scheduled to come before the legislature on Tuesday (June 24).
In summation, I am asking the readers to contact their local representatives as soon as possible and urge them to vote against HB 442 if it contains the amendment banning shrimp trawling.
For the reasons I have outlined above, banning shrimp trawling would be devastating to the coastal economies of eastern North Carolina, while showing little tangible benefits.
Although I am concerned at the speed that this bill is moving — as I am writing this barely 48 hours before it will probably come up for a vote in the House — I am hopeful that with enough public support and outcry the worst parts of this bill can be averted.
The bill with the inclusion of the shrimp trawling ban can be read here. Members of the N.C. House can be found here.
Morty Gaskill is a commercial fisherman and has been a board member NC. Coastal Federation for eight years. He is on the Ocracoke Waterways Commission and on the board of directors of the Ocracoke Seafood Company.