It's A Great Start!

Ambush

Twelve Pointer
I don't see why there a reason to completely ban them. If the science says there needs to be less of them, make them occupied so be it. But I question much of what comes from marine fisheries. While creating the doing the research they need to include comercial fisherman. Don't really care what other states do. Every place is unique.

I'm mainly speaking of our nursery area. I don't see the need for them being in some place like Pungo River or any small creeks. Occupying rule would make sense though.
 

Ambush

Twelve Pointer
At no point in times has there been less gillnets in the water than over the past few years. The recovery you are talking about occurred with way more gillnets in the water.


The regulations on gillnets have done nothing but constantly increase, at no point have they relaxed any regulation put in place.

I haven't kept up with them that closely over the last decade. I know they are still in nursery areas, continuing their waste. There's a good reason other states banned them inside. And, we were speaking of pollution in our sounds. My main point was, the stripers recovered in the same water they crashed in, when all fishing pressure was lowered.
 
Last edited:

FishHunt

Old Mossy Horns
If the water quality is that bad, I wouldn't eat the fish that come out of our sounds...if I were you guys.


Haven't you heard? The sky has fallen and the netters caught all the fish. No danger of eating a contaminated fish...now go thank a netter for saving your health! :D

<>< Fish

26645
 

ECU_Pirate

Banned
One thing I will say about commercial fisherman and caring about the resource. If history has shown us anything it is that people will fish and hunt a species into extinction or unviable if they can make money off it. It has happened NC before. So I don't really buy the whole caring about the resource thing.
 

Wanchese

Twelve Pointer
My main point was, the stripers recovered in the same water they crashed in, when all fishing pressure was lowered.
And my point was, gillnet "pressure" was higher then than it was at any point in time, past or prsesent. The gillnet "pressure" has been constantly reduced.

You're arguement that we need to reduce "gillnet pressure" for them to recover is proven inaccurate by your own admission that they recovered with more gillnets in the water.
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
You know the really neat thing about that ECU....nobody really expected you to, no matter how much information was shared.....
 

ducknut

Eight Pointer
One thing I will say about commercial fisherman and caring about the resource. If history has shown us anything it is that people will fish and hunt a species into extinction or unviable if they can make money off it. It has happened NC before. So I don't really buy the whole caring about the resource thing.
You don't have to buy it but the broad brush strokes about comercial fisherman is the same as all deer hunters are wasteful slobs because a few of them dump carcasses with just the head cut off.
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
You haven't shared any information except for your own fish catching experience. No data to back up anything you say. Most of the people in this thread do not share your opinion.
This may come as a shock to ya bud but I really don't care who shares my opinion. You run on about some study this and some study that when in fact you don't have a clue about it's validity or any bias that may be incorporated into it. I share what I see every single day....
 

Ambush

Twelve Pointer
I really appreciate the seafood, commercials provide the public. And most I've known are good, honest hard working people. That said, it's human nature to not want change. I'm sure I'd feel the same way, if I were in their positions. But, our sounds are unique, like no other place on earth. The potential is there to triple our fin fish poundage in our sounds. The best days of NC fishing are in the future.
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
You like studies? Here's one for those in the "it's worked everywhere else" camp....

Pretty much kicks all your "facts" into a cocked hat.
Here's another:
"It was absolutely unnecessary," said Jerry Sansom, executive director of the Organized Fisherman of Florida, a group of about 350 commercial fishermen. "It hastened the recovery of a number of resources, but you could have accomplished the same thing by taking the recreational fishermen out of the resource, too."

Want another?
"It removed a lot of the people that were the eyes and the ears for what's happening in the lagoon," Thompson said. "I truly believe taking fishermen off the water is not dealing with the root of our problems."
Getting a better handle on stormwater, septic tanks and other water pollution sources should have been the priority, instead, Thompson said.
"If we had done that decades ago, we'd be like Tampa Bay," Thompson said, referring to that estuary's rebound in recent years. "Nobody had the political willpower — they still don't — to get rid of septic tanks."
 
Last edited:

Ambush

Twelve Pointer
You like studies? Here's one for those in the "it's worked everywhere else" camp....

Pretty much kicks all your "facts" into a cocked hat.
Here's another:
"It was absolutely unnecessary," said Jerry Sansom, executive director of the Organized Fisherman of Florida, a group of about 350 commercial fishermen. "It hastened the recovery of a number of resources, but you could have accomplished the same thing by taking the recreational fishermen out of the resource, too."

Want another?
"It removed a lot of the people that were the eyes and the ears for what's happening in the lagoon," Thompson said. "I truly believe taking fishermen off the water is not dealing with the root of our problems."
Getting a better handle on stormwater, septic tanks and other water pollution sources should have been the priority, instead, Thompson said.
"If we had done that decades ago, we'd be like Tampa Bay," Thompson said, referring to that estuary's rebound in recent years. "Nobody had the political willpower — they still don't — to get rid of septic tanks."

I don't think you want to compare our inshore fishing to Florida or Texas since their gill net ban.
:
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
LOL! You might wanna open that link and do the same search on the NC Inshore Fishing before you jump too high...... :ROFLMAO:
 

oldest school

Old Mossy Horns
You like studies? Here's one for those in the "it's worked everywhere else" camp....

Pretty much kicks all your "facts" into a cocked hat.
Here's another:
"It was absolutely unnecessary," said Jerry Sansom, executive director of the Organized Fisherman of Florida, a group of about 350 commercial fishermen. "It hastened the recovery of a number of resources, but you could have accomplished the same thing by taking the recreational fishermen out of the resource, too."

Want another?
"It removed a lot of the people that were the eyes and the ears for what's happening in the lagoon," Thompson said. "I truly believe taking fishermen off the water is not dealing with the root of our problems."
Getting a better handle on stormwater, septic tanks and other water pollution sources should have been the priority, instead, Thompson said.
"If we had done that decades ago, we'd be like Tampa Bay," Thompson said, referring to that estuary's rebound in recent years. "Nobody had the political willpower — they still don't — to get rid of septic tanks."
i knew it.
the recs can save the fisheries. without bothering a soul.
Just throw them back. How hard is that?
 

oldest school

Old Mossy Horns
the argument that the fish are "worth more" to the rec industry is confusing to me.
How much more rec activity can our coast handle?
Is their some metric out there that shows increased rec activity pouring millions into the coastal economy?
isn't the fishing down there now pretty crowded?
where does the money come from if not additional rec pressure, the very thing contributing to the "poor" fishing now.
How would that work?
 

Soilman

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I guess I see both sides of this issue, to a certain degree. I had a great uncle who was a commercial fisherman out of Ocean Isle up until sometime in the '70's. He and his wife fished out of a 14-16 ft. wooden jon boat with 2 or 3 gill nets. Some of my other uncles used gill nets once or twice a year to provide fish for the freezer and dinner table. I don't remember any big stink going on between the Recs and Coms back then.
Things are just not the same now as back then. Our states population has probably doubled. Coms use boats and nets 10 times the size of my great uncle's boat. Development around our sounds and estuaries and the pollution and sediment caused by it has exploded. Recreational watercraft has not only increased in number, but size as well...more pollution and more pressure on game fish. So, what I'm saying is, I don't pin it all on commercial fisherman, but they are certainly a cog in the wheel. It seems we ALL value the resource. We have that in common. At some point, if we want to SAVE the resource, we need to consider ALL the factors affecting the resource. That means ALL of us who have an impact on the resource need own it and be willing to do our part to conserve it...developers, Recs, Coms and others as well. What those part are, I'm not qualified to say, but the resource belongs to ALL of us, so we ALL should be part of the solution.
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Soilman that's what I've been saying from the get-go, in this day and time it seems it's always someone else's fault. Thanks.
 

ECU_Pirate

Banned
the argument that the fish are "worth more" to the rec industry is confusing to me.
How much more rec activity can our coast handle?
Is their some metric out there that shows increased rec activity pouring millions into the coastal economy?
isn't the fishing down there now pretty crowded?
where does the money come from if not additional rec pressure, the very thing contributing to the "poor" fishing now.
How would that work?

Studies have shown that the economic value of the rec fishery far exceeds that of the coms. If you were to get rid of gill nets and inshore trawling certain species would become much more abundant. Thus opening up or bringing back popular rec fisheries that are a shadow of their former selves. Croaker, Spot, Grey trout, and even flounder. Other gamefish species would benefit as well. I know it seems like there are a bunch now but even if the numbers didnt change the same amount of recs would probably end up spending more money going after these revitalized fisheries. Though many of those species dont even require a boat to catch. Thats more licences sold, rods, reels, tackle, bait, hotels, restaurants, and all the other businesses frequented by recs.

So basically we already know that rec activity pours millions in. With getting rid of gill nest and inshore trawling it would almost certainly increase. So it would be fair to assume that extra millions would pour in.
 

ECU_Pirate

Banned

This was a study done by NOAA.

So Recs catch way less fish. Millions compared to billions. Recs provide mor jobs. Provide more income. And provide a larger economic impact.

The numbers in that study are pretty staggering. It could be argued that getting rid of gill nest and inshore trawling would actually help the communities that are scraping by on it now. Especially if they catered to the rec fishery.
 

Longrifle

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
Smh...it's not always all about the money. When you acknowledge the fact that there are other factors affecting the fishery and people other than sport fishermen have a right to eat fresh local seafood maybe we can talk.....
At this point what you're saying is that recs can't even catch enough for themselves and most everything I've seen suggests that that's from their own shortcomings....
 

ECU_Pirate

Banned
Smh...it's not always all about the money. When you acknowledge the fact that there are other factors affecting the fishery and people other than sport fishermen have a right to eat fresh local seafood maybe we can talk.....
At this point what you're saying is that recs can't even catch enough for themselves and most everything I've seen suggests that that's from their own shortcomings....

He asked a question about the economics of rec fishing. I answered him. I have clearly recognized other problems. I had several posts about runoff from multiple sources. I have also not said i want to get rid of commercial fishing. Just gill netting and inshore trawling. From what i can see offshore fish farms are the future anyways. Also other people do not have a right to eat seafood. Its nice and all, but definitely not entitled to it or a right.
 

oldest school

Old Mossy Horns
I cant take that study and translate it into the situation on our coast.
It includes finned and shellfish that inflate the commercial catch compared to the rec.
It doesn't include rec catches from some states.

the focus in Nc is much more defined.
How many targeted rec species are negatively impacted by commercial?
What is the rec take of those?
What is the commercial catch of those?
How many more millions will NC generate if the rec activity increases? how is that calculated?
How much more rec activity can the coast withstand?

Quick someone tell us that.

Surely that study exists. ECU's study is too broad to have meaning.
 

ECU_Pirate

Banned
I cant take that study and translate it into the situation on our coast.
It includes finned and shellfish that inflate the commercial catch compared to the rec.
It doesn't include rec catches from some states.

the focus in Nc is much more defined.
How many targeted rec species are negatively impacted by commercial?
What is the rec take of those?
What is the commercial catch of those?
How many more millions will NC generate if the rec activity increases? how is that calculated?
How much more rec activity can the coast withstand?

Quick someone tell us that.

Surely that study exists. ECU's study is too broad to have meaning.

I'll look for that info but your welcome to as well. Lately I feel like the NChuntandfish librarian.
 

Justin

Old Mossy Horns

This tells the same story as NOAA just on a smaller scale. Rec fishing provides more jobs and more economic value

Its like 300-400k for commercial compared to around 3-4 million for recs.

jobs are 6500-7500 for coms and 40-45k for recs.


Including NOAA in this just voided any credibility you may have gained. Reference cobia and red snapper.

Last year was world class for cobia from both surf and boat. NOAA said they were on the brink and needed tightening up from what they had been. Those classes of fish caught weren’t from the new regs.

Numerous captains moving bottom grounds to keep from catching the endangered red snapper that NOAA says doesn’t exist.
 
Top