Let them spawn act

Mike Noles aka conman

Administrator
Staff member
Contributor
I just know what I've seen sitting on ice under glass. So I read the bill but still don't understand it. Can trawling still take place during the restrictions?

In other words, will commercial fisherman still catch undersized fish while rec fisherman have to toss back target species?

Most commercial fishermen will abide by the law as will most rec fishermen (except for us drum fishermen :sneaky::p), but the sound trawlers are non discriminate and the by catch kill will probably go unpunished.
 

oldest school

Old Mossy Horns
Really? Am I the only one that has seen this? I recall going into a fish market that also sold mud minnows. The flounder in the case were nowhere near regulations size.
well there is that pesky "baby flounder" menu item. LOL
I have no idea where they come from.
 

Wanchese

Twelve Pointer
I just know what I've seen sitting on ice under glass. So I read the bill but still don't understand it. Can trawling still take place during the restrictions?

In other words, will commercial fisherman still catch undersized fish while rec fisherman have to toss back target species?
The trawl boats you see in our sounds don't keep many of the fish they catch. They are there for shrimp, everything else goes back over the side. There's nothing in this bill about trawl boats or shrimping.


The whole baby flounder you see in some markets aren't caught here. They are brought in from other areas, just like snow crab legs, lobster and all the other stuff you see that we don't catch here.
 

nccatfisher

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
I just know what I've seen sitting on ice under glass. So I read the bill but still don't understand it. Can trawling still take place during the restrictions?

In other words, will commercial fisherman still catch undersized fish while rec fisherman have to toss back target species?
Most of the "local" seafood you see isn't. Especially in the chain stores.
 

Wanchese

Twelve Pointer
I won't name names but it's a mom & pop place on the coast. Been several years since I have been in it.
There's a fish house that is literally inches from Wanchese Harbor, the freezers and coolers are full of farm raised and imported crap. Very few places don't sell it at some point.

You can go to Locals Seafood in Raleigh and get legit fresh NC seafood more often than you can a lot of fish markets at the coast.
 

darenative

Twelve Pointer
The difference is the fish stocks will be rebuilt, and fishing rules can relax at some point.

In my lifetime, i can not think of one example of a restriction on recreational fishing that has ever been relaxed in nc after it has been implemented. Folk that think it's gonna happen are in for a major case of buyers remorse.
What typically happens is when a stock is getting close to meeting the objectives in a management plan, the bar is raised and we get continued regulation to meet the new higher goals.
 

Downeast

Twelve Pointer
Recreational saltwater fishermen have tremendous power to influence the management of our resources. The only thing lacking is organization. Imagine just a one month boycott of saltwater fishing activities. Everyone simply stay home or go and play golf or catch bream in some inland pond or lake. Ramps are empty, marinas are empty, tackle shops are empty, no one there to meet the boats coming in during the Big Rock tournament. Just the sound of tourists laying on the beach, the waves and the gulls. The MFC would be pooping in their pants. It wouldn't take a week and the trawlers would be out of the sounds permanently. :ROFLMAO:
 

CRC

Old Mossy Horns
It also doesn’t account for migratory species that move between states.

Yes some migratory species are already regulated between states but some are not
 

JohnBoat

Banned
Look what they wanted for cobia regs..... for what? We have the best cobia fishery in the world and it’s not good enough. Not all commercial fishing is bad. Theyve historically been against it. I’m for specific solutions for specific problems. There’s no problem with sea mullet numbers. There’s no problem with pompano numbers. There’s no problem with striped (or white) mullet numbers. There’s no problem with bluefish numbers. Why are they backing a bill putting restrictions of things that lack problems?

Something isn’t always better than nothing. Something sometimes pushes irreversible regulations on things that never had a reason to be regulated.

I'd say the Chesapeake is the best cobia fishery. But thats not my point. We catch a lot of Cobia in NC. They are a migratory species they travel from Florida to VA every year and are caught the whole way up the coast. What we catch in NC is a small part of the picture. Basing limits off of just that would be ignorant and dumb. It's also called taking preventative measures. Put in limits while we still have fish, don't wait until it goes bad to put in tighter limits. Cobia fishing has exploded in the past 10 years. The secret is out. Everyone and their brother fishes for them now. They receive way more pressure now than 5-10 years ago. Most fish stocks can sustain a certain amount of catch until they just collapse and reach a point of no return or really long return. Saying "we catch plenty of this fish, everything is fine." Is a terrible way of thinking to base fisheries management off of. I remember catching grey trout all the time surf fishing as a kid. All of a sudden they were gone in a couple years it seemed. It has taken them over 10 years to even somewhat recover. The same can happen to almost any fish species. Especially one like Cobia being caught along half the east coast.
 

witler

Eight Pointer
In my lifetime, i can not think of one example of a restriction on recreational fishing that has ever been relaxed in nc after it has been implemented. Folk that think it's gonna happen are in for a major case of buyers remorse.
What typically happens is when a stock is getting close to meeting the objectives in a management plan, the bar is raised and we get continued regulation to meet the new higher goals.
I agree, just like a temporary tax, never goes away
 

witler

Eight Pointer
Serious question, Are there so many recreational fishermen that there is a drastic impact on any one species?
 

witler

Eight Pointer
What are we doing protecting fish so they can swim either North or South to be caught in Virginia or South Carolina? I understand and support limits on Flounder, but Spot and Mullet.
 

23mako

Ten Pointer
no my logic is to leave the historical users alone.
All the rec folks from wake county (largest licensed county for saltwater) don't get to change the world to fit their needs.
It seems from this report that that economic benefit you hear on the rec side is BS. it doesn't outweigh commercial interests. maybe there is better info?


What numbers are you looking at in this report? I see 3.9 billion for recreational economic impact and 431 million for commercial economic impact.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20190623-070051_Drive.jpg
    Screenshot_20190623-070051_Drive.jpg
    95.3 KB · Views: 14
  • Screenshot_20190623-070043_Drive.jpg
    Screenshot_20190623-070043_Drive.jpg
    95.5 KB · Views: 14

sky hawk

Old Mossy Horns
Contributor
So let me get this straight, you think I should pay many $thousands to catch fish that are great table-fare, then release them, so that I can go buy fish from guys who are taking that same resource and selling it back to me at a profit?

No thank you. I have the same right (or more) to eat fish from our waters as they do, and I’m only taking an individual Limit. Not a hundred limits so I can sell it.

I find it entirely illogical to criticize a man for keeping a few fish for his family. An individual’s right to keep his limit of fish supersedes commercial interests every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Greed is not keeping a recreational limit when you go fishing.

I’ve got no problem with comms, but when you start saying a man should release fish he’s going to eat, so he can go buy it from a fish market so another man can stay in business selling those same fish for a profit, you’ve got some wires crossed.
 

Winnie 70

Ten Pointer
If fishing for flounder after the ban in Aug, is there a mile limit off the Carolina coast that is not included in this ban? And if you are outside this limit, if when you come in and get checked with flounder, how you prove they caught outside this ban limit?
 

HotSoup

Old Mossy Horns
If fishing for flounder after the ban in Aug, is there a mile limit off the Carolina coast that is not included in this ban? And if you are outside this limit, if when you come in and get checked with flounder, how you prove they caught outside this ban limit?

Ill be getting mine in SC and NOT renewing my NC license in Oct
 

JohnBoat

Banned
Serious question, Are there so many recreational fishermen that there is a drastic impact on any one species?

Yes, recs certainly have an impact on fish species. Though we do not produce the by catch and waste of practices like I shore trawling and gill netting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRC

23mako

Ten Pointer
I am just curious if any of y'all that are saying this is a bad bill out of one side of your mouth and then saying inshore trawling is the big problem out of the other side of your mouth, supported the NC Wildlife Federation's petition for rulemaking a few years ago? https://ncwf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016-11-02-NCWF-Petition-for-Rulemaking-w_Exhibits-A-F.pdf

And if not why?

What would y'all want changed with regards to inshore trawling? Outright ban? Less effort? Less headrope length? I am genuinely curious.

Also, what do y'all think the hidden agenda driven ploy is with this bill? Do you think it is to shutdown all types of fishing in our state?
 

CRC

Old Mossy Horns
I don't think its a hidden agenda to ruin fishing.

I think strict regulations are needed on flounder but I don't see them as necessary on species like whiting and croaker.

With this bill NC is getting like South Carolina in having politicians set bag and size limits on recreational and commercial fish species.

Heck South Carolina passed a bill that set a size limit on spadefish.
 
Last edited:

HotSoup

Old Mossy Horns
^^^ yet you can keep 10/day. Flounder is already $16/lb. How much will it rise with an all out ban on the rec side?
 

23mako

Ten Pointer
Don't know but interesting the restrictions on flounder are happening without the Let Them Spawn Act

The flounder restrictions have been a long time coming. Several years ago the MFC voted to put harvest restrictions on southern flounder for both user groups. There ended up being a small flaw in the data because it didn't account for intermingling of flounder from other states I believe. The North Carolina Fisheries Association sued the state from implementing the cuts to flounder and the state agreed to kick the can down the road to this year. The NCFA also disagreed with using the supplment process to initiate cuts as opposed to the amendment process which is more thorough.


 

Downeast

Twelve Pointer
What about the increase in pound nets? Don't they target flounder? I've seen dozens of new one's popping up everywhere.
 

darenative

Twelve Pointer
I am just curious if any of y'all that are saying this is a bad bill out of one side of your mouth and then saying inshore trawling is the big problem out of the other side of your mouth, supported the NC Wildlife Federation's petition for rulemaking a few years ago? https://ncwf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016-11-02-NCWF-Petition-for-Rulemaking-w_Exhibits-A-F.pdf

And if not why?

What would y'all want changed with regards to inshore trawling? Outright ban? Less effort? Less headrope length? I am genuinely curious.

Also, what do y'all think the hidden agenda driven ploy is with this bill? Do you think it is to shutdown all types of fishing in our state?

Nope, i didnt support that petition from ncwf. It's too restrictive and totally eliminates small time mom and pop operations. I'm completely against managing our fisheries for a single user group. Our herritage of small time commercial fishing operations in coastal
counties is equally as important as the wake county cca boys freezer full of fish they head west with every sunday leaving here. Until the cca, ncwf, or any group comes to the table with a bill or petition that recognises the real issue and doesnt try to exclude the other user group, im not supporting it. The cca has done a damn good job of making those that live inland think they are entitled to the entire resource, which is why the cca has such limited support in coastal areas in nc. If a group can get the big trawlers out of the sounds while preserving the small time operations and agree to manage the resource for both user groups using scientific data and not knee jerk legislation like 483, then I'll support it without question

I'm not sure that there is a hidden agenda within 483. I think it has the potential to take the science of out of fisheries management and replace it with some jackass politicians skewed version of how to manage fisheries. I guess we'll see if it happens or not in coming years.
 
Top