FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

H 483 (in a nutshell)

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
j.willis View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 09 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 622
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote j.willis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: H 483 (in a nutshell)
    Posted: 23 June 2019 at 9:50am
H483 =>  L75 minimum size or slot for spot, croaker, kingfishes, striped mullet, southern flounder and bluefish.

Why the "hair on fire" response from everyone?




GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION

2019
 
HOUSE BILL 483 
Committee Substitute Favorable 4/16/19 
Committee Substitute #2 Favorable 6/18/19 
Fourth Edition Engrossed 6/20/19 

Short Title: Let Them Spawn. (Public) 
Sponsors: Referred to: March 28, 2019 

*H483-v-4* 

1 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 
2 AN ACT TO REQUIRE A MINIMUM SIZE LIMIT FOR CERTAIN SPECIES OF MARINE 
3 FISH TO ENSURE THAT SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT OF THE JUVENILE FISH OF 
4 THE SPECIES WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACH MATURITY AND 
5 SPAWN AT LEAST ONCE. 

6 The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 
7 SECTION 1. G.S. 113-182.1(b) is amended by adding a new subdivision to read: 
8 "(8) Include a minimum size limit for spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), Atlantic 
9 croaker (Micropogonias undulatus), kingfishes (Menticirrhus ssp.), striped 
10 mullet (Mugil cephalus), southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), and 
11 bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), to ensure that seventy-five percent (75%) of 
12 the juvenile fish at the minimum size limit established for the species will 
13 reach the size of maturity and will have an opportunity to spawn at least once. 
14 The minimum size limit required by this subdivision shall be based on the best 
15 available biological and life history data for each species. In the event data for 
16 a particular species is unavailable for North Carolina, the Commission shall 
17 utilize data from other Atlantic coast states until studies specific to North 
18 Carolina can be completed. This subdivision shall not apply if the Fisheries 
19 Director determines that the species under consideration has a unique life 
20 cycle and maturity characteristic that makes the minimum size limit required 
21 by this subdivision inappropriate based on generally accepted fishery 
22 management protocols. If the Fisheries Director determines that the minimum 
23 size limit required by this subdivision is inappropriate, the Fisheries Director 
24 shall instead propose slot limits to protect the adult spawning stock.

25 SECTION 2. Rule Making. – The Marine Fisheries Commission shall adopt rules to 
26 implement G.S. 113-182.1(b)(8), as enacted by Section 1 of this act.
 
27 SECTION 3. Temporary Management Measures. – Until Fishery Management Plans 
28 are adopted that include the minimum size limits required by this act, the Director of the Division 29 of Marine Fisheries and the Marine Fisheries Commission shall develop and adopt temporary 
30 management measures as provided in this section. The Director shall review the biological and 
31 life history data currently available for spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), Atlantic croaker 
32 (Micropogonias undulatus), kingfishes (Menticirrhus ssp.), striped mullet (Mugil cephalus), 
33 southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), and bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix). No later than 
34 December 1, 2019, the Director shall present the findings of this review to the Commission.

General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2019 
Page 2 
House Bill 483-Fourth Edition
 
1 Based on these findings, the Commission shall adopt temporary management measures that 
2 establish minimum size limits to ensure that seventy-five percent (75%) of the juvenile fish at 
3 the minimum size limit established for these species will reach the size of maturity and will have 
4 an opportunity to spawn at least once. 

5 SECTION 4. There is appropriated from the unappropriated fund balance of the 
6 General Fund to the Division of Marine Fisheries of the Department of Environmental Quality 
7 the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) in non-recurring funds to be used to implement this 
8 act. 

9 SECTION 5. This act is effective when it becomes law and applies to Fishery 
10 Management Plans developed prior to that date and Fishery Management Plans developed on or 
11 after that date.
Back to Top
Get Bowed Up View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 08 August 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Get Bowed Up Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 June 2019 at 10:23am
Haha 10k, no shame in this game.

Still doesn't address the problem/s, are they not listening?

Edited by Get Bowed Up - 23 June 2019 at 10:23am
Back to Top
j.willis View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 09 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 622
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote j.willis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 June 2019 at 10:43am
(1) I think 10K is way too much too. LOL 

(2) It's a start to address the sustainable issue.
Back to Top
marker39 View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 10 May 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 893
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote marker39 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 June 2019 at 3:57pm
Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Haha 10k, no shame in this game.

Still doesn't address the problem/s, are they not listening?



If you are not willing to allow a species to spawn at least once in their lifetime before you harvest,  then you should not be allowed a license to fish, rec or commercial, fresh or salt.

BW #2
Back to Top
Get Bowed Up View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 08 August 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Get Bowed Up Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2019 at 8:29am
Chuck,I'd like to use that GFI from the other day here too please.

Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2019 at 5:40pm
Sure the $10k was plopped into 3rd iteration so it would qualify for crossover.
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2019 at 7:28pm
Good move
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6191
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 June 2019 at 10:22pm
Baitwaster’s letter to the senate-

Dear Senator ___
I am writing to you in opposition to HB 483, short title Let Them Spawn

As back ground, I am a native and 70-year resident of Wake County. I have a BS in Zoology from NC State University and retired after 42 years as a clinical research coordinator at the Duke Clinical Research Institute. 

I have served on three different advisory committees for the NC Marine Fisheries Commission (NCMFC): Inland, Finfish (2 terms) and Red Drum Fisheries Management Plan (MFP). I currently serve in the South Atlantic Species Advisory Panel for the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). In the past, I have been nominated for a seat on the NCMFC and as a NC recreational representative for ASMFC and South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council.

I have been an avid salt water angler for 60 years, own property in Carteret County and have been a member for several decades of the NC Beach Buggy Association, Cape Hatteras Anglers Club and the Raleigh Salt Water Sport Fishing Club, of which I have held many offices including two terms as President.

My opposition to this bill is on several levels:
My understanding is NC Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) and the Department of Environmental Quality, who will be charged with a significant role in implementation, do not support HB483 as written.

While it is a “feel good, sound good bill”, it deviates from established marine fisheries plans in requiring 75% of juvenile fish to reach maturity. Most plans established at the state and federal council level use either 25-40% or, in extreme cases, a moratorium on harvest, e.g., river herring.

It burdens the NCDMF to allocate its scarce resources in a ridiculously short time period (by no later than December 1, 2019) and provides for a ridiculous amount of money, $10,000. I suspect this paltry sum was added to Edition 3 of the Bill ONLY to satisfy eligibility for crossover.

I have concerns that of the 23 Bill sponsors, a bill that will have its major impact on coastal NC, only 3 are from NC counties east of I-95 and fully a third are from Mecklenburg County.

At a personal level, I, along with large numbers of rec anglers, use mullet of various sizes both live and as cut bait. Silver mullet usually seen a “finger mullet”, and striped mullet, mentioned in the bill, are extremely similar and are differentiated only by subtle anatomical differences.

A significant reason for many in the recreational angling community is a number of the species in addition to mullet, i.e., bluefish, kingfishes, and spot, are often used for bait and, per statute, the Mutilated Finfish regulation could effectively eliminate their use as cut bait. SUBCHAPTER 03M –FINFISH, SECTION .0100 –FINFISH, GENERAL, 15A NCAC 03M .0101MUTILATED FINFISH: It shall be unlawful to possess aboard a vessel or while engaged in fishing any species of finfish that is subject to a size or harvest restriction without having head and tail attached. 

NC has provided the NCDMF and its Director and the NCMFC with a pathway to manage finfish species in NC with its MFP process. This bill would add additional burdens and negatively impact both recreational and commercial fishermen, coastal tackle shops and fish houses as well as the NCDMF using an arbitrary, feel-good number. 

As with much broad-reaching legislation, no doubt, the Law of Unintended Consequences will be in effect.

Respectfully,

Edited by Rick - 25 June 2019 at 8:01am
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 4:52pm
BW said:

"NC has provided the NCDMF and its Director and the NCMFC with a pathway to manage finfish species in NC with its MFP process."

Bernie, and how is that working?  

Bills like H483 are attempts to fix the failed MFP process.  Unfortunately, they are last attempts.  One of three things will happen from this day forward.  Fisheries reform will come in the form of Legislation or MFC actions, the MFC/DMF will be swallowed by WRC, or our other fisheries will join the ranks of Southern flounder, river herring, weakfish, spot, croaker, shads, oysters, and crabs. This is patently obvious.  Commercial fishermen need to choose which of the first two options they want and get behind it.  The third option is not an option if they wish to continue to fish.  

You seem to want to burrow in on tiny imperfections of anything.  Trying to nitpick everything.  This bill, like all bills, is not perfect, but continuing on the current path is unacceptable.  

I wish that the process worked better, and am hopeful.  I say this because of the fact that one conservation bill has survived the rules committee and the House.  That is the first one since the FRA 97.  Moreover, the current MFC (who are Governor appointees) have made two significant conservation moves this year (striped bass and S flounder).  We shall see if this move towards conservation continues or we go backward-the success of the current fisheries process based on the MFC appointments relies on one person, the Governor.  There is no statute enforced in NC that holds NC fisheries managers to the primacy of conservation such as the Magnussen-Steven act.  No matter the appointments at the Federal level, those managers must stop overfishing-period.  If we had that provision, S flounder regulations would have been in court to stop overfishing long ago.  The MSA is not perfect either, but it has standards that are enforced and accountability measures (paybacks).  Compare Federally managed stocks to NC.  Which process meets their goals better? 



Edited by chriselk - 25 June 2019 at 6:29pm
The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
Chuck Laughridge View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 09 July 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 1320
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chuck Laughridge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 5:10pm
Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Chuck,I'd like to use that GFI from the other day here too please.


As far as I'm concerned, go ahead.

Good Fishing!!!
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 9:08pm

Nice post, Chris.  And, FWIW.  one of the times I was put up for the MFC (maybe placeholder), I’ve said multiples times, the better, smarter person was appointed - you.  

Still think this bill is flawed at many levels: species selected, time frame, paltry funding. etc.

And as you point out, the current MFC have made some conservation decisions  

Would have preferred a rewrite of FRA 97 rather than a piecemeal bill but this would take someone like Gov. Hunt and Bob Lucas to pull this off.   

Agree MSA has teeth and has shown some success, but, to quibble, weakfish are federally managed, but, and despite something close to a moratorium, continued to be depressed throughout their range.

I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 9:15pm
Take trawling out inside for 5 years and get back
Back to Top
BaitWaster View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar
NCW PATRON

Joined: 15 July 2003
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 13165
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BaitWaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 9:21pm
HB 483 does not including any language on trawling.
I'm not here for a long time, but I'm here for a good time.

The days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days - Ray Wylie
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 June 2019 at 9:50pm
Nope no direct launguage but if all those bycatch can’t spawn
Back to Top
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 June 2019 at 7:52am
Originally posted by BaitWaster BaitWaster wrote:

Nice post, Chris.  And, FWIW.  one of the times I was put up for the MFC (maybe placeholder), I’ve said multiples times, the better, smarter person was appointed - you.  

Still think this bill is flawed at many levels: species selected, time frame, paltry funding. etc.

And as you point out, the current MFC have made some conservation decisions  

Would have preferred a rewrite of FRA 97 rather than a piecemeal bill but this would take someone like Gov. Hunt and Bob Lucas to pull this off.   

Agree MSA has teeth and has shown some success, but, to quibble, weakfish are federally managed, but, and despite something close to a moratorium, continued to be depressed throughout their range.


Thanks for the kind words Bernie.

A revision was proposed that would make substantive positive changes a couple of years ago.  (from memory it was H687).  It would have been much superior to H483 and more broadly applied.  There are only a handful of species that H483 applies to.  But I guess it did not have a short enough title for some in Raleigh to understand, much less read and comprehend it.  It put the primacy of conservation first and would have given fisheries regulators guidance as to how to make decisions.  If they did not, there would be avenues for simple folks like us to intercede.  

So we are left with H483, which is comprehensible by all.  Well maybe not all.
The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
kshivar View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2004
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 859
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kshivar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2019 at 9:28am
Well I guess it is dead. Rabon and Brown will do anything to make sure. That was NCFA’s Ace in the hole to get it sent there. I briefly had some hope. The last nail in the coffin for N.C. fisheries. SHRIMP TRAWL AND GILLNET HARD boys. Kill them all. It is incredible that less than 500 people control the fate of this public resource.

Edited by kshivar - 10 July 2019 at 9:29am
Back to Top
23Mako View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 01 February 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 661
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 23Mako Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2019 at 9:48am
So the bill isn't going to get out of the senate committee? 
Back to Top
kshivar View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2004
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 859
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kshivar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2019 at 1:35pm
Not a chance
Back to Top
23Mako View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 01 February 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 661
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 23Mako Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2019 at 4:33pm
Who makes the decision which committees the bills get sent to?
Back to Top
Rick View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 16 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6191
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 July 2019 at 5:36pm
Originally posted by 23Mako 23Mako wrote:

Who makes the decision which committees the bills get sent to?


Leadership. Bill probably will not be heard this session but hopefully in 2020. We all need to be working our senator.
fiogf49gjkf0d
NC Fisheries Management- Motto: Too Little, Too Late, Too Bad   Slogan: Shrimp On! Mission Statement: Enable Commercial Fishing At Any and All Cost, Regardless of Impact to the Resource.
Back to Top
lcg8978 View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 02 December 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 183
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lcg8978 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 July 2019 at 8:40am
Did anyone seriously think this had a snowball's chance in hell? This was a bad bill being pushed because of the "feel goods" and we all know it.  
Back to Top
kshivar View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2004
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 859
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kshivar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 July 2019 at 10:56am
Originally posted by lcg8978 lcg8978 wrote:

Did anyone seriously think this had a snowball's chance in hell? This was a bad bill being pushed because of the "feel goods" and we all know it.  


“The feel goods”? There’s nothing to fell good about in our fisheries unless you are a dealer or big commercial shrimper. Our inshore fishery is awful and getting worse. But fret not. Once the fishery totally collapses the Fish Fairy will come and make everything ok.
Back to Top
bakesta View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 24 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2652
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bakesta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 July 2019 at 12:37pm
Originally posted by lcg8978 lcg8978 wrote:

Did anyone seriously think this had a snowball's chance in hell? This was a bad bill being pushed because of the "feel goods" and we all know it.  


bad bill?????

No it was not a bad bill.  It was a great bill.  It was written by someone who knew how to make it have a very positive long term effect.  If you couldn't see that, you didn't look very close.  Or you are on the side of continual overharvest.


Snowball's chance????

It passed the house.


Once again - the goal of many reform initiatives is to educate and MAKE THEM VOTE, while knowing full well the odds are long.

This bill made the house vote -- and oh dear!! - look how it turned out!!!

The senate is now clearly to blame.  The house is off the hook on this one and fantastic political inroads have been made for the future.

It would have been EXTREMELY interesting if the senate had been smart enough to drop this hot potato into the governor's lap.



It was a great bill and I hope it comes back to life.



"Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest." --- Mark Twain
Back to Top
TomM View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 11 July 2006
Location: Roanoke Rapids
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TomM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 July 2019 at 1:36pm
It had money attached so it will be there in spring
Back to Top
lcg8978 View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 02 December 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 183
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lcg8978 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 July 2019 at 7:29am
How does placing a minimum size limit on a few more species really help address the real problems we have with our fisheries? Those 3-4 inch croaker, spot, and kingfish in the tailbag of a shrimp trawler would still be tossed overboard dead just as they are today. Those undersized flounder soaking in a large mesh gill net all night would still become crab bait. The only mullet being targeted by any commercial fishing operation are large enough to be well above any minimum size limit imposed.

We don't have the resources to enforce our current laws, what good does creating more do? This is nothing more than a Band-Aid on an axe wound.
Back to Top
chriselk View Drop Down
Pro
Pro
Avatar

Joined: 22 November 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chriselk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 July 2019 at 8:00am
Originally posted by lcg8978 lcg8978 wrote:

How does placing a minimum size limit on a few more species really help address the real problems we have with our fisheries? Those 3-4 inch croaker, spot, and kingfish in the tailbag of a shrimp trawler would still be tossed overboard dead just as they are today. Those undersized flounder soaking in a large mesh gill net all night would still become crab bait. The only mullet being targeted by any commercial fishing operation are large enough to be well above any minimum size limit imposed.

We don't have the resources to enforce our current laws, what good does creating more do? This is nothing more than a Band-Aid on an axe wound.

There was a better more comprehensive bill introduced two years ago, it never made it out of committee.  Its central tenet was protection of the resource for its 10 million stakeholders as opposed to user groups.  If it had passed it would allowed successful legal avenues.

As for the current bill, i would say, opinions vary and just leave it at that.  If anyone at the coast wants to hear Louis Daniel explain its details, he will be speaking at the monthly Crystal Coast (Cape Lookout actually) Flyfishing Dinner at Coxs Restaurant Friday Night at 7 (6 for dinner).  

By the way, if you want a laugh, and we all need one from time to time, sign up for the minutes of the meeting.  They are hilarious.

Here is the announcement.

Cape Lookout Fly Fishers July Meeting Reminder

July 19, 2019

Eating of the vittles begin at 6:01 pm

Program begins sharply at 6:51 pm +/_

Raffle begins immediately after the program

 

Speaker will be Dr. Louis Daniel, who will update us on fisheries stuff including legislative issues, the gill net closure on Tar/Pam and Neuse/Trent and also touch on NC Wildlife Federation.

Remember to Park in the new parking lot and use the VIP entrance on the East Side.

 

And by all means go catch a fish so we can talk about it.

 

Captain Rod McFly

CLFF President

and Male Model for Trap Door Waders

The above comments are my personal opinion and do not represent those of any organizations or agencies I may be a member of.
Back to Top
BrackishWater View Drop Down
Pro
Pro


Joined: 18 December 2014
Location: Pamlico River
Status: Offline
Points: 512
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BrackishWater Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 July 2019 at 5:45pm
An update on H483 as the current long session winds down. The Senate has pretty much decided not to take up anymore legislation although I did see something about recommissioning the NC Milk Commission being some committee's agenda.

Sen. Rabon was willing to send H483 to the Senate AG, Environment and Natural Resources Committee but the Chairs decided to wrap up business and put it off until the short session. So, the Rules Chair was in favor of the bill being heard before so we have no reason to believe that he will not be willing to let the bill move during the short session. And Co-Chair Andy Wells was willing to have the AGENR Committee take the bill up so again, no reason to believe they will not be willing to hear it in the short session. So, rumors of its death may be a little premature, but no one is denying it will not take some TLC to get it beyond the Senate committee level in 2020. As someone mentioned on this thread, this off-season will be the time to be talking with your Senator if you care about its fate.
A rising tide lifts all boats...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.11
Copyright ©2001-2012 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.189 seconds.