Print Page | Close Window

House Bills Filed Today (March 27)

Printed From: North Carolina Waterman
Category: North Carolina Waterman Message Boards
Forum Name: Fisheries Issues/Fisheries Politics/Fisheries Government.
Forum Discription: Post ONLY Marine Fisheries Issues Here
URL: http://www.ncwaterman.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=80587
Printed Date: 18 October 2019 at 5:24am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.11 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: House Bills Filed Today (March 27)
Posted By: Rick
Subject: House Bills Filed Today (March 27)
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 5:12pm


H483

http://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2019/Bills/House/PDF/H483v0.pdf" rel="nofollow - http://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2019/Bills/House/PDF/H483v0.pdf

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2019 H D HOUSE BILL DRH10253-MH-49 
 
 
 
Short Title: Let Them Spawn. (Public)
Sponsors: Representatives Yarborough, Saine, Wray, and B. Turner (Primary Sponsors). Referred to: 
 
*DRH10253-MH-49*
 BILL TO BE ENTITLED 
AN ACT TO REQUIRE A MINIMUM SIZE LIMIT ON ALL COMMERCIALLY AND 
RECREATIONALLY IMPORTANT SPECIES OF MARINE FISH TO ENSURE THAT 
 SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT OF JUVENILE FISH OF EACH SPECIES HAVE AN 
OPPORTUNITY TO REACH MATURITY AND SPAWN AT LEAST ONCE. 
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 
SECTION 1.  G.S. 113-182.1(b) is amended by adding a new subdivision to read: 
 "(8) Include a minimum size limit for every species of marine fish listed in the 
 Division of Marine Fisheries Stock Status Report to ensure that seventy-five 
 percent (75%) of the juvenile fish at the minimum size limit established for 
 the species have reached the size of maturity and have had an opportunity to 
 spawn at least once. The requirement for a minimum size limit shall not apply 
 when the Fisheries Director determines that the species under consideration 
 has a unique life cycle and maturity characteristic that would render the 
 management measure inappropriate to generally accepted fishery 
 management protocol. In the event the Marine Fisheries Commission accepts 
 the determination of the Fisheries Director that an exception to the minimum 
 size requirement is appropriate for a particular species, the Fisheries Director 
 shall instead propose slot limits to protect the adult spawning stock." 
 SECTION 2.(a)  Rule Making. – The Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) 
 shall adopt rules to implement G.S. 113-182.1(b)(8), as enacted by Section 1 of this act, as set 
 forth in this section. The Commission shall establish a minimum size limit for every species of 
 marine fish listed in the Division of Marine Fisheries Stock Status Report based upon the best 
 available biological and life history data to ensure that at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the 
 juvenile fish of each species reaching the minimum size limit are mature and have had the 
 opportunity to spawn at least once. In the event data for a particular species are unavailable for 
 North Carolina, the Commission will utilize data from other Atlantic coast states until North 
 Carolina specific studies can be completed. The minimum size limits set by the Commission shall 
 be included in the management measures of the Fishery Management Plan for each species 
 currently listed on the Division of Marine Fisheries annual Stock Status Report. 
 SECTION 2.(b)  Temporary Management Measures. – Until Fishery Management 
 Plans are adopted that include the minimum size limits required by this act, the Director of the 
 Division of Marine Fisheries is directed to review the biological and life history information 
 currently available in the marine fisheries literature and marine fisheries reports. No later than 
 August 2019, the Director shall present the findings of this review and an authorization to the 
 Commission to impose temporary management measures establishing minimum size limits 
required to allow seventy-five percent (75%) of juveniles of each species reaching the minimum 
 size limit to have reached the size of maturity and to have had the opportunity to spawn at least 
 once. 
 SECTION 3.  This act is effective when it becomes law.



H486

http://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2019/Bills/House/PDF/H486v0.pdf" rel="nofollow - http://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2019/Bills/House/PDF/H486v0.pdf

























-------------
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.



Replies:
Posted By: TomM
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 6:00pm
Good bills. Hope they don’t end up in dead letter box.


Posted By: drumwagon1
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 6:16pm
I hope they pass all these bills. We could have a world class fishery again if it was managed right. Flounder, Spots, Croaker, Weak Fish, have been depleted over many years from bad management.


Posted By: Get Bowed Up
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 8:13pm
Is there anything we can see that's an example of this 75% management?


Posted By: kshivar
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 8:24pm
Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Is there anything we can see that's an example of this 75% management?
    What? It’s a safe bet it’s 75% better than mismanagement.


Posted By: TomM
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 8:43pm
GBU we can easily see what less than 75% leaves us. You have better suggestions


Posted By: Get Bowed Up
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 8:47pm
Originally posted by kshivar kshivar wrote:

Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Is there anything we can see that's an example of this 75% management?
    What? It’s a safe bet it’s 75% better than mismanagement.


Not questioning the concept, merely asking if it's been implemented somewhere else.


Posted By: kshivar
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 9:12pm
Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Originally posted by kshivar kshivar wrote:

Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Is there anything we can see that's an example of this 75% management?
    What? It’s a safe bet it’s 75% better than mismanagement.


Not questioning the concept, merely asking if it's been implemented somewhere else.
   Understood. But do the math. 75% of something is better than 100% of nothing.


Posted By: Ray Brown
Date Posted: 27 March 2019 at 10:44pm
Get Bowed... You raise an interesting and, when considered, an insight into why the answer to your question is probably "no".

Go to the NMFS commercial landings and look at the landings for these species by state. It won't take long before you see that only NC has an extensive commercial fishery on these species. That simply means the pressure on these species in other states is not what it is in NC.

NC has no choice because of this reality. In order to sustain our fisheries we have to maximize in water production because our harvest pressure is so much greater than most states.

I am not trying to be obstinate or antagonistic. I am just pointing out what has been known and identified for years.

Other states can be more liberal with size and creel because they don't allow entanglement nets who can't accurately cull nor do those states tolerate other gear such as as otter trawls to the extent we do which on some species also reduces our biomass.

In short, we have to be different with recs because we are so different with commercial harvest and commercial gear than other states. It isn't rocket science. If you give to one side, you take from the other. We are unique. We give priority to the net based industry on gear use and harvest method and let recs have what is left after the commercial formula is applied. Virtually every other state gives priority to the individual fishing public with commercial activity only after the desires of the general fishing population is satisfied.

Sadly, what we allow doesn't promote abundance so over time the numbers continue to shrink.

We get what we manage for. And that is why I would answer your question "no" because of how they manage without allowing destructive commercial gear or practices, other states don't have to assure themselves that 75% of their fish have to attain sexual maturity. We simply have what Dr. Daniel has said for years.."too much pressure" on the stocks we have.

Who does the state give priority to? Isn't that the real question? We know what our stocks look like after making commercial harvest a priority here in NC. We know what creel and size limits look like in other states who give priority to the general public.

When was the last time we asked the citizens of NC who they felt should have priority of harvest? Or have we ever asked the public for their opinion after giving them all the facts?



-------------
I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.


Posted By: Redfisher
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 7:40am
Get Bowed Up,


You ask a lot of questions but never give us any answers or opinions.


Posted By: drumwagon1
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 8:44am
Taking the trawlers out of pamlico sound our fishing will improve. You know, you don't have to be real smart to figure that out.


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 8:54am
Originally posted by Get Bowed Up Get Bowed Up wrote:

Is there anything we can see that's an example of this 75% management?
 

...I can't think of "anything" in actual practice, so lets look at theory-

Southern Flounder

From the 2018 Stock Assessment-
Maturity & Reproduction Southern flounder maturity at length was estimated for this assessment using data collected by Midway and Scharf (2012) and samples collected by Monaghan and Armstrong (2000) that were restaged using protocols developed by Midway et al. (2013). ASAP requires maturity to be specified by age. Maturity at age was not estimated in Midway et al. (2013); however, since maturity at length in Midway and Scharf (2012) was nearly identical to estimates in Midway et al. (2013), maturity at age was assumed to be time-invariant according to Midway and Scharf (2012) (Table 3.7). To estimate female-only SSB from January 1 biomass of combined sexes, maturity was entered as the maturity at age multiplied by the proportion female at age (Table 3.8).

















...and from the supplement-





So....75% of the females are mature and had an opportunity to spawn at 17" in length.

….but, the "biology" of the fish suggests that a single size limit may not be the best way to manage Southern flounder, or maybe not.

You smart guys look at the tables above and tell me whether the fact that males don't get much bigger than 15" makes a difference when setting size limits.

What happens to the males?  

Am I reading Table 3.8 correct that by age-3 93% of the stock sampled is all females?  If so, then the length at age disparity between males and females doesn't matter in management because a female needs to reach age-3 for 75% to be mature.






-------------
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.


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 9:20am

… the typical commercial fishing rhetoric begins-



I'll remind you what Ken Seigler had to say about red drum-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBZOE3PL33M" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBZOE3PL33M


… and what the former vice-chair of the Finfish AC, Pam Morris had to say about red drum-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS5R7PnskhA" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS5R7PnskhA



-------------
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.


Posted By: kshivar
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 10:19am
It is astonishing anyone could be so ignorant. Buddy Roe apparently advocates killing all the drum as the spots, croakers and greys already have been. Just infuriating.


Posted By: Redfisher
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 10:48am

The fact that Seiglar posts that stuff shows the arrogance of the opposition to sustainable fisheries.


Posted By: Ray Brown
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 11:43am
Get Bowed......an afterthought to my post above.

I'm stepping into Rick's territory a bit since we have all come to lean on him for numbers, but there are two concepts that a lot of folks need to see and understand the implications from that have to do with fishing pressure in NC and how NC prioritizes.

The first is southern flounder management in NC that historically allows 80% of harvest or more to go to commercial nets because of what our laws allow.   Less than 2,000 people get 80% of the fish and they get a public trust for personal monetary gain.   1.5 million citizens and visitors get to split the other 20% of the public trust resource.   Other states managed with a reversed objective.  By their rules the 1.5 million would split the 80% or more and commercial harvest would get the rest. That is why NC citizens get 4 flounder per day when they go to the water while citizens in other states get from two to four times that amount because those states don't promote a commercial fishery on estuarine species.   I'll refrain from saying one is right and one is wrong, but everyone looking for answers should see this reality.  Again, you get what you manage for and NC manages so that net based commercial fisheries get top priority.

For those that say NC should manage all public assets for best economic use then I'll simply ask why aren't we applying that to marine resources?

We know that NC's recreational fishery industry is worth about 1.6 billion dollars per year while the commercial net based industry is worth about 300 million per year to the state.  Let that sink in slowly.

There is no doubt which industry means the most economically to NC.  None!  Nada!

So why do we spend time, and actually make decisions in this state, or have to introduce bills like these to maintain fish stocks, or even worse, pass regulations that are not conducive to sustainable fish stocks, all to prop up an industry that is six times smaller than the largest.  And on top of all that we give priority to the smallest as some form of subsidy.

I served on the first southern flounder AC formed in the year 2,000.   From day one we knew the fish was over fished and over fishing was continuing.  Commercials were getting 80% or more of the harvest.  The DMF biologists at the time were saying a 40% cut was needed.  The net based industry and their allies fought tooth and nail and with "apologies" the MFC voted for a cut based on size harvest dates that was under 20% saying, "we hope the science is wrong."

Well, the science wasn't wrong.  We are catching nearly as many pounds of southern flounder today as back then but with 15 inch fish rather than 11 inch fish meaning we are catching a heck of lot less fish today than back then.  That number of 58% to 72% cuts needed now is simply what NC gets for not addressing real issues in a timely manner.  Anecdotally recs just don't see flounder in the sound and rivers where they did, even in 2000 when a 40% cut was all we needed to rebound.

We sacrificed to a great degree what southern flounder we had in 2000 for that net based commercial industry which is 6 times smaller than the industry which represents the most citizens.  That reality is now hitting home, and the cries you hear as a real cut back is approaching, aren't from people who are anti commercial fishermen by nature, it is finally the cry of people fussing with legislators and regulators for letting us get into this mess to begin with because of the pressure we allow on our species in NC by gear and methods long outlawed in other states.

Sorry for the rant, but count me as one of those who blames the state entirely for where we are.  They prioritized wrong and the resource and we the owners of the resource are now paying the price.






-------------
I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.


Posted By: kshivar
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 1:40pm
Reverend!! Well said Ray. A phone call from Cooper to DEQ could change this trajectory and he could fulfill a promise he made to us, the voters.


Posted By: Get Bowed Up
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 2:31pm
Originally posted by Redfisher Redfisher wrote:




Get Bowed Up,


You ask a lot of questions but never give us any answers or opinions.



Right to hunt and fish, ACs, CSMA 2,special meeting, DMF funding, "influence" in appointments, I've given opinions on as a whole or on certain topics/actions. So I'd have to respectfully disagree with your comment.


Posted By: FishCommander
Date Posted: 28 March 2019 at 3:07pm
Spot on Ray. Thumbs Up


Posted By: bakesta
Date Posted: 30 March 2019 at 11:35am
The spawn bill is based on the DMF stock status report.

Is this it?

http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/2017-stock-overview" rel="nofollow - http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/2017-stock-overview


If yes, then 8 species of fish will be covered.  Weakfish, spot, etc won't be covered.  


Southern flounder are at the point where I don't even catch many small ones any more in the western pamlico.  For several years there were a lot of 13 inchers that would make the day fun.  They seemed to go away about 3 or 4 years ago.  

The entire stock status of NC is just so pitiful that it's hard to understand why these bills would not pass with unanimous support.   

Can't wait to hear how the "scientists" at DMF react.



 






-------------
"Do the right thing. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest." --- Mark Twain


Posted By: kshivar
Date Posted: 30 March 2019 at 2:28pm
DMF will want more studies.


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 06 April 2019 at 4:25pm

Alabama agrees, let them spawn-



https://www.al.com/news/2019/04/size-limits-to-tighten-for-speckled-trout-and-flounder.html?outputType=amp" rel="nofollow - https://www.al.com/news/2019/04/size-limits-to-tighten-for-speckled-trout-and-flounder.html?outputType=amp

-------------
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.


Posted By: TomM
Date Posted: 06 April 2019 at 6:58pm
Makes too much sense for NC😩


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 3:00pm

Great job at 2:00 today by Rep. Yarborough moving these two bills out of the Wildlife Resources House Standing Committee.

No surprise- Jerry Schill was "honored" by Rep Cleveland to speak against both bills as the only public speaker.

No surprises that Pittman and Cleveland led the charges against both bills.  

Cleveland did so with a list of problems for "let them spawn" from an unnamed retired marine biologist.  ...any one wish to bet on that being Jess Hawkins?  When questioned for a name, Cleveland refused to give it.

Poor Rep. Pittman tried to make the case that the problem with spot and croaker is that we're not catching enough.  When he goes down to pier fish all he can catch is a bunch of small croakers.  "There are so many croaker that the big ones can't get a chance to bite his hook for all the little ones."

Let them spawn bill now moves forward-  to Environment, if favorable, Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House

License reform bill now moves forward-  to Appropriations, Agriculture and Natural and Economic Resources, if favorable, Appropriations, if favorable, Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House






-------------
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.


Posted By: j.willis
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 3:12pm
Clap


Posted By: Ray Brown
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 4:07pm
Glad to hear this, but historically things die in Rules. Maybe times are changing? We shall see.

I wonder if I suggest closing the harvest season entirely during mid October to mid November as they migrate to the sea to spawn at the next MFC meeting if the gallery would allow me to get back to my car.

Due to latitudinal differences I suspect the southern flounder fall migration begins in eastern NC from two weeks to a month before it does in Alabama. Even Forest Gump's folks get it.

-------------
I am a native of NC. The "bycatch captial of the east coast of the US". Our legislature lets us kill more fish for no reason than any other Atlantic Coast state. I hope they are proud.


Posted By: Chuck Laughridge
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 7:23pm
May also want to look at HB 810 (filed today) and how it is a bit "different" from SB 554 (the NCDMF "Christms wish" bill). 


Posted By: j.willis
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 7:45pm
HB 810

http://webservices.ncleg.net/ViewBillDocument/2019/3439/0/DRH10488-MH-139" rel="nofollow - https://webservices.ncleg.net/ViewBillDocument/2019/3439/0/DRH10488-MH-139

Short Title: Marine Fisheries Reforms

Sponsor: Rep. Yarborough

(It's 15 pages in length- too long to post on ncwaterman.)


Posted By: j.willis
Date Posted: 16 April 2019 at 7:57pm
From page 3 of HB 810: STRICKEN/REMOVED 

27 (c) To assist in the development of each Fishery Management Plan, the Chair of the 
28 Marine Fisheries Commission shall appoint a fishery management plan advisory committee. 
29 Each fishery management plan advisory committee shall be composed of commercial fishermen, 
30 recreational fishermen, and scientists, all with expertise in the fishery for which the Fishery 
31 Management Plan is being developed.
32 (c1) The Department shall consult with the regional advisory committees established 
33 pursuant to G.S. 143B-289.57(e) regarding the preparation of each Fishery Management Plan. 
34 Before submission of a plan for review by the Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental
35 Operations, the Department shall review any comment or recommendation regarding the plan 
36 that a regional advisory committee submits to the Department within the time limits established 
37 in the Schedule for the development and adoption of Fishery Management Plans established by 
38 G.S. 143B-289.52. Before the Commission adopts a management measure to implement a plan, 
39 the Commission shall review any comment or recommendation regarding the management 
40 measure that a regional advisory committee submits to the Commission.


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 17 April 2019 at 8:32am

http://www.wral.com/commercial-recreational-fishermen-square-off-again-at-legislature/18329912/?fbclid=IwAR3qo53kgWN8JD8Mr5wXEuPmSmjTz2ybgiGwqSAv9Q6D70qopt-aJ7ZREWs" rel="nofollow - http://www.wral.com/commercial-recreational-fishermen-square-off-again-at-legislature/18329912/?fbclid=IwAR3qo53kgWN8JD8Mr5wXEuPmSmjTz2ybgiGwqSAv9Q6D70qopt-aJ7ZREWs

Commentary from Laura Leslie at WRAL from yesterday:

 

Fishing Bills

It's almost as predictable as the return of spring: every session, one or more North Carolina state lawmakers will file a bill favoring either the state's commercial fishing industry or the recreational fishing industry. The two sides have been at odds for years, each blaming the other for the state's dwindling supply of fish and accusing the other of mismanagement and waste. Fisheries management officials often find themselves caught between the two powerful and vocal lobbies, which then turn to state lawmakers to fight their battles in the General Assembly.

One of the bills passed Tuesday, House Bill 486, Commercial Fishing License Reforms, would, according to sponsor Rep. Larry Yarborough, protect the state's commercial fisheries by setting stricter guidelines for who can get a commercial fishing license, how many licenses there are, and how they're allotted. "North Carolina's commercial landings have been steadily declining over the last 20 years," Yarborough said, saying the decline is almost completely in finfish, rather than shellfish.

Yarborough, R-Person, said a 2018 study by the state's Marine Fisheries Commission found that only 46% of the people who hold commercial fishing licenses in North Carolina "actually sell fish and generate trip tickets." The rest, he said, have licenses passed down in the family, but aren't really commercial fishermen. "These are really recreational fisherman acting as commercial fisherman. They're not recorded," Yarborough said. "We have no way of knowing how much they catch or how badly they're damaging the commercial fishery." The bill would define a commercial fishing operation as one that either harvests 1,000 pounds of seafood a year or makes fifteen registered trips. Those who don't meet those criteria for at least two of the five years before their license expires would have their licenses deactivated and, eventually, put back into the pool. However, the measure would make up for the reduced number of commercial fishing licenses by doubling the fees - from $400 a year to $800. Recreational fees would increase by a few dollars.

Jerry Schill with the NC Fisheries Association said commercial fishermen in the state are "overwhelmingly opposed" to the bill. He said part-time commercial fishermen would be driven out of business by the changes.

Another measure, House Bill 483, "Let Them Spawn," also passed by a larger margin. It would instruct the Department of Marine Fisheries to set minimum size limits for fish with the goal of allowing at least 75 percent of each year's harvest to have spawned at least once. The measure wouldn't apply to all species, Yarborough said. Red drum, for example, take five years to mature, he explained, so they would be exempt. But croakers, spot and flounder would be subject to the minimums. "For the past five years, southern flounder has been going down 30 percent every year," Yarborough said. "We're hoping to stop the decline."

The NC Fisheries Association is opposed to the measure, calling it "lacking in common sense, scientific reasoning and a general knowledge of the biology of marine fishes," and warning that such a measure could lead to overfishing of female fish, which tend to be larger. 

 

(Laura Leslie, WRAL NEWS, 4/16/19)

 




-------------
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.


Posted By: Redfisher
Date Posted: 17 April 2019 at 8:38am

Yeah Rep. Pittman, a big conspiracy.  Idiot.


Posted By: Chuck Laughridge
Date Posted: 17 April 2019 at 8:54am
I've been told by 3 folks in the audience that Rep Pittman stated there are no big fish being caught on piers  because there are to many little ones that beat em to the bait (spots/croakers). 


Posted By: Rick
Date Posted: 17 April 2019 at 9:14am

House Bill- 810
https://www.thehulltruth.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1098443&d=1555504770" rel="nofollow - DRH10488-MH-139.PDF



















-------------
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.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.11 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2012 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk