Releases – August 13, 2015
The N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries continues to move forward with plans to construct an underwater memorial in honor of the division’s former Artificial Reef Coordinator Jim Francesconi, but the project has been delayed until autumn.
The vessel originally identified for sinking in Francesconi’s name is no longer available. An alternative vessel has been found, and efforts to contract for purchasing, cleaning, towing, and sinking the ship are underway.
The division will oversee sinking of the vessel on the Howard Chapin Reef (AR-330), about 12 miles outside of Beaufort Inlet. The vessel will be sunk near the wreck of the USS Indra, a 330-foot landing craft repair ship sunk on the reef site in 1992.
This reef is very popular with fishermen and divers, and the addition of another vessel will provide greater access and opportunity to both of these user groups.
Francesconi, who began working for the division in 1987, headed the Artificial Reef Program for 14 years before losing a battle with leukemia on July 18, 2014.
He oversaw the deployment and sinking of several reef vessels including the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Spar, the tug Titan, the Captain Greg Mickey, the tug Pawtucket, the Captain Charlie, and two Coast Guard Falcon Aircraft.
The project will cost approximately $120,000. About $70,000 will come from a special fund that receives money from the sale of SCUBA license plates.
Significant funding has also been generated through donations from local businesses; fishing, diving and civic clubs; and from a GoFundMe account located at www.GoFundMe.com/JJF-Reef-Project. Members of the public can follow the progress of this project on Facebook at www.facebook.com/JJFReefProject.
For more information about the Artificial Reef Program or details of the ship’s sinking, contact division Habitat and Enhancement Section Chief Steve Murphey at (252) 808-8046 or Steve.Murphey@ncdenr.gov.
The N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission will meet Aug. 19-21 at the DoubleTree by Hilton Raleigh Brownstone University Hotel, 1707 Hillsborough St., Raleigh.
Public comment periods will begin at 6:00 p.m. on Aug. 19 and 9:00 a.m. on Aug. 20. The chairman will allow each speaker to comment for three minutes. Due to time constraints, those making comments will be asked to speak only once, either at the Aug. 19 or Aug. 20 session, but not during both public comment periods.
The business meeting begins at 9:00 a.m. on Aug. 20 and 8:30 a.m. on Aug. 21.
The deadline for submitting written correspondence to the commission, email or otherwise, through the Marine Fisheries Commission Office is 5:00 p.m. on Aug. 17. Those who wish to give handouts to the commission during the public comment periods should bring at least 12 copies of the handout.
The commission will offer a live webcast of the meeting. Up to 200 participants may listen to audio and view presentations in real-time on a first-come, first-served basis. Directions for participating in the webcast, including information on system requirements and testing, can be found at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/listen-online.
At this meeting, the commission is scheduled to select and approve management measures for Supplement A to the Southern Flounder Fishery Management Plan Amendment 1. The discussion is slated for 8:30 a.m. on Aug. 21.
In May, the commission chose six potential management proposals to take out for public review. The six options range in impacts to different fisheries and gears. They can be found at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/southern-flounder-current-topic.
Approved management measures could be implemented for this fall.
The commission is also scheduled to: (1) Receive a presentation on the 2015 Stock Status Report; (2) Hear an update on adaptive management triggers for the blue crab fishery; (3) Vote to post draft information updates for the Interjurisdictional and Kingfish fishery management plans on the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries website for public review; and (4) Approve a five-year fishery management plan schedule.
A meeting agenda and a full briefing book can be found at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/mf/mfc-meetings.
For more information, contact Marine Fisheries Commission Liaison Nancy Fish at (252) 808-8021 or Nancy.Fish@ncdenr.gov.
Federal Judge James C. Dever has dismissed a lawsuit by the N.C. Fisheries Association demanding that the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries either abandon all Incidental Take Permits regarding sea turtles or shut down recreational fishing until a similar plan can be applied to hook-and-line anglers.
In dismissing the complaint that was also brought by the N.C. Fisheries Association and the Carteret County Fisherman’s Association on behalf of all commercial fishermen in the state, Dever said the plaintiffs “lacked jurisdiction” to sue various state and federal agencies. This is legal wording that means neither of the two associations nor their members could offer an environmental or economic harm traceable to state and federal marine management policies.
Greg Hurt, chairman of the state’s Coastal Conservation Association, was pleased with the judge’s decision to dismiss the suit without going to trial. “While CCA was not a party to the lawsuit, we do represent thousands of recreational fishermen who could have been adversely affected had this specious suit gone forward. One of our primary goals is to protect the rights of the men, women, and kids who recreationally fish. This clearly unmerited claim would have severely impacted that goal.”
Hurt said, “Unfortunately, I don’t think a significant number of N.C. citizens realized what the NCFA was attempting to do. If successful they would have prevented families from enjoying one of our state’s favorite pastimes.” Businesses that provide goods and services to recreational fishermen would have been devastated if the suit had halted all hook-and-line angling, he added.
Dever, the chief judge for the U.S. Eastern District of North Carolina, in his 19-page order dismissing the suit on July 22, wrote, “Plaintiffs allege merely that NCFA and CCFA and its members have suffered injury to their economic and environmental interests, which are uniquely entwined with endangered and threatened sea turtles. The federal defendants argue that plaintiffs have not adequately alleged any valid injury-in-fact.”
Plaintiffs, meaning the associations, have not plausibly alleged either an economic or environmental injury sufficient to establishing standing in their own right, Dever wrote. “Plaintiffs’ conclusory allegation that they have suffered economic and environmental harm does not suffice.”
The associations also cannot establish representational standing, the judge continued. He did agree that the plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that their members have suffered economic harms but not an environmental injury. “The court will consider whether the economic injuries suffered by plaintiffs’ members are traceable to the challenged conduct and are likely to be redressed by a favorable decision by this court.”
Dever wrote that the plaintiffs have shown their members use the waters where sea turtles are allegedly being taken, but have not plausibly alleged that their members’ use of the waters is being “lessened by the challenged activity. Moreover, any claimed environmental injury due to the sea-turtle takings is not plausible in light of plaintiffs’ allegation that sea turtle populations are increasing and should be removed from the endangered species list. Thus, plaintiffs have not established traceability.”
As for plaintiffs’ argument that a favorable decision in this case could redress their members’ economic burdens, the judge called it “entirely speculative. The redressability prong requires that it be likely, and not merely speculative, that a favorable decision from the court will remedy the plaintiff’s injury.”
Dever noted nothing suggests that if sea turtle taking regulations were enforced on the recreational hook and line fishery, there would be a lessening of the commercial fishing industry’s regulatory burdens and compliance costs. He concluded, “The plaintiffs have failed to plausibly allege that the federal defendants are causing sea-turtle takings to be committed. Thus, the court grants the motions (from both federal and state defendants) to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.”
