More detailed coverage on what potential Marine Protected Area additions would mean for anglers and others in the Lowcountry.
Federal regulators are looking at further restricting bottom fishing offshore in the Southeast by expanding a series of Marine Protected Areas where the fishing is not allowed.
Marine Protected Areas
WHAT’S HAPPENING: The regional regulating council for federal fishing laws is considering adding to Marine Protected Areas, offshore preserves where some types of fishing are banned. The council is meeting this week in Charleston.
WHERE: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council meeting, Charleston Marriott Hotel, 140 Lockwood Blvd.
WHAT NOW: A council committee is expected to vote Wednesday whether to recommend an amendment that would entail starting the process to consider the MPA additions. Full council is expected to vote Thursday or Friday.
WHAT NEXT: If the go-ahead is approved, specific proposals would go to informal public hearings in early 2014.
WHAT TO DO: MPAs can be discussed at an informal question and answer session 5:30 p.m. Wednesday. A formal public hearing on amendments up for council vote takes place at 4:30 p.m. Thursday.
That means putting more snapper and grouper off limits — the popular restaurant plate catches already under a series of restrictions. It’s been proposed as a method to protect the speckled hind and Warsaw grouper, two of those fish said to be in serious decline.
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council will decide whether to move ahead with proposals that could increase the MPA areas from 785 square miles to 1,093 square miles. Existing areas would be realigned to protect more prime spawning grounds along the edge of the Continental Shelf. It wouldn’t end offshore fishing for those species; anglers could still bottom-fish around those grounds. But the grounds include such marquee spots off South Carolina as the Georgetown Hole and Edisto Banks.
Some recreational and commercial anglers also are worried about earlier proposals that would also ban in the areas “trolling,” or fishing for popular surface catch, such as dolphinfish, wahoo or marlin.
Council members, meeting this week at the Charleston Marriott, have said they will not consider those options. But they will be part of a committee discussion, at least. That has spurred widely disseminated outrage among anglers.
Some commercial anglers say even adding to the bottom ban is likely not necessary given other protections, and the council hasn’t done the studies on whether current restrictions are working, that would show whether it’s needed.
The proposal is “a misguided reaction to radical environmental groups that are pushing for extraordinary and unjustifiable protections for two deep-water grouper species,” said Tom Swatzel, a Murrells Inlet deep-sea charter fisherman who is a former council member.
Leda Dunmire, of the PEW Charitable Trusts, one of the premier conservationist groups battling for the proposal, is frank, saying the additions would further protect not only those two species but others.
“It’s a means to an end,” she said. “Get more fish out there for more people to go fishing. Let’s use every tool in the book.”
A council committee is expected to vote by Wednesday whether to recommend to the full council an amendment that would give a formal go-ahead for the plan. The full council will vote Thursday or Friday. If the committee makes the recommendation, the public will have two chances to comment, Wednesday and Thursday, before the final council vote.
Reach Bo Petersen at 937-5744, @bopete on twitter or Bo Petersen Reporting on Facebook.
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.