Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Red Snapper Efp topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears plan for a limited red snapper exempted permit; commissioners warn of capacity and equity concerns
Summary
Staff said North Carolina submitted an exempted fishing permit application for red snapper to begin testing state management and data collection, proposing a two‑month July–August season with a 100‑angler lottery; commissioners raised concerns about limited access, data utility and potential political backlash.
Division staff updated the commission on a North Carolina application for an exempted fishing permit (EFP) to allow limited recreational access to red snapper in federal waters for data collection and state testing.
Director Rawls said the application was submitted Nov. 10 by North Carolina as one of four South Atlantic states pursuing EFPs. For North Carolina’s proposal, staff recommended a roughly July 1–Aug. 31 season, hook‑and‑line only with a one‑fish per‑person daily limit, and participation limited to about 100 anglers due to staffing and capacity constraints. Rawls said the state is pursuing the EFP to test state management and to collect enhanced data that could inform future assessment and management.
"It is a very two‑month season… basically July 1 through August 31 with the one fish per person per day hook and line," Rawls said. "We're still working out whether it will be lottery or first‑come; we haven't figured that out yet."
Commissioners acknowledged the potential for improved data but warned that a 100‑angler cap would be perceived as inequitable and could inflame stakeholders. One commissioner noted other states’ EFPs would allow broader access and suggested restricting North Carolina to a small lottery could create political and distributional problems.
"I think this exempted fishing permit is going to upset a lot of people… North Carolina's EFP is a lottery for 100 people in the state to potentially fish for red snapper," a commissioner said, urging the division to seek resources to broaden access if possible.
Staff responded that the proposal reflects resource realities; a larger participation program requires more funding and personnel. Rawls said the division hopes the EFP will produce improved real‑time reporting and management lessons that could be applied to other species if the pilot is successful.
The commission discussed the politics of differing state approaches and the risk that inconsistent state programs could complicate regional quota allocations if access is unequal across states. No final commission vote on program design occurred; staff said they will return with more details when available and that the EFP process includes a federal notice and comment period once the application is deemed complete.
