THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, December 17, 1995 TAG: 9512170074
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY SCOTT HARPER, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Medium: 66 lines
Virginia is threatening to quit. So is North Carolina. Florida simply stopped paying its dues.
And other Atlantic coastal states are upset, too - all over a small agency in Washington that controls valuable fish stocks in state waters, measured from oceanfronts to 3 miles offshore.
The object of their scorn is the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, started in 1942 as a gentlemanly panel to coordinate fishing policies in 15 states, from Maine to Florida.
For years, commission members simply advised governments. They recommended management plans and catch limits that states could follow - or ignore - without penalty.
But in 1993 that role changed dramatically when Congress passed a law requiring states to abide by rules adopted by the ASMFC. Failure to comply can lead to the U.S. secretary of commerce barring certain fishing.
With the stakes higher for each state, critics charge, politics and regional alliances now dominate policy-making even more than usual, with the results often making little sense.
North Carolina fishermen, for example, are livid that Massachusetts and New Jersey can band together to maintain a healthy quota for catching bluefish, even though the species is caught only a few months in the North Atlantic.
``What does that have to do with conservation?'' fumed Willie Etheridge III, general manager of Etheridge Seafood in Wanchese, N.C. ``It's become a game, like trading horses or something.''
The intent of the law was better conservation of dwindling fish stocks. The perception, however, was more federal trampling of states' rights.
Commercial fishermen picked up on this anti-federal beat and began demanding that their states consider leaving the commission in protest. A rebellion had begun.
Etheridge, for example, minces few words when discussing the commission.
``The damned thing's a travesty, a joke, a waste of time and money,'' he said. ``I've told every elected official I know to get us out of that thing and disband it.''
So far, the politicians seem to be listening. In Raleigh this year, North Carolina approved a bill to study leaving the commission. A recommendation is expected in May.
And in Richmond last winter, Virginia overwhelmingly passed a bill sponsored by environmental advocate Del. W. Tayloe Murphy Jr. to withdraw from the commission in July 1996.
John H. Dunnigan, ASMFC's executive director, is unfazed by such criticism.
``It's like a family of 15 trying to argue over the family's heirlooms,'' he said. ``Some members always feel like they're getting a raw deal. It's just particularly loud right now.''
Quitting the commission would not excuse a state from still complying with ASMFC's rules, Dunnigan said. For that reason, Bruce Freeman, North Carolina's director of fisheries, opposes his state's exit.
But Jack Travelstead, director of Virginia's fisheries, is not so sure.
While he sees the importance of remaining a player at the ASMFC table, Travelstead said the more states that protest, the more likely the commission will let states again tailor fishing plans to their specific needs.
``I don't like the ASMFC coming down and telling us what to do,'' he said. ``And I think they're realizing they need to tone it down a little.'' by CNB