BY NICOLE BOWMAN-LAYTON

RALEIGH — Hundreds of commercial fishermen, scientists, and lawmakers gathered at the North Carolina Legislative Building on Tuesday, voicing strong opposition to a surprise Senate amendment to House Bill 442 that would effectively ban shrimp trawling in the state’s inland waters — a move critics say would devastate an already struggling coastal industry.

The House Republican Caucus was to scheduled to take up the bill on Tuesday. However, according to sources in Raleigh, the Caucus did not take up HB 442, but will take it up on Wednesday.

NC Catch is a nonprofit working to bring together commerical fishers, consumers, deafood dealers and scientist to learn from each other and keep North Carolina seafood on the tables. On Facebook, the organization said it believes it had the votes to kill the bill but certain members, backed by special interests, argued to delay the vote in order to give proponents of the bill another day to lobby for the bill.

Those opposing the bill were asked to return to Raleigh on Wednesday to convince the House to oppose HB442.

Hosted by Rep. Ed Goodwin (R-Chowan), a press conference Tuesday served as a unified show of force against the amendment, which was added to the bill during the 11th hour last week in the Senate. Speakers included both Republican and Democratic legislators, marine scientists, and longtime shrimpers—many of whom said the ban would destroy livelihoods and was rushed without proper scientific backing.

“This amendment came out of the blue,” he said. “It skips past the scientific report the General Assembly itself commissioned. This isn’t just about shrimping — it’s about families, jobs, and an entire way of life on the coast.”

Shrimpers Speak Out

Mallette also pointed to declining seafood processing infrastructure in the region, noting, “It’s not that the fish are gone—it’s that the jobs are being regulated out of existence.”

Glenn Skinner, executive director of the NCFA, echoed those concerns.

“This is not how sound fisheries management is done,” Skinner said. “We are not against regulation — we are against backroom deals and policy based on politics, not facts.”

Skinner emphasized that the state’s shrimping fleet is already tightly regulated with gear restrictions, closed seasons, and protected zones.

Scientists Urge a Data-Driven Approach

Lupton noted that there are a lot of smaller trawlers in fisheries.

“If this passes, small trawlers such as those in Pamlico County will have to spend hours travelling to the inlet,” Lupton said. “They’ll have to either steam 55 miles this way or 42 miles this way to even get to the inlet. That costs money. That will get into their profit margin.”

Lupton said trawling and other commercial fishing can exist together.

“Fisheries management is complex,” Lupton said. “… They need to be evaluated and managed through the prescribed Fishers Reform Act by the agencies or commissions that were charged with that. There is no evidence that a wholesale ban on the inshore trawling will improve the stocks.”

Reprensetative Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford), who put on a “Stop the Shrimp Trawling Ban” shirt prior to taking the podium,” went to the coast a lot as a child and fell in love with the culture heritage of the ment and women lifving off the sea. She is a member of many environmental and scientific boards.

She noted that the legislature should not be dealing with thhis allocation issue, as it it not equiped to do so.

“These are more suitably dealt with by the agencies, ith the Fisheries Reform Act in 1997, we put together stakeholder committees. We have fishers. … We have recreational coastal scientists, agency folks. Those are the ones that should be making these decisions. They shouldn’t get up here where it’s completely political,” Harrison said. “I can’t assert that strongly enough because having stakeholder input is how you get to a good decision, not dropping a bomb on a bill that has hardly been considered and hasn’t included the public that needs to weigh in and the stakeholders that were most most impacted by this bill.”

Bipartisan Backlash

Opposition to the amendment spanned the political spectrum, with lawmakers from coastal regions warning of widespread economic fallout.

“The shrimping industry pumps millions into our economy,” said Rep. Celeste Cairns (R-Carteret). “This ban would gut small towns, hurt working families, and eliminate a core part of our identity.”

Rep. Carson Smith (R-Pender) said the ban would eliminate hundreds of jobs in his district, including shrimpers, dock workers, and seafood processors.

“This isn’t just a regulation—it’s a death sentence for entire communities,” Smith said.

Kidwell Delivers Fiery Rebuttal

Closing the press conference was Rep. Keith Kidwell (R-Beaufort), whose coastal district includes Beaufort, Hyde, Dare, and Pamlico counties — home to many of North Carolina’s remaining shrimpers.

“Shrimping is not a career. It’s a way of life,” Kidwell said. “Hyde County told me this bill would put them in financial peril. Twenty percent of the population there relies directly on shrimping — not fishing — shrimping.”

In a speech laced with humor and fire, Kidwell mocked the backroom nature of the amendment, questioned its timing ahead of a pending legislative study, and warned against killing off a centuries-old industry with the stroke of a pen.

“We don’t flip a switch on an industry,” he said. “Because if we do it on shrimping, what’s next? Gas stations? Dry cleaners?”

He likened legislative sneak tactics to horror film villains:

“Bills in this building are like Freddy Krueger — once you think they’re dead, they come back to life. We’re going to spike this bill and drive a stake through its heart.”

Kidwell ended by urging his colleagues not to sponsor or support the ban.

“I’ve gotten thousands of calls and emails begging us not to destroy their livelihoods,” he said. “This is where we make our stand — for the coast, for the working people, and for common sense.”

Next Steps

House Bill 441 — an accompanying bill allocating funds to compensate shrimpers to change their profession — reportedly lost its primary sponsors. Without sponsors, the bill can not move forward.

Whether the trawl ban amendment survives conference committee negotiations remains to be seen.