Post by hookedup on Dec 31, 2021 11:59:36 GMT -5
I got this article from North Carolina Coastal Conservation. Hard to believe the state took the position they are not responsible to manage fisheries for the today or the future. Guess it's typical government, send me money and let me spend how I like, constitution be damned. Maybe those from NC should contact their representatives and voice their opinion.
In November 2020, a group of 86 North Carolina citizens and the Coastal Conservation Association of North Carolina filed a lawsuit to hold the State of North Carolina accountable for the decades-long, chronic decline in North Carolina's coastal-fisheries resources. The lawsuit describes how the State has failed to meet one of its core responsibilities: managing and preserving North Carolina's coastal fisheries resources for the benefit of current and future generations.
In the Court's first decision in the case, the Court on March 31, 2020, denied a motion to intervene as a defendant party filed by the North Carolina Fisheries Association, a trade association for the commercial fishing industry. In denying that motion, the Court agreed with the 86 North Carolina citizens and the CCA NC that the only proper defendant in the lawsuit is the State, and that the commercial fishing industry did not have any right to intervene in the case.
CCA NC's General Counsel, Dr. Tim Nifong, commented on the ruling. "We are pleased with the Court's decision, which faithfully tracks North Carolina precedent. As the Court's decision reflects, only the State can defend claims that it has failed to meet its public-trust and constitutional obligations, which go to the very heart of public rights and proper public resource management in a democracy."
The State responded to the lawsuit in January 2021 by filing a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims. Among the State's various arguments for dismissal, it asked the Court to give it immunity from lawsuits of this kind. The State also denied that it had any responsibility to hold in trust and manage coastal fisheries resources for the benefit of its current and future citizens. The Wake County Superior Court considered hundreds of pages of materials and held a two-hour hearing on the State's motion on June 9, 2021. On July 28, the Court issued an order rejecting each and every one of the State's arguments. The State is now seeking to appeal that ruling.
A number of observers were surprised by the State's position in response to the lawsuit. "For the State to argue in court that it has no responsibility for preserving our coastal fisheries is deeply concerning," said Bert Owens, Chairman of the Coastal Conservation Association of North Carolina's Board of Directors. "By taking this approach, the State has made this about something larger than the documented decline of our coastal fisheries under its management. There is a fundamental disagreement here about the relationship that we, as citizens, have with our government, and the government's responsibility to ensure that we have natural resources like fish and wildlife to pass along to future generations."
Professor Joseph Kalo, the Graham Kenan Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law, offered the following: "The State's assertion that it does not have an enforceable, affirmative obligation to manage North Carolina fisheries for the long-term public good flies in the face of the clear language of the North Carolina Constitution, Article 1, Section 38, which states that the right to fish shall be forever preserved for the public good. The State's position would make the constitutional right to fish meaningless. Surely the voters in 2018, who by a wide margin approved this amendment to the Constitution, believed that the right to fish meant something more than the right to wet a hook. Preserving the right necessarily implies an obligation to use sound science to secure, protect, and manage the health of fishery resources for the long-term public good."
Notably, the group of 86 citizen plaintiffs in the case includes five former members of the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission, a state government commission responsible for fisheries management. Mac Currin, one of the five former state officials who joined the lawsuit as a plaintiff, commented that he was "grateful for the Court's ruling, which puts us closer to ensuring that sustainable coastal fisheries will be there for our children and grandchildren."
On December 9th, our legal team received the State's brief on their appeal and has been preparing our response which is due to the Court of Appeals on February 9, 2022. We are also recruiting amicus parties to provide friend of the court briefs in support of our position. We already have commitments from several other conservation groups, and we are excited about our position going into a hearing before the NC Court of Appeals next year.
In the Court's first decision in the case, the Court on March 31, 2020, denied a motion to intervene as a defendant party filed by the North Carolina Fisheries Association, a trade association for the commercial fishing industry. In denying that motion, the Court agreed with the 86 North Carolina citizens and the CCA NC that the only proper defendant in the lawsuit is the State, and that the commercial fishing industry did not have any right to intervene in the case.
CCA NC's General Counsel, Dr. Tim Nifong, commented on the ruling. "We are pleased with the Court's decision, which faithfully tracks North Carolina precedent. As the Court's decision reflects, only the State can defend claims that it has failed to meet its public-trust and constitutional obligations, which go to the very heart of public rights and proper public resource management in a democracy."
The State responded to the lawsuit in January 2021 by filing a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims. Among the State's various arguments for dismissal, it asked the Court to give it immunity from lawsuits of this kind. The State also denied that it had any responsibility to hold in trust and manage coastal fisheries resources for the benefit of its current and future citizens. The Wake County Superior Court considered hundreds of pages of materials and held a two-hour hearing on the State's motion on June 9, 2021. On July 28, the Court issued an order rejecting each and every one of the State's arguments. The State is now seeking to appeal that ruling.
A number of observers were surprised by the State's position in response to the lawsuit. "For the State to argue in court that it has no responsibility for preserving our coastal fisheries is deeply concerning," said Bert Owens, Chairman of the Coastal Conservation Association of North Carolina's Board of Directors. "By taking this approach, the State has made this about something larger than the documented decline of our coastal fisheries under its management. There is a fundamental disagreement here about the relationship that we, as citizens, have with our government, and the government's responsibility to ensure that we have natural resources like fish and wildlife to pass along to future generations."
Professor Joseph Kalo, the Graham Kenan Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law, offered the following: "The State's assertion that it does not have an enforceable, affirmative obligation to manage North Carolina fisheries for the long-term public good flies in the face of the clear language of the North Carolina Constitution, Article 1, Section 38, which states that the right to fish shall be forever preserved for the public good. The State's position would make the constitutional right to fish meaningless. Surely the voters in 2018, who by a wide margin approved this amendment to the Constitution, believed that the right to fish meant something more than the right to wet a hook. Preserving the right necessarily implies an obligation to use sound science to secure, protect, and manage the health of fishery resources for the long-term public good."
Notably, the group of 86 citizen plaintiffs in the case includes five former members of the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission, a state government commission responsible for fisheries management. Mac Currin, one of the five former state officials who joined the lawsuit as a plaintiff, commented that he was "grateful for the Court's ruling, which puts us closer to ensuring that sustainable coastal fisheries will be there for our children and grandchildren."
On December 9th, our legal team received the State's brief on their appeal and has been preparing our response which is due to the Court of Appeals on February 9, 2022. We are also recruiting amicus parties to provide friend of the court briefs in support of our position. We already have commitments from several other conservation groups, and we are excited about our position going into a hearing before the NC Court of Appeals next year.