One more article:
Agencies take aim at fish-gorging cormorants on Santee Cooper lakes
April 14, 2014 1:00 am • By MARY H. YARBOROUGH, T&D Correspondent(5) Comments
EUTAWVILLE — After an agonizingly long, raw winter, Lake Marion should be jammed with jon boats ferrying khaki-lidded men glaring across the deep, red waters in search of striped bass, crappie and perch.
But it’s not. Something is chasing away the fish and fouling up the once trophy-cup attraction for Lakes Marion and Moultrie.
Fishermen blame the double-crested cormorant, a gangly black, prehistoric-looking migratory bird, and have succeeded in getting the state to license folks to kill them.
Cormorants nest in the American Northeast and Canada, laying up to seven eggs, and fly south after September to roost up high in the trees to spot schools of shad, herring and most anything that swims, even if it’s too big to swallow.
“I definitely think (cormorants) are hurting our business,” says David Broome, a Eutawville resident and professional fishing guide of 20 years. “There’s zillion of them out there. Every year it gets worse and worse.”
Because the double-crested cormorant is a native migratory bird, it is a protected species and cannot be killed without federal permission.
The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources got permission from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last year under its depredation rule established in 2003 to manage with lethal force the overpopulation of the cormorants.
With less than half of the permitted hunters reporting by Thursday, at least 11,653 double-crested cormorants were killed or taken between Feb. 2 and March 1 under the federally-permitted order, said Derrell Shipes, a wildlife biologist and chief of DNR’s Wildlife Statewide Programs.
“This is a preliminary count. We’ve only got 40 percent of those permitted to take the cormorants reporting so far,” Shipes said. “But you couldn’t expect the numbers to increase exponentially based on the number of permits issued.”
To Broome and others who rely on a good stock of fish for a living, “They need to kill more.”
DNR issued 1,225 permits to those who were required to attend one of the three required training sessions held before February. Not everyone exercised their authority to kill the birds and 113 indicated they did not participate. Many others did not respond to follow-ups, Shipes said.
Broome was among those permitted who did not take any cormorants. “I was going to do it. A friend and I went for the training. We’d been cussing those damned birds for years,” he said. “But my buddy died right before the hunt so I didn’t go. Didn’t feel up to it.”
The biggest take was 278 by a South Carolina man whom Shipes declined to identify.
The FWS allows qualified states to target the cormorant using forceful or harassing measures to help control the population. States would have to demonstrate that the birds negatively impact natural resources, ecosystems, economy and quality of life, and provide a full report by the end of the year.
Wildlife groups complain that DNR lacked sufficient evidence to justify the kill. Broome and Shipes say the need was visibly evident.
Resting on a clear, bright afternoon clouded by another day with elusive fish, Broome was exhausted and almost discouraged. Catching a nap before he headed back out to guide his customers to a good hole, he expressed frustration with observations by wildlife groups.
To Broome and many like him, the cormorant migration seems more like an invasion that’s playing yearly in greater numbers.
“Last December, I heard of a good spot on the north side of the lake,” Broome said. “I went over there and those birds were so thick setting on the water that they must have covered an acre. They were chasing the fish, and you could see the fish hanging out of their mouths as they flew over. It’s taking a toll. It’s probably a combination of things; the cold weather, but I know the cormorants are a large part of it.”
The Audubon Society said DNR’s cormorant-taking action sets a bad precedence, adding that the mass killings weren’t scientifically indicated.
“The burden of proof is with the DNR, but where’s the evidence? Fisherman can’t admit they can’t catch fish so they blame it on the birds that they claim are eating all the fish,” said Norman Brunswig, S.C. Audubon Society state director. “What do you suppose could happen if these fishermen decided that bald eagles, ospreys and egrets were eating too many fish? There are a lot of species that eat fish. Are we going to take them out, too?”
Other groups are also calling for more scientific evidence to support claims before wildlife are killed.
The S.C. Wildlife Federation is seeking to make studies and public comment mandatory before any state agency takes action harming or killing animals.
“We would have appreciated an opportunity to comment on it before DNR made their decision. I didn’t learn of what DNR was planning until after they decided to issue kill permits,” said Ben Gregg, executive director of the S.C. chapter of the National Wildlife Federation. “I don’t think there was enough scientific evidence to support it.”
To Broome and his guide fishing colleagues, it’s a matter of common sense and an action that is long overdue.
FWS rules
Responsible agencies must initiate any control activities in a given year and provide a one-time written notice to the FWS Regional Migratory Bird Permit Office indicating their intent to act under the order, according to Carmen Simonton, Southeastern Region chief of the FWS Migratory Bird and Eagle Permit Office. She said states are not compelled to provide public hearings or scientific evidence other an assessment of damage and impacts on local communities’ life and economies and natural habitat.
A 30-day advance notice must be provided if the state agency plans to undertake a succession of actions intended to kill more than 10 percent of the double-crested cormorant breeding colony.
FWS may allow for actions in the following years under the initial request if the first takings failed to manage the cormorant population.
Wildlife groups are hoping to get their proposal to require public comment passed by the state’s Legislature, Gregg said.
