a c k talk 



Coastwatch wants to hear from you 

 on topics relating to the North Carolina 

 coast. Letters should be no longer than 

 250 words and should contain the 

 author's name, address and telephone 

 number. Letters may be edited for style. 

 Send all correspondence to Coastwatch, 

 UNC Sea Grant, Box 8605, N.C. State 

 University, Raleigh, NC 27695. 

 Opinions expressed on this page are not 

 necessarily those of UNC Sea Grant 

 employees and staff. 



Renewing Coastwatch 



I want you to know that I really love 

 the CoastH'atch. I look forward to 

 getting it. It's extremely interesting. I 

 love it, and I am sending a check for 

 another year's subscription. 



Tony E. Bone, Durham, N.C. 



Thanks for the kind note on your 

 subscription renewal form. We appreci- 

 ate you and many of our other readers 

 renewing your subscriptions. Beginning 

 a magazine is a scaiy business. We 

 weren't sure if we could attract enough 

 subscribers to support our efforts. 

 Luckily we did. Then it came time for 

 most of you to renew your subscrip- 

 tions. Again, we were nervous because 

 we saw your renewals as a confirma- 

 tion that you liked what you were 

 reading and seeing in Coastwatch. Most 

 of you have renewed, and many readers 

 wrote nice notes of thanks and encour- 

 agement. We appreciate all of your 

 comments, and we look forward to 

 another year of providing you with 

 information about our wonderful coast. 



No More Coastwatch 



I am sorry, but we'll no longer 

 subscribe. I enjoyed Coastwatch over 

 many years. Its few typed, stapled pages 

 were vital, of meaningful content and 

 often amateurish, but very much to the 

 point. 



The new Coastwatch I find of little 



interest and minimal content — its 

 conservation and ongoing consciousness 

 replaced by glossy covers with empha- 

 sis on layout and format at the expense 

 of content. 



Who wants food recipes, especially 

 a vegetarian like me? With the cost now 

 for a subscription and the apparent 

 move of Coastwatch into a popular 

 press goal, I believe it is drifting into a 

 waste of resources for catering to the 

 masses and is fast losing the critical 

 objective of its important original 

 mission. I'm gone. 



Sorry, 



Lewis Clarke, Raleigh, N.C. 



We re sorry to lose you too, Lewis. 

 But there are a few things I have to say 

 to refute your comments. First, 

 Coastwatch was never typed, stapled 

 and amateurish. As a newsletter, it was 

 typeset, rarely stapled and profession- 

 ally designed. In fact, the newsletter 

 won several awards for its all-around 

 professionalism — writing, editing, 

 design, photography and printing. 



As far as the content is concerned, 

 we have added pages and tried even 

 harder to provide our readers with 

 meaningful content. We write our 

 stories, then design the magazine. 

 Consequently, the content dictates the 

 design and not vice versa. 



Many of the changes in the maga- 

 zine are those requested by our readers. 

 In our last survey, readers told us 

 emphatically that they wanted more 

 pages, more color and larger photo- 

 graphs. We have tried to accommodate 

 those requests when possible. We added 

 pages and a color cover. However, the 

 inside pages, or guts, of the magazine 

 are still printed in two colors just like 

 the old newsletter. And the photographs 

 are larger only when we don't write too 

 much copy, which isn't often enough, 

 our designer says. 



I have seiyed as the editor of the 



newsletter and the magazine, and our 

 focus at Sea Grant has not changed. We 

 still strive to provide our readers with 

 information that will help them make 

 better decisions about the use of coastal 

 resources. 



Kathy Hart, Editor 



Finfish Excluders 



The phone has been ringing off the 

 hook at the Sea Grant Marine Advisory 

 Service offices as fishermen call to learn 

 more about finfish excluder devices. 

 Called a variety of names — Florida 

 fish separators, snake eyes, fish shooters 

 and BRDs — the finfish excluder devices 

 will soon become a required part of 

 shrimping in North Carolina waters 

 when a new proclamation takes effect 

 Oct. 2. 



When fishermen call about the finfish 

 excluders, Sea Grant Agent Jim Bahen 

 has some answers. UNC Sea Grant was 

 one of the first to research the use of 

 finfish excluders, and Bahen began a 

 pilot project this spring to test several 

 designs. Commercial fishermen from 

 Dare to Brunswick counties stepped 

 forward to install the excluders in their 

 nets and test the results. The devices, 

 which come in a variety of sizes, shapes 

 and configurations, are installed around 

 a hole in the tailbag of a shrimp net, 

 Bahen says. They allow finfish to escape 

 while shrimp are pushed into the tailbag. 

 So far, fishermen have told Bahen they 

 like the excluders because they increase 

 towing times, decrease culling and make 

 for a better quality shrimp catch that 

 isn't mashed into the tailbag by larger 

 fish. As of Oct. 2, the N.C. Division of 

 Marine Fisheries will begin requiring 

 shrimpers to use the excluders in all state 

 waters. To find out more about the 

 regulations, contact the Division of 

 Marine Fisheries at 919/726-7021. To 

 learn more about making and installing 

 fish excluder devices, contact Bahen at 

 919/458-5498. 



24 SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 1992 



