THE PARADOX IN BEING A FISHERMAN AND A CONSERVATIONIST

At a certain point, it becomes real hard to be both

By Capt. John McMurray

The Oxford dictionary defines “conservationist” as “a person who advocates or acts for the protection and preservation of the environment and wildlife.” 

I suppose I do consider myself a conservationist. Afterall, I’ve spent a significant amount of my adult years doing just that — marine wildlife if we’re being specific. 

While the words “conservationist” and “preservationist” are sometimes used interchangeably, they are indeed different.  The latter advocates no use, while the former advocates responsible/sustainable use.  

Clearly, I fall into the former.  Of course, I have a deep respect for the resource itself, as I believe most fishermen do, but I use (read kill) things… and cumulatively, as someone who spends most of their life underway (I’m a full-time guide), I probably kill a LOT more stuff than most.  

The truth is all anglers kill fish.  Even the folks who release everything (discard mortality exists in ALL fisheries).  Killing stuff, while certainly part of being a fisherman, is one thing, yet recklessly killing too much stuff is quite another. 

But listen, if we’re considering a real, non-egocentric, perhaps uncomfortable, definition of a conservationist, I’m pretty sure it doesn’t prioritize killing-things-for-sport.  

And that puts me and a lot of conservation-focused guides/anglers in a weird spot.

Reality

When you have to make sure to scrub behind your ears, lest you show up to dinner with blood behind them?  Well, you can understand that any use of the word “conservation” might elicit notions of hypocrisy.  As someone who sat behind the management table, as well as someone who’s spent decades promoting conservation of marine resources, I’ve amassed more than a few critics, and they are NOT shy about pointing such a contradiction out.    

Truth is, it’s not unusual for me to have three yellowfin on deck, tails beating rapidly, while I’m trying to bleed-out, core and ice three fish at the same time, face and arms spattered with blood. 

For sure though, some of us kill more than others.  But if it’s sustainable?  Well then, so what?  Does sustainability equal conservation?  And are we still conservationists, just because we say we are? 

Lately, the line between being a conservationist and NOT being one has become REALLY blurry in my mind. 

Motives 

No matter how many times you see it, it’s absolutely stunning when a humpback lunge-feeds 25 yards away from the boat.  Or, being in the middle of a striper blitz, putting the rods down and just watching; or seeing bluefish tailing in a foot-or-two of water; or a giant tuna airing out; or a big striper cruising the flats.  And then, there’s the ocean itself.  It’s extraordinary power and beauty, and the unreasonable sense of pure happiness I get from riding its energy on a surfboard. 

All of these things, while not directly related to sticking hooks in fish, hold immense value.   Because, well…because that kinda stuff is awesome. 

But while yes, I value these things, I probably wouldn’t have invested 9 years of my life on the Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Council or another 6 as a Legislative Proxy on the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, or pretty much my entire life since college in positions that either directly or indirectly sought to push a conservation agenda, if I didn’t actively hunt fish. 

Because when you get the sort of enjoyment, or I suppose in some extreme cases (like mine), “meaning”, out of something…and maybe even figure out that you can eke out a living doing it?  Well, especially if you’re Irish, with a quintessential sense of self-righteous anger and justice, you get pissed-off when you know something could be, or is destroying it, or like-wise on the other side of things, taking away access.  And, well, ya wanna do something about it! 

Fish in the water vs. fish on the dock

Anglers need fish in the water, A LOT of fish in the water, if we’re actually going to catch a few…because we suck at fishing.  And, that’s by choice.

We use the least efficient methods.  We don’t set traps, drag nets, soak gill nets, deploy purse-seins, or set out miles of baited hooks. It’s all rod and reel, and many of us use light-tackle.  In other words, we choose to make it even harder on ourselves by not trolling and using light gear with the intent of increasing the direct connection to the fish itself.  And, if we’re really dumb (and I am) we use fly-fishing gear.  And…there are a few of us stupid enough to think we can actually make a living running light-tackle charters. 

It’s true that people like us need abundance to be successful at the catching part. 

Self-interest would dictate that the more challenging it is, the more of a conservation slant you’re likely to have.  That’s because the more fish get taken out, the more it reduces opportunity.  Thus, it should be no surprise that the light-tackle/flyfishing folks, not to mention the surf fishing community, seem to be the most conservation oriented (i.e. focused on catch and release and in general, keeping more fish in the water).  

Yeah, there’s intrinsic value to marine wildlife.  And, sure, there are of non-fishers who have dedicated their lives/careers to the preservation of marine resources, simply for its intrinsic value.  But…there’s NOT a ton.  For me and I think for most people who get or have gotten deep into the management/conservation world, while we might have signed a petition or two, there’s no way we’d care as much as we do, or did all of the things we’ve done, if we didn’t have a vested, maybe enlightened, self-interest in protecting/conserving those marine resources. 

As terrible as this might sound, it’s true that I want/need there to be fish around – a LOT of fish – so it’s easier to find and kill them.  Or in some cases, torture and release them. 

Is that sort of thing valiant, virtuous, righteous? Or, is it simply self-gratification and, hell, by some measure, maybe even unethical? 

Maybe… but maybe it also makes us conservationists.  

User-groups and stakeholders

When I was younger, I had assumed that I was the one doing the right thing.  I was the righteous do-gooder trying to protect marine resources from those terrible fishermen raping the oceans.  And I guess, in the back of my mind, I still kinda think that.  Because, hell, conservation is better for everyone in the long run, right?

But come on man…the truth is that I was/I am trying to keep a few fish in the water so that I can get a crack at’em, and more so, so that I can take well-to-do anglers out to play with them.

The point is that anglers, even us light-tackle/conservation-minded folk, are simply one stakeholder amongst many, all of which have different goals.   While our goal is abundance and sustainable use, there are stakeholders who’s goal is abundance and no-use (i.e. preservationists).  On the other end of that spectrum are large-scale commercial fishing operations whose goal is maximum harvest. 

There are quite a few stakeholders in between, such as small-scale commercial harvesters and recreational folks who prioritize harvest.  But, with the exception of the sliver of folks who want to end all use, just about all stakeholders believe in sustainable use. There aren’t ANY stakeholders who want to fish themselves out of business. Even those folks who represent large scale harvesters believe there should be some oversight (i.e. quotas, regulations etc.).   

Does that make all fishermen conservationists?  I guess to some extent it does, but if the goal is maximum extraction, it’s hard to believe that there’s a real conservation aspect there.  Certainly, those harvest-focused stakeholders wouldn’t call themselves conservationists. 

Behind the helm vs. behind the laptop

It’s easy to be a real conservationist if you spend most of your life behind a computer.  Maybe a little bit harder, but not much, if you fish a few times a year, or even a day or two a week.  You can be REAL critical of all those guys trying to make a living and feel self-righteous and good about yourself. 

But if you spend real time on the water, whether it’s for work or play, it’s a hell of a lot more difficult.  Because you’re definitely killing things, in some cases a LOT of things. Unless you’ve developed refined denial skills, it’s hard to NOT recognize that, because it’s in your face all the time.  Even if you’re releasing everything, ya gut or gill-hook a few, sometimes more than a few, and while I often say “crabs gotta eat too” it still doesn’t feel right.  And if you’re a charter captain, even a light-tackle one, you’re still gonna get guys who want to take the “limit” home.

Yes, occasionally my conscience bothers me.  Especially, but not limited to, the guy who wants to take a few hundred pounds of yellowfin home when you KNOW he’s not gonna eat it all, or even be able to give it all away.  You can advise against that sort of thing, and I frequently do.  And sometimes you can just say no, which I’ve certainly done on more than one occasion.  But even if they don’t keep a limit, it’s hard to feel like it ain’t “too much” sometimes. 

It’s definitely harder to call yourself a conservationist when you’re killing stuff regularly, even if you’ve spent most of your adult life advocating for “abundance”, which generally comes from not killing, or at least killing less.  And sometimes, the hypocrisy feels pretty real, and, well, it’s hard to not feel like you’re maybe part of the problem. 

But…let’s get one thing straight here.  Conservationist or not…it’ll be a cold day in hell when I give up fishing, or fishing for a living for that matter.    

I mean, like I said.  The whole idea is to preserve and protect/conserve fisheries and habitat so that I (we) can have opportunities to catch them and, yes, in many cases kill them. 

And THAT is a HUGE paradox. 

Taking fishermen out of the equation

Fishing is REAL important to me.  Not just on a recreational level, but on an existential one. Not only do I make a living from fishing, but it has become part of who I am.  It’s one of the larger pieces that gives my life purpose and meaning.  And, it’s that sort of valued importance is what ultimately leads to engagement in the conservation and management of marine resources. 

While I may be an extreme example, there are plenty of others this applies to.  People that didn’t want to see their fisheries disappear because of overfishing, habitat degradation etc.  And on a lesser level, there are likely hundreds of thousands of anglers who are simply “concerned” about the fisheries they prosecute, even though it’s simply recreation to them.  While they may not engage on a high level, plenty of them do engage (i.e. give testimony at hearings, write letters to managers etc., or simply support conservation causes by volunteering or providing donations). 

Historically it’s been hunters/anglers that have driven conservation campaigns.  Because they REALLY give a crap… certainly more than the part of the population that doesn’t hunt and/or fish.

Absolutely, there are, and have always been ENGOs (Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations) who focus on marine issues, advocating for reduced harvest and/or habitat protection.  But in my experience, those organizations change their campaigns regularly.  And while an ENGO may be engaged in the management of a particular fishery, they could be, and often are out of it, with very little warning, because of board preference, funding issues etc. 

The point here is that it’s the fishermen that consistently seem to be engaged.  And it’s hard to believe some fisheries would be where they are now without them. 

Of course, when you take that sort of “enlightened-self-interest” out of the equation, it’s difficult to believe there wouldn’t be rollbacks.  When you have stakeholders that simply want to maximize harvest, without those on the other side who want “abundance”, then you would expect managers to allow more extraction and the expense of conservation. 

So why am I writing this now?

Because I’m confused. 

Since I was old enough to hold a rod, I’ve fished for and killed fish. What started with bluegills culminated in bluefin.  Once I got into the tuna side of things, and once I made the choice to go full-time, for better or worse, that killing increased.  Still, my/our goal is, and always has been abundance, and I certainly did my part in the trenches working for that.

Yes, my motives were self-serving, or “community-serving” at best. Yet, I’ve aways believed that this made me and everyone else who shared my view a “conservationist”.    

But, I’ve begun to question whether that term fits anymore. 

What initially spawned that train of thought?

A few years ago, the Feds issued a proposed rule which would implement a 10mph speed restriction on boats over 35’ to protect endangered right-whales, which would greatly restrict my access to tuna during a few prime months, while likely not saving a single whale.  Of course, I LOVE whales!  But I dunno that I’d willingly give up tuna fishing when there’s about as much of a chance of me hitting a right-whale as there is winning the lottery.

Ultimately/thankfully, that proposed rule was thrown out.

More recently, however, is the emergence of “no-targeting closures” to address discard mortality in the recreational striped bass fishery.  In other words, you couldn’t even be out there targeting them.  A catch-and-release striped bass fishery is real important to my business and, well, my life. 

A clear tenant of the “enlightened self-interest” conservation movement is that if we put the resource first, it would subsequently take care of us.  But as management tools like “no-targeting closures” get a foothold, well, I’m not so sure that’s the case anymore. 

While I absolutely believe in science-based conservation measures, what I don’t believe in, and frankly what my brain can’t really get ahold of, are measures that could and maybe will take the folks, who have always put conservation-first, off the water, particularly when such measures don’t even seem to have much of a conservation benefit (in the case of no-targeting closures they are literally unenforceable).   

Sure, I want what’s best for the fish.  But, I’ll be real honest here…NOT at the expense of not being able to fish at all.  I mean, come on man…what’s the value of “conservation” to a fisherman, if there’s no access?

And really… once you remove anglers, particularly those conservation-minded ones, from the equation, then you lose a critical part of the conservation community. 

And at that point?  It’s not unreasonable to think that eventually, it won’t be a matter of access, it’ll be a matter of whether or not there are enough fish around anymore to target. 

Am I a conservationist? 

Well, I really don’t know anymore. 

What I do know is that I haven’t given up on conservationist ideals.  Because, as a guide/angler, we don’t have opportunity without abundance.  And conservation is required to achieve abundance, and ultimately access. 

When you take away any part of that equation, it all falls apart.

While it may be paranoia, and perhaps an over-exaggeration on my part, it does seem that in recent years maybe we’re moving toward “preservationist” ideals and away from conservationist ones. And that really bothers me.

I’ll acknowledge that my point-of-view/my-opinion on all of this is extremely bias, because much of my life depends on access.  And that maybe, in the end, when you take away what’s clearly self-interest, conservation and the existence of marine resources are WAY more important than access in the grand scheme. 

I really just don’t believe that we can’t have both (i.e. conservation and reasonable access).  

I think that we really HAVE to have both…

Capt. McMurray is the owner of One More Cast Charters in Oceanside NY.  He served three terms on the Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 6 years as NY’s legislative proxy at ASMFC, and was a founder and past president of the American Saltwater Guides Association. 

Note: A shorter version of this piece “Blood on my Hands” was published in Anglers Journal, Spring 2025 Edition. https://anglersjournal.com/saltwater/blood-on-my-hands/