We welcome letters to the editor’s desk on any topic. Our ideal length is around 400 words or less, but if they need to be a little longer, that’s fine. We reserve the right to edit or add context when necessary. We ask that submissions come with your name and where you live (no street address necessary, just your neighborhood, town, city, etc.). Criticisms are welcome, but we ask you to try to keep it civil.
Send your letter to BSchachtman@whqr.org — or by mail, if you're old school, to WHQR Public Media 254 N. Front Street, Suite 300, Wilmington, NC 28401.
This edition’s letter comes from New Orleans Chef Dana Honn, chef and co-owner of Nikkei Izakaya and Tempero’s Kitchen, founder of the Louisiana Shrimp Festival & Shrimp Aid, and co-founder of Porgy’s Seafood Market.
He’s responding to last week’s letter from Wilmington’s Chef Dean Neff about transparency and supply-chain challenges for local shrimp, and what he felt The New York Times got wrong about those issues in its recent article by food writer Brett Anderson. (This will make more sense if you read Neff’s piece, which you can find here.)
Note: While we usually focus on local voices and issues, Chef Honn reached out and asked if he could share his perspective. Given his advocacy for local seafood and the local shrimp industry in Louisiana, it seemed relevant.
***
I want to commend Chef Neff for his ongoing efforts to support local shrimpers. He’s right that sourcing local seafood—or anything local, for that matter—is not always easy. It requires trust at multiple points along the journey from the boat to the plate. North Carolina presents its own challenges, of course, but many of the issues facing domestic wild-caught shrimpers are shared across the Gulf and Atlantic coasts. I also recognize that our intentions are likely similar in supporting our local fisherfolk and producers in ways which are sustainable for the future. In that spirit, I’d like to offer some perspective on a few points raised.
First, regarding the testing methodology cited in the article: the data and methods used by SeaD are publicly available upon request. My restaurant has been tested, and I fully understand the desire for transparency. Ideally, we'd see randomized, ongoing testing conducted by state health departments or regulatory agencies—that would provide an even clearer picture of who is serving what. But would those results differ meaningfully from SeaD’s findings? No, chances are they wouldn’t
Much of the criticism in response to Brett Anderson’s reporting has centered on the idea that restaurants caught mislabeling may have been victims of fraud further up the supply chain. While mislabeling at the distributor level does happen on occasion, it is far less common than misrepresentation at the restaurant level. Still, if a restaurant claims they were misled by a supplier, that should be investigated thoroughly. And if in fact one of the restaurants tested turned out to be an actual victim of illegal distribution—an outcome that underscores the value of testing — that restaurant would likely receive community support and business for being fraud victims themselves, for their honesty and vigilance.
As for restaurants that do source wild shrimp but weren’t included on the “good” list, there’s a tremendous opportunity here to stand in solidarity with local fishers and help educate consumers. Start the conversation. Let diners know why it’s important to ask, “Where’s this shrimp from?”
I can’t speak directly to the difficulties of sourcing North Carolina-caught shrimp, but I know it’s not an either/or choice between local and imported farmed. Wild-caught American shrimp is available throughout the country, including through distributors in North Carolina. The choice is not just NC vs. imported—it’s domestic vs. foreign, and in most cases, wild vs. industrially farmed.
The painful truth is that time is running out for our shrimpers. They’ve been taking on water for years, undermined by the flood of cheap, subsidized, sometimes toxic imported shrimp. There has been far too little meaningful response from government, industry, and yes — even chefs.
The good news is that change can come quickly when the issue is finally brought to light. In regions where testing has occurred, we’ve already seen more restaurants sourcing local, more transparency, and even a slight rebound in dock prices. The truth can be uncomfortable, but sometimes it takes a shock to the system to wake people up.
In Louisiana—and across much of the U.S.—shrimping is more than a job. It’s the foundation of entire communities, economies, and ways of life. If we lose our shrimpers, we lose a critical piece of our culture. We need everyone—government officials, seafood companies, restaurants, markets and consumers—to care as much about saving our fisheries as they do about protecting their margins.
***
Shortly after I heard from Chef Honn, I heard about a surprise amendment added by the state Senate to House Bill 442, which originally proposed a four-year pilot program to expand the recreational season for flounder and red snapper. (And if you haven’t heard about how contentious that kind of thing can be, check out this edition of The Newsroom, which we titled, I think fittingly, “Fish Wars.”)
The amendment was about shrimp, not fish, essentially banning inshore trawling – that is, casting nets for shrimp within a half-mile of the coast. That’s where three-quarters of local North Carolina shrimp are harvested, according to industry groups.
Supporters of the bill say it will protect the juvenile fish nurseries in the Pamlico Sound – where nearly half of the state’s 6.5 million pounds of shrimp, worth an estimated $14.1 million, are caught. A 2024 research report highlighted the importance of the sound, which is home to dozens of fish species, and noting that 90% of the commercially important finfish spend time there. Notably, North Carolina is the only East Coast state that allows extensive inshore trawling.
Critics, including commercial shrimpers, say it will decimate North Carolina’s local shrimp industry, noting the vast majority of shrimp boats are not designed to operate in deeper waters.
On Thursday, the Senate added language that would provide three years of payments to shrimpers impacted by the ban. But it's not clear if that's enough time for those shrimpers to fundamentally shift how they harvest shrimp.
Restaurateurs and chefs around the state have also voiced concerns. On Instagram, Neff noted the ban was moving with “lightning speed,” noting that shrimpers would be “devastated,” and suggested the absence of local shrimp would mean more farm-raised varieties, which he called a “terrible option” for humanitarian and health reasons. Neff called for those shrimpers to have a seat at the table. Fellow Wilmington chefs and restaurant owners Keith Rhodes and James Doss also took to social media to support the shrimp industry and protest the amendment; Rhodes specifically called on people to contact state Senator Bill Rabon, who has supported the legislation.
The Senate passed several readings of the amended bill, which now heads back to the House for a vote, expected early next week.
I think it's fair to say there's still plenty of earnest debate to be had around the original issue Neff and Honn were addressing, namely, transparency and public education around the supply chains that bring shrimp (and food in general) to the table. But I think both would agree, HB 422 is a more immediate concern. If nothing else, the blitzkrieg pace of the legislation seems cause for concern, leaving shrimpers, restaurateurs and chefs, and the general public precious little time to figure out what's happening.
