November 30, 2012 — The following is an excerpt from the opinion piece "A make-or-break moment for ‘the most important fish in the sea’" by Chris Moore, published in the Washington Post:
One of the smallest fish in the Chesapeake Bay is also one of the most critical. Atlantic menhaden have been called “the most important fish in the sea” because of the vital ecological and economic roles they play in the bay and along the Atlantic Coast.
Filter feeders, the silvery fish form massive schools that sweep through the water eating microscopic plants, animals and detritus. Young menhaden are sardine-size, but they can grow into foot-long fish that are bony, oily and considered quite unpalatable by human tastes.
Other critters love them, however. Menhaden are a major food source for striped bass, bluefish, summer flounder, weakfish, dolphin, whales and iconic Chesapeake birds such as ospreys, loons and pelicans. Seventy percent of an adult rockfish’s diet typically has been menhaden. If you love angling for stripers or dining on rockfish fillets, you have to love menhaden, the little fish that makes it all possible.
But all is not well. And in Virginia, one peculiar legislative oddity could stand in the way of badly needed action.
For many years, menhaden numbers have been declining dramatically in the Chesapeake Bay and along the Atlantic Coast. Today, they’re at their lowest levels on record, or about 8 percent of unfished numbers. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, which manages the coast-wide menhaden population, has concluded that menhaden have been experiencing overfishing for at least 32 of the past 54 years.
Equally disturbing are scientific reports that osprey in the lower bay are suffering malnourishment linked to fewer menhaden; similar concerns have been raised about striped bass.
Help for menhaden could be on the way. But two things need to happen first.
Read the full story in the Washington Post
Analysis: In a recent article in the Washington Post titled “A make-or-break moment for ‘the most important fish in the sea’,” Chris Moore, of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, claims extreme cuts are necessary to save the Atlantic menhaden population, but in doing so, provides an inaccurate representation of the status of the species.
When Mr. Moore claims that, “menhaden have been experiencing overfishing for at least 32 of the past 54 years,” he fails to acknowledge that most of this overfishing occurred between the 1950s and the 1970s, and that incidences of overfishing are much rarer in the recent history of the fishery. The 2010 Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) stock assessment found that from 1993 to 2008 (the last fifteen years for which there is reliable data), overfishing occurred only twice, and by only 0.4 percent in its most recent occurrence in 2008. Because menhaden is a comparatively short-lived species (living from 10-12 years), and the average menhaden produces a high number of eggs during its lifetime, the most recent data is much more relevant in determining the health of the species than older, dated statistics.
Mr. Moore acknowledges the importance of the menhaden fishery to Northern Virginia’s economy, yet still calls a reduction of menhaden landings by 25 percent or more “essential”. A 50 percent reduction, the harshest of the measures currently being considered by the ASMFC, could likely put the commercial menhaden fishery out of business, causing devastating economic loss to the home of the fishery in Virginia’s Northern Neck region. A recent economic impact study conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) highlighted the importance of the industry to this rural area of Virginia: the reduction fishery employs almost 300 people directly, and many more indirectly, and contributes more than $80 million in economic output to the Northern Neck. Without the reduction fishery, employment in the region would decrease by 8 percent and economic output by 14 percent. Enacting a new quota now could lead to a bad economic situation, and could later be considered bad management with no science-based rationale for setting quotas and no recent, reliable stock assessment as a reference.
It is also important to recognize that references to menhaden as “the most important fish in the sea,” including Mr. Moore’s reference in the title of his article, are not scientific designations. They are instead derived from the title of a book regarding menhaden, The Most Important Fish in the Sea, by Rutgers University English professor, H. Bruce Franklin. There is no scientific evidence supporting the claim that any fish being is the “most important,” it reflects the views of Dr. Franklin and his supporters, rather than any scientific consensus.