Octber 30, 2012 — Almost every large marine fish and mammal in the waters off New England depends on menhaden (bunker, pogies) for food. But in 32 of the past 54 years (through 2008), menhaden were overfished, and they are now at their lowest level on record, according to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
This fall, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is considering new fishing rules to ensure long-term protection of menhaden. The agency is accepting public comment until November 16.
Anglers, marine conservationists and anyone else who cares about menhaden and the health of the ocean ecosystem should contact the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.
Read the full story in Boating Local
Analysis: Boating Local, a news source for fishermen around the New England area, has unfortunately, in this post, relied on information from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF). Instead of offering a balanced portrayal of the fishery, CBF, along with other environmental groups – most notably Pew Environment — has repeatedly made exaggerated claims about the frailty of the menhaden population.
The article, “Action Urged to Protect Menhaden”, offers an explanation of the current status of the menhaden population and encourages readers to get involved in the management process. But it also misrepresents several key facts about the menhaden fishery.
The article states that, “In 32 of the past 54 years (through 2008), menhaden were overfished, and they are now at their lowest level on record.” What the article does not tell the reader is that 30 of those 32 instances occurred between 1954-1993. In the most recent 15 years for which we have data, overfishing occurred just twice, most recently in 2008 by less than 1%. For menhaden, recent data is more important than historical statistics from two decades ago as they are a comparatively short-lived species.
Current biomass levels are similar to those seen in the late 1960s, when biomass was lower. The late 1970s and early 1980s saw several years of especially strong recruitment, followed by years of high biomass.
The article also ignores the distinct difference between a stock that is experiencing overfishing, and one that is overfished. Overfishing is a legal determination meaning that the number of fish caught in a given year exceeds a mortality rate set by regulators.
On the other hand, a stock that is overfished is not producing enough eggs to sustain itself. According to NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Office: “Based on the current reference point to evaluate stock condition, Atlantic menhaden are not considered overfished.”
Since the Boating Local website describes itself as “THE SOURCE FOR NEW ENGLAND BOATERS,” its readers are probably most concerned about menhaden in New England waters. In the fall of 2011, Dr. James Sulikowski, of the University of New England, conducted an aerial survey of the waters off New England and Long Island, New York, to provide partial documentation of the menhaden in the northern range, an area for which there is little data available. The survey results were analyzed by Dr. Doug Butterworth, a world-renowned stock assessment scientist from the University of Cape Town in South Africa, and Dr. Alexia Morgan, who has consulted with organizations such as the New England Aquarium, the Blue Ocean Institute, and the Pew Environment Group. The results of the North Atlantic aerial survey were compared with contemporaneous aerial observations made by spotter pilots in the southern portion of the menhaden fishery’s range. Based on these comparisons, Drs. Butterworth and Morgan found that menhaden stock biomass may be twice as high as measured in the currently-used 2010 assessment, which found that overfishing is occurring but that menhaden are not overfished.
“Action Urged to Protect Menhaden” reflects the interests of environmental groups which provided Boating Local with this information, and misleads readers on the current health of menhaden.
Read previous articles on how Pew and CBF have been misleading readers on menhaden