May 6, 2025 — In the debate over the future of the Atlantic menhaden fishery, working families are being pushed to the margins. The fishermen, plant workers and coastal community members who have sustained this industry for generations are too often falsely portrayed as obstacles to conservation. Meanwhile, environmental activist groups are assumed to speak for the public good. But regulators and members of the public should not accept the premise that these groups speak for the public interest simply because they say so on their websites.
Blind trust in activist groups has serious consequences. It gives disproportionate influence to organizations with agendas shaped not just by science or stewardship, but by fundraising goals and ideology. Take, for example, the recent formation of the Atlantic Menhaden Chesapeake Bay Work Group. Its assumption, that menhaden harvests are driving a decline in fledgling osprey survival, is not supported by the best available science. Yet it has shaped public discourse and policy proposals, in part because its leaders come from high-profile nonprofits such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Audubon Society.
Let’s be clear: We are not against responsible conservation. Many of us are fourth- or fifth-generation members of this fishery. Our lives depend on healthy ecosystems, and we support science-based management to ensure that menhaden and the marine food web remain strong. We welcomed the development of Ecological Reference Points (ERPs), which incorporate predator needs into harvest decisions. But even as those were adopted, some activists criticized them — not because the science was flawed, but because the outcome didn’t slash harvest levels to their liking.
This reveals a deeper truth: For some groups, no amount of responsible management is enough. They move from one manufactured crisis to the next, each time casting commercial fishermen as the villain. It is not members of the charter and for-hire sectors — comprised of hard-working watermen like ourselves — but well-funded industry organizations such as the American Sportfishing Association and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership that lead these attacks on our livelihoods. Complaints about the reduction fishery are as old as the fishery. The same recycled arguments have been made since the 1800s.