May 26, 2026 – The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

In a May 6 post by Jaclyn Lunaas, (“Fisheries Board Defers Advancing Plan to Address Chesapeake Bay Menhaden Management”), the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) calls the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) Menhaden Board’s decision to form a work group on Draft Addendum II  “another delay for Chesapeake Bay menhaden conservation,” then argues that cutting Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest (and spreading it across the season) is needed to improve outcomes for predators like striped bass.  

That framing misses the most important fact: striped bass are overfished because striped bass have been overfished for years, not because managers failed to squeeze menhaden hard enough. But when the ASMFC is asked to make unpopular decisions that directly affect striped bass anglers, TRCP’s rhetoric is very different.

1) ASMFC explicitly chose status quo for striped bass in 2026 because of socio-economic consequences

The ASMFC’s striped bass management history is clear: striped bass were declared overfished in 2019 and are under a rebuilding plan that requires rebuilding to the spawning stock biomass target by 2029. The ASMFC also notes that while the stock is no longer experiencing overfishing, it remains overfished.

At an October 2025 meeting, the ASMFC’s Striped Bass Management Board considered—and ultimately rejected—moving forward with a proposed 12% reduction in fishery removals for 2026. The ASMFC’s own summary explicitly cited “severe economic consequences” as a key reason the Board maintained current measures and quotas.

TRCP’s response to this decision? Deafening silence. Other than its repeated attacks on the menhaden fishery, Ms. Lunaas and TRCP have not published a comment directly addressing striped bass management since November 2023.

Sticking with the status quo for striped bass will make rebuilding harder and decreases the likelihood that the 2029 rebuilding target will be met, but the ASMFC weighed that against socio-economic harm to the recreational and commercial striped bass fisheries and the communities and businesses they support. That’s a legitimate policy tradeoff. But it’s exactly the tradeoff TRCP refuses to acknowledge when it comes to menhaden.

2) Silence on protecting striped bass access, no mercy for menhaden workers

TRCP’s post pushes menhaden cuts as if predator recovery depends on it, while staying quiet on the striped bass decision that delays rebuilding trajectories and was justified, in part, by economic impacts.  

When the affected stakeholders are recreational striped bass anglers (and the coastal economies tied to that fishery), TRCP is aligned with a process that treats economic consequences as central. When the affected stakeholders are the menhaden fishery’s working families—a union workforce in a rural community, and one of the largest minority workforces in its area—TRCP’s tone shifts to “just do it,” even when many of their claims about menhaden fishing remain unproven.  

3) TRCP overstates the evidence on seasonal quota periods and Maryland pound nets

TRCP implies that re-timing the Virginia reduction harvest via seasonal quota periods will improve availability for predators and other fisheries, including Maryland’s pound-net bait fishery.  

But the ASMFC’s Plan Development Team (PDT) memo does not support the re-timing story as settled:

• The PDT calls its work a preliminary analysis and recommends the Technical Committee as the proper avenue for a detailed test of the hypothesis.  
• Maryland pound-net landings fell sharply in 2023–2024, but the PDT found the data suggest the decline was “primarily driven by reduced effort” because catch per unit effort (CPUE) fell less dramatically than effort and catch.  
• For early-season weeks (13–26), the PDT says it is unlikely low pound-net CPUE in 2023–2024 was due to the reduction fishery because reduction harvest usually begins later—and in those years was delayed even further.  
• For 2024, the PDT says an effect is possible, but the data were inconclusive at the resolution evaluated, and a meaningful conclusion would require finer-scale analysis of movement and fishery dynamics.  

So when TRCP pushes seasonal menhaden quota periods as a practical fix to protect other fisheries, it’s taking a hypothesis and selling it as if it were established.

Bottom line

Striped bass recovery won’t be achieved by blaming menhaden whenever recommended striped bass management proposals become unpopular. The ASMFC’s Striped Bass Board chose status quo for 2026, citing economic consequence, while striped bass remain overfished and the 2029 rebuilding requirement still exists but seems unlikely.  

If TRCP wants any credibility, it should stop implying that menhaden cuts are a substitute for confronting the real driver of striped bass decline—a long period of excessive striped bass fishing mortality—and face up to the hard tradeoffs between rebuilding timelines and economic realities the ASMFC has repeatedly had to make to protect both the striped bass population and the striped bass fishery itself.

About the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) is a collective of menhaden fishermen, related businesses, and supporting industries. Comprised of businesses along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition conducts media and public outreach on behalf of the menhaden industry to ensure that members of the public, media, and government are informed of important issues, events, and facts about the fishery.