Saving Seafood

Virginia: Menhaden quota bill pulled in Va. House of Delegates

March 7, 2018 — A much-lobbied bill about an oily fish that nobody eats died in the House of Delegates — but with a promise by some proponents and stern opponents to work together to push for permission to catch more.

The bill, backed by the Northam Administration, was an effort to deal with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s sharp, 41.5 percent cut in a Chesapeake Bay quota for menhaden.

But the administration and Omega Protein, the owner of the Reedville plant that processes menhaden from the bay, agreed to stop fighting over the bill and work together to convince the Marine Fisheries Commission to increase the quota.

The regional commission last year approved a more than 36,000-metric-ton cut in bay quota for menhaden caught by drawing huge “seine” nets around schools of the fish and then hauling them up onto so-called “purse seine” fishing vessels.

Currently, the old marine fisheries commission quota of 87,216 metric tons for fish caught is written into state law.

Knight had proposed removing the reference in state law to the 87,216 tons and empowering the head of the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to set a new quota after appealing, and hopefully winning, an increased quota from the regional body.

Virginia Secretary of Natural Resources Matt Strickler had argued that keeping the old quota in the Code of Virginia risked sanctions that could include an outright ban on menhaden fishing in the bay.

Environmental groups — including the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, League of Conservation Voters and Nature Conservancy, as well as sports fishermen — argued that the lower quota was necessary as a precautionary measure. They fear too many young menhaden are caught in the bay, a key nursery area for the migratory fish. This could put the menhaden population at risk, as well other species, including striped bass and ospreys.

Read the full story at the Daily Press

 

Virginia: Time for bill runs out, higher menhaden quota remains

February 13, 2018 — A multi-state body says Virginians must catch fewer menhaden from the bay, but Virginia’s General Assembly didn’t listen — or, to be exact, didn’t really get a chance to hear.

A bill to bring Virginia’s quota in line with a steep cut demanded by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has languished for more than a month in the House Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee.

The committee won’t meet again before Tuesday’s midnight deadline for the House of Delegates to act on bills sponsored by House members. Without a committee’s vote to recommend a bill, it couldn’t make it to the floor for all the delegates to consider.

And that means that the higher quota applies for the only fishery — Virginia’s biggest — that the General Assembly regulates.

Del. Barry Knight, R-Virginia Beach, wanted the General Assembly to agree to the cut in Virginia landings of menhaden from 87,216 metric tons to 51,000 tons that was approved in November by the regional fisheries commission.

That 41.5 percent cut came as the commission approved an 8 percent increase in the coastwide quota set by the commission.

The proposed quota cut is meant to protect a major nursery for menhaden and the striped bass that feed on them, said Chris Moore, senior regional ecosystem scientist at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

While menhaden aren’t sold for human food, they are processed for fish oil, in food supplements, and for fishmeal, an important ingredient in livestock feed, as well as in pet food and to nourish farm-grown fish and seafood.

The striped bass that eat menhaden, on the other hand, have become an important food fish, as well as popular catch for recreational fishermen. Menhaden are also a vital food for marine mammals and osprey.

Moore said not enacting the regional commission quota puts Virginia, and the fishing crews and processing plant workers who depend on menhaden, at risk of sanctions.

That’s a big business. Omega Protein, the Texas-based fish oil and fishmeal producer whose Reedville operation, supplied by seven ships, is the fifth-largest U.S. port for fish landings, with 321 million pounds, worth $31 million, in 2016.

Read the full story at the Daily Press

Virginia: A big, but cautious bay role for the General Assembly

January 26, 2018 — Issues involving crabs, oysters and fish sometimes need to age a bit in Virginia’s General Assembly, even though the unusually large role in fisheries management it has assumed makes the questions seem familiar.

So, as the couple of dozen aging holders of crab scrape licenses struggle harder to make ends meet dragging softshell crabs from bay eelgrasses, Eastern Shore Del. Rob Bloxom’s notion of letting them keep any hard-shell crabs they haul from the bottom won a nod this week from the House Agriculture, Natural Resources and Chesapeake Bay Committee.

And, though nobody necessarily wants to admit it, the idea that those watermen, mainly based on Tangier Island, are getting older may have been a factor in why Bloxom let slide his first pass at the issue, which also would have allowed them to run bigger scrapes. You have to haul them up by hand, after all.

A newer notion about crabs — that the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences has found a way to help them escape from abandoned pots — had less luck this week, though.

State Sen. Monty Mason, D-Williamsburg, has been talking enthusiastically for months about VIMS’ research on biodegradable panels for crab pots. The idea is to keep the thousands of ghost pots dotting the bottom of the bay from trapping so many crabs, which die there because they can’t escape.

“They’re basically competing with watermen,” Mason told his fellow senators. A few years back, a $4.2 million effort to scoop up the abandoned pots netted nearly 35,000, which trapped an estimated 3 million crabs a year, Mason said later.

“When one of those drop, it is harvesting and fishing till the end of time,” Mason said. The cost to watermen in terms of crabs not caught and crabs not reproducing amounts to millions of dollars a year.

But neither the watermen, who flooded senators with phone calls opposing the measure, nor most of the Senate itself were convinced.

At $1.50 a panel, times two, times installing them twice a year, times several hundred pots, Mason’s proposal to require two biodegradable panels on all crab pots by 2020 would pose a significant financial burden on watermen, said state Sen. Bill DeSteph, R-Virginia Beach.

State Sen. Lynwood Lewis, D-Accomack, said the first tests of the new panels were limited and produced only mixed results.

Mason said he’s going to keep trying to make the economic case. He’s already talked to Secretary of Natural Resources Matthew J. Strickler about reviving a ghost pot recovery effort, and plans to ask the Virginia Marine Resources Commission to push for more testing of the panels.

Read the full story at the Daily Press

States seek exemptions from Trump’s offshore drilling plan, citing economic value of fisheries

January 18, 2018 — Newly released plans for an expansion of domestic offshore drilling from the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump could come at a significant cost to the country’s seafood industry, according to  environmental advocates and public officials.

As the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management held a public comment meeting in an Annapolis, Maryland hotel on Tuesday, 16 January, those opposed to the plan met at the same hotel.

William C. Baker, president of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, reiterated his opposition to leasing drilling rights in Maryland waters and elsewhere. The bay is a critical nurturing ground for blue crabs.

“One oil spill at the wrong time at the wrong place could wipe out an entire year’s class of Chesapeake Bay blue crabs, several hundred million dollars worth, and all the jobs that associate with it,” Baker said at the rally, according to the Capital Gazette.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke unveiled the administration’s proposal, which would open nearly all the country’s coastal waters for oil and gas drilling over a five-year period. Proponents of offshore drilling say it would create new jobs and reduce the country’s reliance on foreign oil supplies.

The first public meetings to receive input into the plan were held Tuesday, 16 January in Annapolis and Jackson, Mississippi. According to the Associated Press, the Mississippi meeting drew a small crowd due to snowy conditions.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

Menhaden catch limit raised along Atlantic coast, slashed in Bay

November 20, 2017 — East Coast fishery managers plan to increase the coastwide menhaden catch by 8 percent next year, while slashing the amount that can be harvested from the Chesapeake Bay.

But despite heavy pressure from environmental groups, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission balked at a proposal that would have required fishery managers to take into account the ecological role of the small, oily fish when setting future harvest levels.

By the end of their two-day meeting in mid-November, commissioners had succeeded in disappointing and pleasing environmentalists and industry officials alike — typically not at the same time — while setting up another big debate two years from now over how to account for the role menhaden play as a food source for other species.

In a statement after the meeting, Robert Ballou, of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management and chair of the ASMFC Menhaden Board, acknowledged that many people were left disappointed by the decisions that will guide harvests for the next two years. But he said the commission’s actions demonstrated a “commitment to manage the menhaden resource in a way that balances menhaden’s ecological role with the needs of its stakeholders.”

It was the latest round in a decades-long struggle over how to manage the catch of Atlantic menhaden, a fish almost never eaten by humans that is an important food for a host of marine species. By weight, menhaden make up the largest catch in both the Chesapeake and along the East Coast, but by nearly all accounts their abundance is increasing, especially in New England. In fact, the ASMFC’s science advisers indicated that the current coastal catch limit of 200,000 metric tons could be increased by more than 50 percent with little chance of overfishing the species.

But conservation groups have long argued that such assessments do not fully account for the importance of menhaden as a food source for marine mammals, many birds, and a host of other fish, such as striped bass.

It is part of a larger, long-running debate between conservation groups and the fishing industry over how to treat forage fish, which include menhaden, anchovies and other small species that provide a critical link in the aquatic food chain by converting plankton into nourishment for larger predators.

Historically, conservationists contend that forage species have received less attention — and protection from overfishing — than the larger predators, such as striped bass. Prior to the meeting near Baltimore, conservationists had gathered a record-setting 157,599 comments urging the ASMFC to adopt new harvest guidelines, or reference points, that would take the ecological role of the fish into account when setting catch limits. If adopted, the guidelines would almost certainly have required a reduction in the current coastwide menhaden catch.

But critics — which included ASMFC’s own scientific advisers, as well as the commercial menhaden industry — said the reference points under consideration were based on studies of other species in other places and may not be applicable to menhaden.

Ultimately, the commission — a panel of state fishery managers that regulates catches of migratory fish along the coast — voted 13–5 to delay the adoption of ecological reference points until a panel of scientists it has assembled can make its own ecological recommendations, tailored specifically to menhaden. Those recommendations are not expected to be ready until 2019.

Dozens of activists attended the meeting, many holding bright yellow signs that said, “Little Fish Big Deal,” “Keep it Forage” or “Conserve Menhaden.” Many were surprised not only to be defeated after the huge volume of comments — more than 99 percent in favor of ecological reference points — but also by the lopsided vote.

Read the full story at the Bay Journal

 

New Chesapeake Bay menhaden rules spark praise, criticism

November 15, 2017 — CHESAPEAKE BAY, Va. — New regulations on the harvest of menhaden are proving a mixed bag for local industry and conservationists.

Menhaden is a key part of the Chesapeake Bay’s ecosystem, serving as food for larger fish, mammals and birds. But they are also the key raw material for Omega Protein. Every day Omega turns tons of menhaden into fish oil, fish meal and other products.

As we showed you in our investigation Controversial Catch two years ago, Omega is the last major company of its kind on the Atlantic Coast, and has been operating in Reedville since the mid-1800s. Omega employs about 250 people there.

This week at its meeting near Baltimore, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has raised the total allowable catch of menhaden, from Maine to Florida, by 8 percent.

But Omega is not happy about that, because at the same time, the commission cut the amount the company can catch from the Chesapeake Bay by 40 percent.

Read the full story at WAVY

 

Menhaden vote a mixed bag for Virginia

November 15, 2017 — There was measured praise and disappointment all around this week after a regional fisheries commission voted on a 2018-2019 management plan for Atlantic menhaden, often called the most important fish in the sea.

For Virginia, too, it was a mixed bag.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission decided at an annual meeting in Linthicum, Md., to lower the Chesapeake Bay reduction fishery cap by 41.5 percent, from 87,216 metric tons to 51,000 metric tons. This pleases Virginia conservationists, but not the reduction fishery.

The commission said in a statement that its decision “recognizes the importance of the Chesapeake Bay as nursery grounds” for menhaden and many other species that rely on menhaden as a food source.

It also bumped up the coast-wide catch limit for menhaden by 8 percent to 216,000 metric tons — a net plus for fisheries, and a “modest” increase with a “zero percent chance of subjecting the resource to overfishing or causing it to be overfished,” the commission’s Atlantic Menhaden Board Chairman Robert Ballou of Rhode Island said in a statement.

Read the full story at the Daily Press

 

US regulators boost Atlantic menhaden catch limits by 8%

November 14, 2017 — BALTIMORE — Omega Protein, Daybrook Fisheries, Lund’s Fisheries and several other US big fishing companies that rely heavily on menhaden caught in the Atlantic Ocean got the outcome they hoped for in a hotel meeting room here this week.

By a 15-3 tally, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), meeting as the Atlantic Menhaden Management Board on Tuesday morning, approved a 216,000 metric ton total allowable catch (TAC) on the Atlantic coast of the United States in 2018 and 2019 — an 8% increase. The panel gave itself the flexibility to lower the threshold should its staff come up with new ecological reference points (ERPs) that suggest a reduction is needed.

The day before ASFMC voted down, 13-5, a change favored by environmental advocates that would’ve required the establishment of interim goals aimed at restoring menhaden to 75% of their original biomass and prompted action, possibly even a moratorium, should the biomass ever fell below 40% of that amount. It approved a substitute proposal that requires ASMFC’s staff to develop species-specific ERPS, something that is predicted to get done by the end of 2019.

“We’re in a pretty good place right now where the fishery is concerned. As has been referenced, we’ve got an expanding stock and a stable harvest over the last couple of years and we’re still leaving about 40% of the unfished spawning potential in the water right now,” said Dave Blazer, Maryland’s representative on the panel, in explaining why he was voting for the substitute proposal on Monday.

Read the full story at UndercurrentNews

 

Days Before High-Stakes Menhaden Vote, Questions and Uncertainties Abound

Amendment 3’s new Ecological Reference Points in Center of Controversy

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — November 10, 2017 — By Marisa Torrieri:

As the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission prepares to vote on highly-contested benchmarks for managing menhaden next week, uncertainties about the potential ripple effect of new ecological reference points (ERPs) are fueling heated exchanges between environmental groups and fisheries.

On November 13 and 14, the Commission is expected to meet to vote on Amendment 3, which will establish management benchmarks, and consider ecological reference points for menhaden, a bony and oily forage fish that is a primary food source for bigger fish such as striped bass and humpback whales and is harvested commercially for oil and fertilizer. The Commission also plans to review and potentially update state-by-state quota allocations.

Should the commission vote for “Option E” under Amendment 3 — an approach largely favored by environmental groups — the ASMFC would establish interim ecological reference points that would set a target of 75 percent and a threshold of 40 percent of a theoretical unfished stock. The ASMFC’s Biological Ecological Reference Points Workgroup would continue to develop Menhaden Specific ERP.

Fishermen whose livelihoods depend on the fish say the impact of this option would be catastrophic to their business.

Jeff Kaelin, head of government relations for Lund’s Fisheries, Inc., in Cape May, N.J., said New Jersey would lose a lot of jobs and money, in the event that interim ERPs took effect.

“With Option E, if we fish at the target that the environmental community is advocating, we’ll have a 25 percent cut in the fishery we have today, and that’s significant,” says Kaelin. “In 2013, when the quotas were established … we lost access to 50 percent of the fish. This is worth about $2 million to the state of New Jersey if we take a 25 percent cut. That’s what would happen, and there’s no need for it because the science is so robust.”

Yet environmental groups have countered that Option E, if selected, would not trigger draconian changes — it would simply put new goals in place that would benefit everyone, which could be phased in based on an organization’s own time table.

“The ERP is the goal, what you’re trying to achieve,” said Joseph Gordon, a senior manager for Pew Charitable Trusts, who directs campaigns to conserve forage fish. “Option E doesn’t tell you how fast to get there and how much risk to take. If the Commission decides to move forward Option E, they will be opting to have a very high population [of menhaden] in the ocean. When we talk about Option E, the goal of that is to achieve and maintain a high biomass of fish in the ocean. That should support significant amounts of fishing in the case of menhaden, over time as the population grows. The benefits to everyone, including commercial fisheries, is the goal of management.”

Chris Moore of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation also suggested Option E isn’t as bad as fisheries are making it out to be.

“Option E would say ‘OK, we now have a new target … fisheries would need to make changes to ensure they’re hitting that target,” says Moore. “But it’s not ‘we shall do this, we shall do that.’ If you look at the last stock assessment, the last quota showed we’re increasing. There’s a lot of leeway for the managers to get to the target.”

Omega Protein Corporation, the largest participant in the menhaden fishery, is based in Reedville, Va., a state that is currently allocated 85 percent of the catch. It says comments from environmentalists in support of Option E sugarcoat the potential economic impact of the ERPs.

Omega Protein is in favor of the more conservative Option B, which keeps ERPs at the existing status quo levels, until better mathematical models for menhaden are available.

“To say that the current reference points are inadequate, and we want to change them, and then say, ‘we won’t mandate that the harvest be cut when over the target,’ that’s ludicrous,” says Monty Deihl, Vice President of Operations for Omega Protein. “The environmentalist solution is looking for a problem, and there is no problem! We only take 8 percent of the biomass per year. The current model says you could harvest 300,000 metric tons per year without overfishing. With Option E, there’s a 25 percent cut in the harvest.”

Shaun Gehan, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who represents Omega Protein, said that environmentalists promoting Option E as a “phased approach” — while the language within the Option calls for a clear cut in fishing activities — are hypocritical.

“The real issue is if one believes that menhaden should be at 75 percent un-fished levels and the target [fishing mortality] helps achieve that, then it is hypocritical to advocate for anything but a cut,” he says. “It seems there is a lot of folks that want to have their cake and eat it too. That is, being able to say, ‘ecological reference points’ are being used, while avoiding harvest reductions they entail because no one thinks cuts are warranted in light of menhaden’s abundance.”

THE ROAD TO AMENDMENT 3

One of the biggest arguments for clamping down on menhaden fishing, one which has resonated with the public, is that concerns about menhaden weren’t on anyone’s radar until recently, when reports warned that the supply was in danger.

According to Pew, people started to “wake up” to the menhaden issue after a coast-wide decline in menhaden in the 1990s through the early 2000s that attracted a lot of attention: This decline was noticed on the water up and down the coast by recreational fishermen. The effects of this decline on predator species, especially striped bass, were especially noticed, since striped bass is a prized recreational fish – and the reason the ASMFC was created in the first place.

“Striped bass had been recovering from depletion, and many were interested and invested in this recovery,” Gordon noted. “But anglers were seeing signs of starvation and disease in striped bass, and it didn’t take long to trace many of the problems to the absence of adequate prey (menhaden) for them. That’s what led to the first cap on menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay, in 2005.”

In 2012, with support from the Lenfest Ocean Program, the Institute for Ocean Conservation Science at Stony Brook University convened the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force, a panel of 13 marine and fisheries scientists from around the world, to offer science-based advice for the management of species known as forage fish, because of their crucial role in marine ecosystems. In their report, “Little Fish, Big Impact,” researchers concluded fisheries managers “need to pay more careful attention to the special vulnerabilities of forage fish and the cascading effects of forage fishing on predators.”

Since then, ASMFC staff, scientists, and advisors have been developing and reviewing a range of ecological models and management strategies. In 2012, the ASMFC voted in favor of Amendment 2, which set a new coast-wide catch limit. In May of 2015, the ASMFC began drafting Amendment 3 to the menhaden management plan, with the goal of establishing ecological management, and to review and possibly update state-by-state quota allocations.

“What’s amazing to watch over time, and I’ve worked on this for about a decade, is we’ve gone from a situation where we didn’t have any coast-wide limit at all to a question of when it’s going to happen,” says Gordon.

CONSIDERING SCIENCE

The outcome of the vote on Amendment 3 is expected to have a powerful impact on the future of menhaden, as well as recreational anglers, tourism, conservationists and larger fisheries. Yet with so much on the line, figuring out the right path isn’t so clear cut.

For one, scientists and researchers who study menhaden are at odds with each other, some saying we are at a critical juncture and must make drastic moves to manage and protect menhaden, and others dismissing such reports as hysteria.

In a Q&A with Pew Charitable Trusts, Ellen Pikitch, a marine biology professor and director of the Institute for Ocean Conservation Science at Stony Brook University, said the state of menhaden appears to be in decent shape if you examine the population in isolation.

“But when you look at it from an ecosystem perspective—whether there are enough to feed predators—menhaden are much less numerous than they ought to be,” she said. “On the East Coast, menhaden used to range from Nova Scotia to Florida, but we haven’t seen that kind of distribution for probably 50 years.”

Pikitch led a group of more than 100 scientists who commented on the proposed Amendment 3 ERPs, and is pushing for the implementation of Option E.

But at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard on October 24, fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn, a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, said there was “no empirical evidence to support the idea that the abundance of forage fish affects their predators.”

Dr. Hilborn’s comments came in response to questioning from Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) about whether fisheries managers should manage forage fish according to a “rule of thumb” approach, where fisheries are managed according to a set of broad ecological and management principals, or a “case-by-case” approach, where management is guided by more species-specific information.

Hilborn, who was part of a team of fisheries scientists that recently examined the effects fishing for forage fish species had on predator species, has expressed concern that the 2012 report from the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force may have overestimated the strength of the predator-prey relationship.

John Bull, commissioner for Virginia Marine Resources Commission, believes the latter. And while he’s heard environmental groups are trying to make Option E seem more palatable by saying it will result in “phased implementation,” he does not support the establishment of interim ERPs because it “doesn’t make sense, scientifically.”

“The science shows from a benchmark stock assessment a couple years ago that the stock is healthy, robust, and reproduction is good,” said Bull. “And in fact, a 30 percent increase on menhaden could be enacted with a 0 percent chance of overfishing. What Virginia would like to see is an increase in the quota on the East Coast of 5, 6, 7 percent.”

Marisa Torrieri is a freelance writer who lives in Fairfield, Connecticut, with her husband and two young sons. She possesses a master’s degree in journalism from Northwestern University, and has written and edited for dozens of publications, including the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun, and the Village Voice.

Menhaden Fisheries Coalition Analysis Finds 92 Percent of Atlantic Menhaden Already Left In Water to Serve Ecological Role

Analysis Challenges Arguments That Interim Ecological Reference Points Are Urgently Needed

An analysis finds that 92 percent of Atlantic menhaden are left in the water to serve their ecological role. A high quality version of this infographic is available by clicking on the image.

WASHINGTON – November 9, 2017 – The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

A new analysis from the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) finds that current management leaves 92 percent of Atlantic menhaden to serve their ecological role as forage for predators. The analysis is based on data from the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (ASMFC) 2017 update stock assessment of Atlantic menhaden. The MFC has produced an infographic illustrating this analysis, which is available here.

In recent weeks, numerous ENGOs and recreational fishing groups up and down the Atlantic Coast have published articles and op-eds arguing that menhaden are in dire need of greater protection. These groups include the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the American Sportfishing Association, and local activists from coastal states like Rhode Island and New Jersey. However, the MFC’s analysis challenges the assertion that fisheries take too many menhaden, and makes clear that the vast majority of fish are already left in the water to fulfill their ecological role.

The analysis tracks an average menhaden year class through its full life cycle. It finds that two-thirds of juvenile menhaden (younger than age 1) are either consumed by predators or die of natural causes. These juvenile menhaden are the preferred forage for predator species and are not targeted by the fishery, which takes less than 1 percent of these fish.

Over half of the menhaden that survive to age-1 are allocated to the ecosystem to be eaten by predators such as striped bass and marine birds or die of natural causes. Only 8 percent of age-1 menhaden are harvested by the fishery.

The menhaden fishery largely harvests menhaden over the age of 2, but even for this age group, it only harvests about 40 percent of fish. Overall, just 8 percent of a menhaden year class is harvested by the fishery. The overwhelming majority of fish – 92 percent – are not impacted by the fishery.

This MFC analysis is an update of a previous analysis that was based on the ASMFC’s 2015 benchmark stock assessment of Atlantic menhaden. That analysis was reviewed by the ASMFC last fall. Both the 2015 benchmark assessment and the 2017 update assessment found that Atlantic menhaden is neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing.