Chesapeake Bay Archives - Page 2 of 36

Fisheries commission again holds fire on striped bass limits

October 31, 2025 — With a glimmer of hopeful news about harvest pressure and a warning from commercial fishermen that their economic survival is at stake, East Coast fishery managers have pulled back from ordering another round of catch restrictions on struggling Atlantic striped bass.

Meeting in Dewey Beach, DE, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted Oct. 29 not to require any additional cuts in either the recreational or commercial catch of the migratory finfish known as rockfish in the Chesapeake Bay.

The vote against tightening already-strict catch limits came after more than a year of debate by the panel, which regulates nearshore fishing on migratory species along the Atlantic coast. Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and North Carolina voted for more restrictions.

Widely regarded as the most prized finfish in the Chesapeake and along the Atlantic Coast, striped bass were declared overfished in 2019, with the number of large female fish below what was needed to sustain the population. The commission responded by ordering a series of catch reductions in ensuing years aiming to rebuild the stock by 2029.

Read the full article at Bay Journal

Coastwide Menhaden Catch Limit Cut by 20% as Potential Bay Cuts Loom

October 29, 2025 — In a marathon four-hour fishery management meeting on Tuesday, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC)’s Menhaden Management Board grappled with menhaden catch limits up and down the East Coast. Under pressure from environmentalists to cut catch limits and from menhaden fishermen to protect their livelihoods, board members for the ASMFC voted to reduce the coastwide menhaden catch by 20% in 2026, allowing fishermen to land 186,840 metric tons. The total allowable catch will be revisited in time for the 2027 and 2028 seasons. This motion passed 16-2, with only Virginia and Pennsylvania voting against it.

Inside the Chesapeake Bay, however, the rules are different. The Virginia menhaden reduction fishery, led by purse seine operator Ocean Harvesters, adheres to its own limit, known as the “Bay Cap”, which is currently set at 51,000 metric tons of fish. But environmentalists argue that a much lower Bay Cap is needed to protect the environment. They want to cut the reduction fishery’s limit by 50%. Groups like the Chesapeake Bay Foundation believe menhaden are in trouble, and since menhaden are an important forage fish, that there isn’t enough food to go around for predators like osprey and rockfish. The Virginia menhaden fishing industry disputes the claim that menhaden are in trouble, or that the Bay’s osprey and rockfish population struggles are directly related to a lack of menhaden.

The Science Center for Marine Fisheries (SCEMFIS) just funded a new project that will pull together all of the existing research on menhaden in the Bay, identify gaps in the research, and propose new study methods to fill these gaps. This would lead to solid research for setting a meaningful Bay harvest cap for that is based on data and is scientifically defensible.

Scientists from the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) Chesapeake Biological Laboratory in Solomons, Maryland, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, and NOAA, will lead the project to develop a “research roadmap” for Bay fishery managers.

Since that future research won’t be available for some time, the ASMFC Menhaden Management Board moved to initiate a new addendum that would potentially change how the Bay Cap is used, or lower the limit. This addendum would “develop periods for the Chesapeake Bay Cap that distributes fishing effort more evenly throughout the season” and it would also develop “a range of options to reduce the Bay Cap.” These options could be anything from keeping the cap at its current level to a 50% reduction. The hope is to have a draft of the addendum ready to present at ASMFC’s next meeting this winter.

Read the full article at the Chesapeake Bay Magazine

Menhaden Misinformation: Four Organizations Push Drastic Cuts that Contradict the Assessment Record and Ecosystem-Based Management

October 27, 2025 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), American Sportfishing Association (ASA), Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP), and the American Saltwater Guides Association (ASGA) are circulating claims about Atlantic menhaden that don’t match the assessment record or how this fishery is managed.

Managers already have an ecosystem framework in place that ties menhaden harvest to predator needs. The 2025 single-species and Ecological Reference Points (ERP) assessment components (adopted and implemented by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC)) underwent external peer review; under Total Allowable Catch (TAC) levels set since 2021, the stock is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring in an ecosystem context. Risk management is keyed to avoiding the ERP fishing mortality threshold, and not arbitrary percentage cuts.

Claims being circulated, and the record

1) “Striped bass anglers are making big sacrifices that will be wasted unless menhaden quotas are cut by ~50%.”

The record:

Rebuilding success depends on keeping striped bass fishing mortality (F) low and hoping for improved recruitment; the few recent strong year classes (e.g., 2015, 2018) were heavily impacted by fishing mortality, and Chesapeake Bay recruitment has been below average for years, issues not caused by a menhaden-forage deficit. The next striped bass amendment must hold F low enough to protect weaker cohorts.
Assessment-team reinforcement: the Assessment report indicated that “minor changes in Atlantic menhaden harvest rates are not expected to have major negative effects on most predators”; rather only increasing effort to the “overfishing” level (F_THRESHOLD) “would cause declines in biomass for more sensitive predator species, particularly striped bass.” “As a result, … the probability of exceeding the ERP F_THRESHOLD under the current TAC is low.”
Proposals for cuts up to 55% are not indicated by the risk framework and would devastate the 150-year-old reduction fishery, small-scale bait fishermen along the coast, and the lobstermen and crabbers who depend on them without helping striped bass fishermen.

2) “Striped bass are starving due to a lack of menhaden; severe menhaden cuts are needed to rebuild striped bass.”

The record:

Striped bass rebuilding is driven by reducing striped bass mortality within the 10-year plan to 2029; board discussions since 2019 have focused on striped bass controls, not a forage shortage from the menhaden fishery.
Chesapeake Bay workgroup monitoring from Virginia and Maryland reported healthy striped bass body condition; the fish are not underfed.
Menhaden removals overlap little with what predators eat most: predators primarily consume age-0/1 menhaden, while the reduction fishery targets age-2+ fish.
Assessment team reinforcement: the fishery has limited impact on predators like striped bass because they largely rely on younger fish not targeted by the fishery, and recruitment (environment) is the main driver of young menhaden’s availability to predators.

3) “Severe coastwide cuts are necessary to hit a probability of not exceeding the ERP mortality (F) target.”

The record:

National Standard 1 (NS1) of the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) and peer-reviewed advice focus on preventing overfishing; the operative risk line in the ERP control rule is the F threshold, not the policy F target. Managers should select TACs that avoid any chance of exceeding the threshold.
Assessment team reinforcement: even maintaining the current TAC carries a low probability of exceeding the ERP F threshold; if managers seek extra assurance, a precautionary reduction of no more than 10% (to ~210,195 mt) produces no chance of overfishing in 2026 and only ~1% if held through 2027–2028.
ERP-based management already protects predators by capping risk at the ERP F threshold; under this system, menhaden are not overfished, and overfishing is not occurring in an ecosystem context.
Adjusting TAC: a ≤10% precautionary reduction (~210,195 mt) provides no chance of overfishing in 2026 and about 1% if held through 2027–2028. Larger cuts are not indicated by the risk framework.

4) “Past TACs were far too high because menhaden abundance was overestimated.”

The record:

ERP-era TACs were set conservatively to avoid exceeding ecosystem risk thresholds; under ERP management since 2021, menhaden remain not overfished and overfishing not occurring in an ecosystem context.
The 2025 assessment’s natural mortality (M) re-estimation was empirically derived from the Ahrenholtz tag-recapture database and independently reviewed; the single-species and ERP models were externally peer-reviewed (including through NOAA Fisheries’ Center for Independent Experts) and should be treated as authoritative.
Assessment team reinforcement: despite a rigorous reevaluation that reduced fecundity estimates, stock status remains “not overfished” and “overfishing is not occurring,” attributed to “management [that] has consistently been more conservative than single-species reference points would have historically prescribed and [which] has continued with a conservative approach even under the 2020 ERPs [i.e., the current TACs].”

5) “Earlier assessments misestimated abundance by ~37%; ‘errors’ require a 55% TAC reduction.”

The record:

The “37%” talking point is misstated and does not justify fixed percentage cuts. The current natural mortality (M) (~0.932) is higher than historic values sometimes cited and was endorsed by the Center for Independent Experts after intensive scrutiny of the tag-recapture database. There is no basis to convert M updates into a mandated 55% reduction under ERPs.
Assessment team reinforcement: recruitment (environment) is the main driver of menhaden availability to predators; managing to the ERP fishing mortality threshold, not reverse-engineering large headline cuts, aligns with the science.

6) “Because the coastwide assessment ignores Bay impacts, new Chesapeake Bay-specific limits are needed now.”

The record:

There is no scientific justification for new Bay-specific limits beyond ERPs at this time; research from the Science Center for Marine Fisheries now underway will inform any Bay-focused questions, and managers should await the new science before acting.

Bottom line

ERP-based management already protects predators by capping risk at the ERP fishing mortality threshold; under this system, menhaden are not overfished, and overfishing is not occurring in an ecosystem context.
Rebuilding striped bass depends on reducing striped bass fishing mortality; broad menhaden cuts are not a substitute and are not indicated by the ERP risk framework.

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.

Virginia, Maryland spawning surveys spell trouble for prized Atlantic coast gamefish species

October 24, 2025 — The most recent Chesapeake Bay striped bass spawning surveys are in and the news is not good.

A young-of-the-year survey done by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences shows spawning recruitment just below historical averages in Virginia’s portion of the Chesapeake Bay and tributaries. A survey conducted by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources in Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay waters shows numbers significantly lower than historical averages.

That makes seven straight years of poor Chesapeake Bay spawns. Because 70% to 90% of all Atlantic striped bass are spawned and reared in the Chesapeake, the numbers are even more alarming. Striped bass numbers are declining. The fish has a billion dollar sport and commercial fishing impact on the economy of every state from North Carolina to Maine.

Read the full article at WAVY

Menhaden Fisheries Coalition Applauds Science-Based Review of Chesapeake Bay Menhaden Harvest Cap

October 24, 2025 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition today welcomed a newly funded Science Center for Marine Fisheries (SCEMFIS) project to produce a research roadmap for Atlantic menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay as a long-overdue opportunity to replace political compromise with sound science.

For nearly twenty years, the Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest cap, a harvest limit that applies only to the reduction fishery, has been managed without biological justification. Regulators and scientists have repeatedly acknowledged this fact. The new project from SCEMFIS will identify the research needed to finally develop what the scientists leading the project call a “scientifically defensible and ecologically meaningful Chesapeake Bay cap.”

Regulators Acknowledge Current Bay Cap Was Never Based on Science
When the cap was first imposed in 2006, it was a political compromise between Virginia, Maryland, and environmental groups, not a conservation measure grounded with a scientific justification. As the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (ASMFC) own Executive Director at the time, Vince O’Shea, testified before Congress in 2008, the Bay Cap was established “in response to a political problem” and “there was not a science basis for the Cap.”

That view was echoed by ASMFC’s scientific staff. In 2012, the Menhaden Plan Development Team concluded, “The annual Chesapeake Bay harvest cap is not based on a scientifically quantified harvest threshold, fishery health index, or fishery population level study.”

In a follow-up report that same year, the ASMFC Technical Committee stated: “The TC stands by its previous recommendation that, given the current fishery and history of landings, there has not appeared to be any biological benefit to the Chesapeake Bay Reduction Cap since it was implemented.”

The Technical Committee reinforced this position during the Commission’s December 2012 meeting, with the then-chairperson noting that, “Given the current structure of the industry right now, and the fish that they harvest, and the biological information that we’re collecting, there doesn’t seem to be any benefit” from the Bay Cap.

Previous ASMFC Chairman Confirms Lack of Evidence for Bay Cap
When Virginia appealed a 41% cut to the Bay Cap in 2018, ASMFC Chairman Jim Gilmore stated in a formal letter that “there is no evidence in Amendment 3 to support the view that lowering the Bay Cap was necessary to protect the Bay as a nursery area for menhaden and there is no evidence to suggest the Bay Cap is necessary to protect the Bay as a nursery for other species.” He concluded: “Leadership agrees the Amendment does not provide sufficient evidence to support such claims.”

Call for a Science-Based Approach
Despite repeated coastwide stock increases and consistent findings that the Atlantic menhaden population is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring, the Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest cap has remained fixed at 51,000 metric tons, less than half the level originally set in 2006. Meanwhile, the ASMFC has allowed other Bay fisheries, including Maryland and Potomac River bait harvesters, to increase their quotas.

The Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest cap has become a symbol of how fisheries policy can drift away from science with outside influence from special interest groups dictating management strategies. The ASMFC’s own scientists have said for over a decade that there is no biological justification for this cap.

The Need for a Research Roadmap
The SCEMFIS-funded effort, led by scientists from the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, and NOAA, will begin by conducting an extensive review of the existing data on relevant issues such as Atlantic menhaden biomass, the movement of schooling pelagic fish, and the consumption of Atlantic menhaden by Chesapeake Bay predators. They will also work with the industry to review data sources such as landings data and spotter pilot reports to complement existing peer-reviewed studies and other sources of data.

After the review, the researchers will identify knowledge gaps, and will propose new study designs and methodologies to fill these knowledge gaps to inform a Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest cap that is based on data and is scientifically defensible.

SCEMFIS is a collaborative project between the fishing industry and leading finfish and shellfish researchers aimed at improving our understanding of important commercial species and supporting sustainable management of the fisheries that depend on them. It is part of the National Science Foundation’s Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers program.

About the Menhaden Fishery
Atlantic menhaden support the largest commercial fishery by weight on the U.S. East Coast and sustain hundreds of unionized, family-supporting jobs in rural Virginia communities where few comparable opportunities exist. Fishermen are represented by the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 400, earning family-sustaining wages and full benefits. The fishery is certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, the gold standard for responsible fisheries, and the ASMFC has repeatedly found that menhaden is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring.

SCEMFIS Funds Chesapeake Bay Menhaden Research Roadmap to Inform a Scientifically Defensible Bay Cap

October 23, 2025 — The following was released by the Science Center for Marine Fisheries:

The Science Center for Marine Fisheries (SCEMFIS) has funded a new project that will create a detailed and actionable roadmap that identifies the research needed to develop a scientifically defensible and ecologically meaningful Chesapeake Bay harvest cap for Atlantic menhaden.

The project, funded at the Center’s fall meeting, is being led by scientists from the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL) at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES), the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), and NOAA. The team is experienced in matters related to Atlantic menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay, bringing decades of peer-reviewed research, assessment leadership, and survey design expertise to this work.

What the project will do
Drs. Genevieve Nesslage and Michael Wilberg (UMCES), Drs. Robert Latour and James Gartland (VIMS), and Dr. Amy Schueller (NOAA SEFSC), will conduct an extensive review of existing menhaden science, focusing on factors such as estimated menhaden biomass, migration patterns of schooling fish, and the consumption of menhaden and other forage species by Chesapeake Bay predators. The review will identify gaps in available information and propose specific study designs, analytical approaches, timelines, and estimated costs to guide new Bay-focused menhaden research.

Research recommendations will likely involve a combination of new data collection and analyses of existing datasets, including industry data such as landings information and spotter pilot reports.

The roadmap is intended to be practical and actionable, leveraging tools and data already in use and identifying where new information, such as novel tagging, hydroacoustics, and spatial modeling, would add significant value.

Why this matters
Current menhaden management in the Chesapeake Bay is built around a landings limit rather than a Bay-specific biological target. Commercial reduction landings of Atlantic menhaden from the Bay are currently subject to a 51,000-metric-ton Bay cap. This cap is based on the average of 2012–2016 reduction landings from the Bay, but it is not a biological reference point, and thus cannot, by itself, inform managers about the status of the portion of the stock within the Bay or the potential ecological impacts of harvest on other species.

Over time, the Chesapeake Bay menhaden harvest cap has been adjusted as a matter of policy: reduced from 109,020 metric tons (2006) to 87,216 metric tons (2012) and then to 51,000 metric tons (2017). These caps were not based on Bay-specific biological analyses, and were intended as precautionary, interim limits. This project will define the research activities needed to evaluate Bay-specific conditions and ecological interactions so that future decisions about the Bay Cap can be grounded in robust, transparent science.

Economic importance of Atlantic menhaden
Atlantic menhaden support the largest commercial fishery by weight on the U.S. East Coast and play a critical role as forage for predators. The fishery supports a unionized workforce with strong wages and full benefits in a rural region with few comparable opportunities.

Project Team (selected qualifications in Atlantic menhaden & Chesapeake Bay)

Genevieve M. Nesslage, Ph.D., Associate Research Professor, CBL (UMCES)
- Quantitative fisheries scientist with research focusing on Atlantic menhaden spawning locations and larval dispersal, fishery sampling, survey design, overwintering habitat use, and predator-prey modeling. Former Senior Stock Assessment Scientist at the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

Michael J. Wilberg, Ph.D., Professor of Fisheries Science, CBL (UMCES)
- Fisheries stock assessment and management strategy evaluation specialist with research focused on Atlantic menhaden movement, mortality, growth, and predator-prey modeling. Lead author of the 2020 survey design for Atlantic menhaden in Chesapeake Bay.

Robert J. Latour, Ph.D., Professor, VIMS (William & Mary)
- Quantitative fisheries ecologist focusing on predator–prey interactions, population dynamics, and habitat modeling. Lead/co-author of the 2023 study on female Atlantic menhaden reproductive biology and fecundity and co-author (with Gartland) of Virginia’s 2023 Atlantic Menhaden Research Planning report to the General Assembly.

James Gartland, Ph.D., Senior Research Scientist, VIMS (William & Mary)
- Quantitative fisheries scientist with extensive experience in the development of fisheries monitoring surveys, prey consumption models, and ecological indicators, including in Chesapeake Bay. Co-author of the 2023 menhaden fecundity study (with Latour and Schueller) and co-author of Virginia’s 2023 Atlantic Menhaden Research Planning report guiding Bay-specific research priorities.

Amy M. Schueller, Ph.D., Research Fish Biologist, NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center
- Lead assessment analyst for Atlantic and Gulf menhaden and key contributor to the working group on ecological reference points (ERPs) that underpin Atlantic menhaden management.

About SCEMFIS
The Science Center for Marine Fisheries (SCEMFIS) brings together academic and industry expertise to address urgent scientific challenges facing sustainable fisheries. Through advanced methods, analytical tools, and collaborative research, SCEMFIS works to reduce uncertainty in stock assessments and improve the long-term sustainability of key marine resources.

SCEMFIS is an Industry-University Cooperative Research Center supported by the National Science Foundation. Industry organizations join SCEMFIS through an Industry Membership Agreement with one of the center’s site universities and contribute both financial support and valuable expertise to help shape research priorities.

Its university partners include the University of Southern Mississippi (lead institution) and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science at the College of William and Mary. The center also collaborates with scientists from a broad network of institutions, including Old Dominion University, Rutgers University, the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, the University of Maryland, and the University of Rhode Island. These researchers bring deep expertise in finfish, shellfish, and marine mammal science.

Demand for SCEMFIS’s services continues to grow, driven by the fishing industry’s need for responsive, science-based support. The center provides timely access to expert input on stock assessment issues, participates in working groups, and conducts targeted studies that lead to better data collection, improved survey design, and more accurate modeling-all in service of sustainable, science-driven fishery management.

Seven years of bad luck for striped bass, survey shows

October 22, 2025 — Striped bass reproduction has remained below average in parts of the Chesapeake Bay since 2018, and this year is no different.

The annual juvenile striped bass surveys from Maryland and Virginia give insight as to how the next generation of striped bass will sustain the population. With continuing poor results, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is considering stronger catch limits.

Striped bass are top predators in the Bay and support commercial and recreational fishing. They are found along the East Coast from Canada to Florida, but they spawn and spend the first few years of their lives in the Bay.

The Virginia Institute of Marine Science has conducted its annual survey on striped bass since 1967. This year, scientists caught more than 1,000 juvenile striped bass at 18 sites in the Rappahannock, York and James rivers with a 100-foot seine net. Fish are captured, counted, measured and thrown back.

Read the full article at Bay Journal

Dam removals boost fish passage in Chesapeake region

October 21, 2025 — The Chesapeake Bay region opened more than 300 miles of rivers and streams for migratory fish in 2022-2023, a tenfold increase from the preceding two-year period.

Thirteen dams were taken down during that span, but more than two-thirds of the total mileage came from the demolition of the Oakland Dam on the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania. Another key removal was the Wilson Creek Dam in Virginia.

“In addition to restoring native and recreational fisheries, these projects can improve wildlife habitat along stream corridors and reduce long-term maintenance needs of aging infrastructure, flooding and public safety hazards to local communities,” said Ray Li, a fishery biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Read the full article at the Bay Journal

An average year for juvenile rockfish in Virginia waters in 2025

October 20, 2025 — Preliminary results from an ongoing long-term survey conducted by researchers at William & Mary’s Batten School & VIMS suggest that an average year class of young-of-year rockfish, or striped bass, was produced in the Virginia tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay in 2025. The 2025 year class, representing fish hatched this spring, will reach fishable sizes in three to four years.

The Batten School & VIMS Juvenile Striped Bass Seine Survey recorded a mean value of 5.12 fish per seine haul in the Virginia portion of the Chesapeake Bay. The 2025 value is similar to the historic average of 7.77 fish per seine haul and represents an improvement over the previous two years of below-average recruitment in Virginia tributaries.

Rockfish are an important top predator in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem and a valuable resource for commercial and recreational anglers. Mary Fabrizio, a professor at the Batten School of Coastal & Marine Sciences & VIMS, directs the Juvenile Striped Bass Seine Survey and notes that the economic and ecological values of rockfish lend significant interest to the year-to-year status of their population.

Read the full article at Shore Daily News

Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Menhaden Blame Game Isn’t Backed by CCB Findings

October 8, 2025 — The following was released by Ocean Harvesters:

As Virginians, we share the public concern about the poor 2025 osprey breeding results reported by the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB). But the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s (CBF) attempt to pin those outcomes on the menhaden fishery misstates the timeline, overextends the CCB advisory’s inferences, and ignores other environmental factors that CCB itself noted.

What CCB actually reported

CCB’s news advisory organizes 2025 results by salinity (used as a proxy for local fish communities) and finds that higher-salinity sites had low productivity while low-salinity sites exceeded population-maintenance thresholds. CCB explicitly states “salinity is a proxy for the fish community” and that ospreys in high-salinity areas are believed to rely more on menhaden. CCB also documents many pairs that did not lay clutches in 2025, arriving on time in late February-early March, then abandoning territories in significant numbers, with many returning in June (a first for the Bay population). Finally, CCB notes that food stress showed up as single-chick broods (67% of broods in waters with salinity levels above 5 parts per thousand) and widespread post-hatch losses.

A presentation given by US Geological Survey scientists to the Menhaden Board of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission in August 2024 shows that past research, including research by CCB Director Dr. Bryan Watts, identified other species as being the primary prey of osprey in the higher salinity areas of the Bay. To make the leap that menhaden is the singular problem is not supported by the data.

By Virginia law, purse-seine fishing for menhaden is closed until the Sunday before the first Monday in May (i.e., there is no fishing until early May).
According to Ocean Harvesters’ fleet logs provided to state regulators, menhaden fishing did not begin in the Bay until the week of May 26 in 2025, reflecting late arrival/availability of menhaden that is controlled by nature.
CCB states in a photo caption that: “Most young that starve in the nest die within the first two weeks after hatching.” If chicks hatch in April/early May, those deaths occur before fishing started.
CCB records pairs arriving late February-early March; many never laid eggs at all, events that obviously precede any fishing and indicate that birds may not return to the area in good health.

Taken together, CCB’s description of timing, plus the dates of the legal fishing season, make clear that early nest failures and the chick mortalities in the first two weeks after hatching occurred before the menhaden fishery began harvesting.

Where CBF goes beyond the CCB advisory

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s press statement asserts that CCB’s results “indicate insufficient local food availability in areas where the osprey diet relies on forage fish like menhaden.” CBF points to a decline in bait landings and juxtaposes those figures with the industrial reduction fishery’s annual catch to imply cause and effect.

That is CBF’s biased interpretation, not CCB’s conclusion. CCB does not directly blame the menhaden fishery; it infers food limitation from breeding metrics and salinity as a prey proxy.

CCB itself reports weather-related nest losses (high winds, extended rains) and notes that even low-salinity areas performed worse than recent years, evidence that multiple environmental drivers were at work in 2025.
Ospreys are generalist fish-eaters that take a range of species of suitable size; when menhaden aren’t present inshore, ospreys use other prey (e.g., gizzard shad, catfish). CCB’s map/photo captions and standard references reflect this dietary flexibility.
Fleet operations and observations indicate menhaden have arrived late in recent years, a function of environmental conditions, not fishing. The fishery has no mechanism to delay migration or in-Bay availability.
While menhaden bait landings may be lower in the Bay than in the past, CBF fails to consider the level of effort. There are documented instances of pound netters who have stopped fishing over the past few years through a combination of factors including higher costs for equipment and the inability to find dependable (and affordable) labor.
Bait landings reflect harvest effort and market conditions and are not a direct measure of local fish abundance or near-shore availability to osprey.

CCB’s 2025 advisory shows food stress signals in higher-salinity waters, but the timing and the text do not support CBF’s misleading narrative that the regulated menhaden fishery caused this year’s early nest failures and first-weeks chick mortalities. Those events occurred before the season opened and menhaden boats were still at the dock. Environmental factors, weather-driven nest losses (high winds/extended rains) and widespread post-hatch starvation, are plainly implicated in CCB’s account and must be part of any honest discussion, despite the self-interested view of a special interest group like the CBF.

About Ocean Harvesters
Ocean Harvesters owns and operates a fleet of more than 30 fishing vessels in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. The company’s purse-seine fishing operation is exclusively engaged in the harvest of menhaden, a small, nutrient-dense fish used to produce fish meal, fish oil, and fish solubles. Both its Atlantic and Gulf Menhaden fisheries are certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council. Committed to responsible fishing operations, Ocean Harvesters is proud to be heir to a fishing legacy that extends nearly 150 years.