Chesapeake Bay Archives - Page 4 of 35

USGS faces big cuts, endangering Chesapeake science

June 26, 2025 — Vital research into threats to the Chesapeake Bay from invasive blue catfish, PFAS contamination, climate change and land use is on the chopping block as the Trump administration aims to decimate if not eliminate ecological studies done by the U.S. Geological Survey.

In its proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 released May 30, the White House has called for a 90% cut in funding for ecological research, laboratories and personnel at the USGS, which is the science arm of the U.S. Department of the Interior.

“It’s the most important mission area in USGS that they’re cutting,” said Scott Phillips, who retired from the agency in 2023 after more than 25 years as its Chesapeake Bay science coordinator. Beyond water quality, he noted, fish and wildlife are “what people care about.”

Read the full article at the Bay Journal

Officials spark debate with proposal to lift ban on controversial fishing practice: ‘One of the biggest unknowns’

June 18, 2025 — Maryland officials are considering lifting a current ban on fishing for striped bass.

However, reopening fishing could impact the species’ already-low reproduction rates and threaten its survival in the Chesapeake Bay.

What’s happening?

As Maryland Matters reported, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources is looking to allow striped bass fishing, with restrictions, in April and May. In exchange for opening up springtime fishing, the department proposed a complete ban in August to prevent the heat-related deaths that can follow catch-and-release methods.

The DNR stated that it wants to approach its striped bass fishing season similarly to how it’s handled in the Potomac River of Virginia, per Maryland Matters. It also wants to increase fishing tourism in the spring and support local fishing guides and tackle shops.

However, even catch-and-release fishing is linked to declining striped bass populations during spawning season. This impact is most significant in the hot summer months when fish are extracted from the water and can’t survive after anglers toss them back in from their hooks.

“That’s one of the biggest unknowns about this kind of fishery,” said Reid Nelson, a fisheries ecologist. “If this fishery blows up [with a lot more catch-and-release in spring] even if the fish continue to spawn, does that impact the quality of larvae?”

Read the full article at TCD

Chesapeake Bay’s blue crab population falls to ‘distressing low’

June 10, 2025 — Blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay have dropped to a “distressing low” number, experts say, marking several years of repeated declines and raising concern about their long-term health.

The estimated number of crabs was 238 million, the second-lowest point since an annual blue crab dredge survey to measure their population started in the 1990s and coming shortly after 2022’s record low of 226 million crabs, according to experts. The survey found that the decline hit all of the crustaceans, regardless of maturity or gender.

“It’s disturbing because we’ve seen in all sectors — adult males, adult females and juvenile crabs — drops in their numbers,” said Allison Colden, Maryland executive director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. The biggest concern, she and other experts said, is the drop in juvenile crabs.

“There’s a disconnect,” she said, “in the productivity of the blue crab population and the number of females in the water.”

The causes of their decline are a bit of a mystery to scientists. The blue crab population can vary widely each year, depending on several factors, including changes to their habitat — especially a loss of underwater grasses that are critical for young crabs, an increase in predators such as blue catfish and red drum fish, pollution runoff into the bay and dramatic shifts in wind, current and storm patterns that can especially affect juvenile crabs.

“If it gets too cold too quickly that causes them to die, and we’ve seen a very high rate of crabs dying over the winter,” Colden said.

Read the full article at The Washington Post

Chesapeake Bay blue crab population dip worries experts

June 2, 2025 — The most updated edition of the annual Chesapeake Bay blue crab winter dredge survey has found that the blue crab population in the U.S. states of Maryland and Virginia is the second-smallest recorded in recent history.

The survey, conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, estimated the total crab population to be 238 million, just above 2022’s all-time low of 226 million.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Fishery lawsuit merging coastal states could reel in Trump

May 14, 2025 — Atlantic striped bass season begins on the Chesapeake Bay May 16 amid mounting tensions between fishing industry groups and regulatory agencies.

A federal lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by fishing industry organizations bordering the Atlantic Ocean and its inland waterways, including the Chesapeake Bay and Hudson River Estuary.

The suit targets the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which coordinates conservation and management of coastal fish species shared by 15 states along the Atlantic coast, along with several other federal agencies.

Captain Rob Newberry, chair of Delmarva Fisheries Association (DFA), and Brian Hardman, chair of the Maryland Charter Boats Association, are leading the challenge against current Maryland state regulations, particularly those concerning striped bass.

The following was released by Southern Maryland News

Menhaden fishers urge ASMFC to maintain quotas in face of NGO criticism

May 6, 2025 — The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition and six shop stewards representing union fishermen participating in the Chesapeake Bay menhaden fishery are urging the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to maintain current allowable catch levels in the face of NGO criticism.

The ASMFC Menhaden Management Board is meeting on 7 May to discuss management of the species. In a letter to the board, members of the UFCW Local 400 union called on board members to listen to fishermen and adopt regulatory practices based on “sound scientific principles” rather than listen to environmental groups that claim the fishery is responsible for declines in other species in the Chesapeake Bay.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

DARAWN KENNER: Facts, not rhetoric, should drive menhaden decisions

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.

Read the full opinion piece at the Virginian-Pilot

USGS Challenges Simple Narrative Linking Menhaden to Osprey Decline

May 5, 2025 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

A letter from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) sent last week to the House Natural Resources Committee indicates multiple environmental stressors—not just prey availability—are responsible for recent osprey reproduction issues in the Chesapeake Bay. The USGS’ conclusions challenge narratives pushed by menhaden fishery opponents, including a widely publicized study by Dr. Bryan Watts of the Center for Conservation Biology, which linked a decline in osprey reproduction in Virginia’s Mobjack Bay to reduced availability of menhaden.

Menhaden increase in osprey diets is statistically insignificant

Specifically, the USGS finds that the Watts et al. (2024) study did not demonstrate a biologically significant change in the proportion of menhaden in the osprey diet over time. The agency also noted that menhaden made up a slightly higher portion of the diet in 2021 compared to 2006–07, although the difference is statistically insignificant. “Although the proportion of Menhaden as a percentage of total diet in 2021 is numerically larger than the 2006–07 value, the two values are bounded by overlapping error bars, and are thus not different in a biologically meaningful way,” the letter stated.

“The amount of food delivered to young in a nest can be influenced by many factors, including prey abundance, access to prey, … increased predation risk, parental condition, brood size, and adverse weather conditions,” said the USGS letter, which was delivered on May 2. “Ecological systems such as this are complex and occur at large scales that make it difficult and sometimes not possible to measure and accurately estimate the influence of all contributing factors.”

Chesapeake osprey trends also seen around the country

Following bird conservation measures including the banning of DDT, the Atlantic Coast osprey population increased by nearly 600% between 1966 and 2022. In the Chesapeake Bay, it has increased by about 1800% since 1960. While scientists have observed a leveling off of osprey populations between 2012 and 2022, populations remain high by historical standards. Furthermore, the USGS reports that this trend has been observed in numerous other locations including Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Delaware, as well as the Pacific Coast, raising serious questions about any impact from the menhaden fishery since there is no menhaden fishery in those locations.

Overfished Striped Bass also an important food source for osprey

The USGS also identifies striped bass as an important food source for osprey in parts of the Chesapeake Bay and notes that the status of this stock may influence osprey reproduction. “Preliminary observations made by USGS scientists during a 2024 Osprey nesting study in the vicinity of the Choptank River suggest Menhaden and Striped Bass may be the primary prey type there,” the letter states. It further explains that “the principal contributing factor to poor breeding performance was loss of young due to starvation,” likely caused by “limited prey capture and/or prey delivery to nests.” Additionally, the letter notes that “the USGS has included Striped Bass among the list of prey species captured and consumed by Osprey at some Chesapeake study sites,” and concludes that “many of the factors that affect the status of the Striped Bass stock in the Chesapeake could also have direct or indirect effects on Osprey reproduction.”

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) has found that Atlantic striped bass are currently overfished, with spawning stock biomass below the sustainable threshold as of the most recent assessment. Over the past decade, recreational fishing—particularly in the Chesapeake Bay—has been the primary driver of striped bass mortality, accounting for the vast majority of total removals, including substantial losses from catch-and-release mortality¹. The ASMFC has repeatedly cited recreational release mortality as a major factor in the species’ decline² and has responded with new management measures aimed at rebuilding the stock by 2029³.Conversely, the Atlantic menhaden fishery has repeatedly been found to be healthy and sustainably managed. The most recent stock assessment by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission in 2022 found menhaden is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring. The fishery has been certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, the gold standard for seafood sustainability, since 2019.

Osprey nesting sites in the Chesapeake are now at a surplus

The USGS scientists reported that the number of breeding pairs in the Chesapeake Bay increased from approximately 1,450 pairs in 1973 to around 10,000 pairs in 2020—an increase of nearly 600 percent. “All estimates indicate that the density of breeding pairs of Osprey in the Chesapeake has grown substantially since the 1970s,” the letter states. It also notes that “there are many natural structures, duck blinds, and manmade platforms suitable for nesting Osprey in the Chesapeake,” and that “Osprey nesting sites in the Chesapeake are now at a surplus and unused platforms are frequently being taken over by Canada Geese.” While the letter does not conclude that the population has exceeded environmental limits, it acknowledges that “as a natural population regulation process,” higher osprey densities increase competition for limited resources such as food and nesting sites, and that “growth usually continues until the population reaches the maximum population size the environment can support.”

VIMS also found no clear relationship with menhaden

Last fall, scientists from the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) also found that the Watts study did not “establish a clear relationship with menhaden abundance and availability.” Both the original Watts study⁴ and the VIMS rebuttal⁵ were published in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science.

The USGS findings make clear that osprey reproduction is shaped by a wide array of environmental factors—and that no single fishery can shoulder the blame. The letter shows that blaming the menhaden fishery for complex ecological trends in osprey populations oversimplifies the science and misleads the public. Moreover, the overfished status of striped bass—driven largely by recreational fishing—may also be a contributing factor.

Footnotes

¹ Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Atlantic Striped Bass Stock Assessment Update. October 2022.

² Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Amendment 7 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan. May 2022.

³ Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Addendum II to Amendment 7. January 2024.

⁴ Watts Bryan D. , Stinson Christine H. , McLean Peter K. , Glass K. Andrew , Academia Michael H. , Byrd Mitchell A. (2023). Prey provisioning and diet of Osprey in lower Chesapeake Bay: A comparative study. Frontiers in Marine Science.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2023.1284462/full

⁵ Latour Robert J. , Gartland James , Ralph Gina M. (2024). Commentary: Prey provisioning and diet of Osprey in lower Chesapeake Bay: A comparative study. Frontiers in Marine Science.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2024.1416687/full

Could planned federal funding cuts jeopardize Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay restoration plans?

April 28, 2025 — The Trump administration’s plans to propose budget cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) could jeopardize efforts to restore the health of Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay, according to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF).

According to the CBF, the administration’s potential budget cuts would slash NOAA’s total budget by $1.7 billion, from $6.1 billion to $4.5 billion. It would also reduce funding for the National Marine Fisheries Service by approximately 30 percent.

How would the cuts affect the Chesapeake Bay?

The proposed budget plan would significantly reduce NOAA’s financial support and scientific leadership for Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts.

Under the plan, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which currently operates with a budget of $1.1 billion, would be reduced to $789.3 million in fiscal year 2026 under the planned budget.

The NMFS houses NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Office, which leads science initiatives across the region and works closely with the EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program on restoration efforts, according to the CBF.

Read the full story at CBS News

US lawmakers propose transferring blue catfish inspections back to the FDA

March 27, 2025 — Recently introduced legislation meant to improve conservation in the Chesapeake Bay region of the United States would also reduce inspection requirements for blue catfish, making it easier to operate a commercial fishery.

“The bill would also enable more watermen to improve their bottom line by harvesting invasive blue catfish,” Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Federal Director Keisha Sedlacek said in a statement. “This would help protect native Bay species and the seafood industry from this voracious predator while supporting the region’s economy.”

Read the full article at SeafoodSource