Saving Seafood

Menhaden Fishing Operations Sustainable, Says Menhaden Fisheries Coalition

October 29, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) is maintaining that their members’ fishing operations are sustainable and in compliance with menhaden regulations. The statement from MFC comes ahead of the annual Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC).

“The recent misleading attacks on menhaden fishermen have claimed that the fishery threatens the food supply of marine mammals and other predator species, despite there being no evidence to support this allegation,” the MFC states. “Instead, the best available science points to a thriving menhaden population that is successfully meeting its ecological roles.”

According to MFC, the ASMFC has delivered “good news” for the Atlantic menhaden stock over the past three years. An analysis conducted by MFC also found that 92% of Atlantic menhaden are left in the water “to serve as food for predators and to meet other environmental functions.”

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Menhaden Fisheries Coalition: Menhaden Fishing in New York, New Jersey is Sustainable, Infrequent

October 25, 2018 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

The past few months have seen an unnecessary controversy over legal and routine menhaden fishing in the federal waters off the coasts of New York and New Jersey. With the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) having met this week for its annual meeting, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) would, once again, like to unequivocally state that our members’ fishing operations in both the reduction and the bait fisheries are sustainable, and in compliance with all menhaden regulations.

The recent misleading attacks on menhaden fishermen have claimed that the fishery threatens the food supply of marine mammals and other predator species, despite there being no evidence to support this allegation. Instead, the best available science points to a thriving menhaden population that is successfully meeting its ecological roles.

Over the last three years, the ASMFC, which manages Atlantic menhaden, has repeatedly delivered good news for the stock, confirming in a stock assessment last year that the species is neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. As a direct result of this news, the Commission voted to once again raise the quota, which they determined could be implemented withno risk of overfishing the resource.

Looking at the Commission’s stock assessment data, there is no evidence suggesting that menhaden fisheries are negatively impacting predator species. A MFC analysis of that data published last year found that 92 percent of Atlantic menhaden are left in the water to serve as food for predators and to meet other environmental functions.

As part of the coastwide menhaden fishery, New York’s and New Jersey’s menhaden quotas are conservatively set by the ASMFC to ensure sustainability. Most of the recent criticism of the fishery has focused on two individual days of fishing: one in late August and another in early September. Since then, activist groups have continued to push a misleading narrative to the public, ignoring the ample evidence that points to there being more than enough menhaden to support whales, fish, fishermen and fishing communities.

Members of the MFC who support a healthy menhaden fishery off New York and New Jersey include Lund’s Fisheries in Cape May, New Jersey; the Garden State Seafood Association in Trenton, New Jersey; the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association in Montauk, New York; and Omega Protein in Reedville, Virginia.

About the MFC
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.

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

 

Political pressure affected quota decision, menhaden industry group charges

November 17, 2017 — A day after the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted to raise the catch limit on Atlantic menhaden by eight percent, a trade group claimed on Wednesday that the commission let political pressure affect not only that raise but how quotas were allocated across member states.

The commission’s Atlantic Menhaden Management Board approved an amendment to raise the total catch limit to 216,000 metric tons. However, in doing so, it gave each member state a minimum share of 0.5 percent. While those shares seem small for states that do not have an active menhaden fishery, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition said it will have a significant impact on the two largest fisheries, Virginia and New Jersey.

Virginia received an allocation of 78.66 percent, while New Jersey got 10.87 percent. No other state received more than 1.27 percent of the allocation.

“The creation of a system allowing non-fishing states to ‘horse-trade’ allocation, the ‘taking’ of quota from some to give to others, and the arbitrary moving of quota from the marine ingredients fishery to the bait fishery constitute inappropriate intrusions into the market economy, our members say,” the coalition said in a press release issued late Wednesday afternoon.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

 

ASMFC Succumbed to Political Pressure on Atlantic Menhaden Coastwide Quota, Allocation

WASHINGTON — November 15, 2017 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) reiterates its thanks to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) for allowing science to prevail in setting reference points for Atlantic menhaden, and rejecting the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force “rule-of-thumb” approach in favor of the development of species-specific ecological reference points. The MFC believes it is unfortunate, however, that on the second day of the meeting, politics prevailed.

Our members argue that the ASMFC did not follow the best available science in setting the overall menhaden quota level. Although the best available science would have allowed an increase from 200,000 metric tons to 314,000 MT with only a minimal risk of overfishing, we believe the Commission succumbed to political pressure in raising the quota just 8 percent, to 216,000 MT.  This led to the adoption of a complex reallocation scheme that we think unnecessarily pits state-against-state.

The commission gave each state other than New Jersey and Virginia – even those with no historic menhaden fishery — an additional 0.5 percent of the overall quota, taking that percentage from Virginia and New Jersey’s historic share. In addition, the scheme allows states to swap quota amongst each other using quota as a currency of trade.

Rather than adopt a reasonable and scientifically-justifiable quota level that addressed the needs of ALL states, our members maintain that the lower increase and allocation scheme creates a situation in which:

  • New Jersey’s significant bait fishery may see a statistically insignificant quota increase.
  • Virginia’s marine ingredients fishery will likely see a cut, and the Virginia bait industry will see a cut while their competitors in other states will get an increase.
  • Sets a precedent of giving fixed minima to states that didn’t qualify for it on the basis of their historical participation, which could have ramifications for other fisheries.

The creation of a system allowing non-fishing states to “horse-trade” allocation, the “taking” of quota from some to give to others, and the arbitrary moving of quota from the marine ingredients fishery to the bait fishery constitute inappropriate intrusions into the market economy, our members say.

The MFC believes a reasonable increase to just 240,000 MT would have allowed Virginia and New Jersey to receive their fair, historic, catch-based share of the resource, and also have allowed states such as Maine, Rhode Island, and New York, which have historic fisheries and sought a quota increase, to receive it via non-precedent breaking mechanisms. (Our member companies in Massachusetts also seek additional quota, although Massachusetts’s delegation did not represent their position at the meeting.)

Menhaden Fisheries Coalition Thanks ASMFC For Adopting Best Science on Menhaden Ecological Reference Points

WASHINGTON — November 14, 2017 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) thanks the Commissioners of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) Atlantic Menhaden Management Board for following the best available science in setting reference points for Atlantic menhaden.

As part of Amendment 3 to the Atlantic Menhaden Intestate Fishery Management Plan (FMP), the Commission voted 16-2 to continue current management measures for Atlantic menhaden until its Biological Ecological Reference Points (BERP) Workgroup finishes developing menhaden-specific ecological reference points (ERPs). These ERPs are supported by the MFC, and would manage menhaden based on its role in the ecosystem as forage for predator species.

The best science shows that managing forage fish according to general biological principals, as advocated by various environmental and sportfishing groups, is not the correct approach. Earlier this year, Dr. Ray Hilborn and a team of top fishery scientists released a study that recommended forage fish be managed on a case-by-case basis, based on the unique biological and ecological factors affecting individual forage species. The BERP Workgroup is following this advice in its work developing a menhaden-specific management model.

While these reference points are being developed, current menhaden management has led to a healthy stock. The ASMFC’s 2015 and 2017 stock assessments of Atlantic menhaden found that menhaden is not overfished and not experiencing overfishing.

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.

National Wildlife Federation Revives Menhaden Myths with Latest Petition

October 24, 2017 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition: 

The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) is misleading the public on the health and history of Atlantic menhaden – an economically critical fish species along the East Coast. Pushing an online petition and enlisting the help of Hollywood celebrities to call for further restrictions on the menhaden fishery, NWF is repeating and amplifying oft-repeated misinformation on the species.

Menhaden were not overharvested, and quota cuts have not been responsible for their resurgence. NWF states that “fishing pressure” had reduced the coastwide menhaden population, and the species has only begun to recover thanks to harvest reductions that went into place in 2012. Neither of these claims is accurate. Five years ago, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), the interstate body responsible for menhaden management, instituted harvest cuts based on an inaccurate and flawed stock assessment. But two improved, subsequent assessments, one released in 2015 and one earlier this year, instead confirm that menhaden are not overfished, nor are they experiencing overfishing.

More importantly, the assessments also found that this is not a recent development: menhaden have not been overfished at any point in the last decade, and menhaden fishing mortality has been on a long-term downward trend and is near the lowest it has ever been. Last year, the ASMFC considered the menhaden stock to be healthy enough that they voted to raise the coastwide quota.

The menhaden fishery does not heavily impact striped bass. Menhaden are one of the many forage species that are eaten by striped bass. But recent science finds that the menhaden fishery does not have as much of an impact on predator species as commonly thought. A study published this April by Dr. Ray Hilborn and a team of fisheries scientists concluded that the size of predator populations had little correlation to the number of forage fish available to them, and that other factors, including the location and naturally fluctuating populations of forage species, were just as influential.

It also found that, specifically in the case of menhaden, that predators such as striped bass are not in direct competition with menhaden fishermen: bass typically target smaller fish, while fishermen generally catch older fish.

Menhaden oversight did not begin in 2012. While 2012 marked the first time that a coastwide quota was put into effect, the NWF is wrong to suggest that this marks the beginning of menhaden oversight. The ASMFC has monitored the menhaden fishery since the late 1950s, and state-level catch limits and restrictions were in place long before the 2012 quota.

NWF surrogates are also wrong characterizing the current debate over menhaden reference points as the menhaden fishery wanting to “remove restrictions” on the species. Members of the menhaden fishery instead support quotas and reference points for menhaden that are supported by the science produced by the ASMFC, and reflect the healthy state of the menhaden population.

Menhaden are not “the most important fish in the sea.” Credible scientists do not consider any one species “most important.” The moniker “the most important fish in the sea” was coined by Rutgers University English professor H. Bruce Franklin in his 2007 book of the same name. The phrase stems from entirely qualitative judgments made by the author that lack scientific founding. There has been no scientific study that validates this claim, and studies that have attempted to analyze how menhaden affects other species and the ecosystem, like the Hilborn et al. study published earlier this year, have found that it is just one of many factors impacting predator species.

The Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Menhaden Advisory Committee discussed the book upon its publication in a March 2008 meeting and concluded, “the book should be sold as a book of fiction and generally disregarded.” There is no scientific evidence supporting the hyperbolic statement that any one species of fish is “most important,” and this phrase represents only Dr. Franklin’s opinion, rather than any scientific consensus.

About the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition 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.

Update Assessment Confirms Sustainable Atlantic Menhaden Stock

Atlantic fisheries managers will take positive findings into consideration for management purposes

ALEXANDRIA, Va. – August 2, 2017 – The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition: 

Today, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) was presented with an updated stock assessment that shows Atlantic menhaden is neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. These positive conclusions mirror the results of the ASMFC’s 2015 benchmark assessment of Atlantic menhaden, which showed a healthy and sustainable stock.

The 2017 Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment Update, prepared by the ASMFC’s Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment Subcommittee using data through the 2016 fishing year, shows that fishing mortality remains well below the ASMFC’s target levels (see Table 7.2.1.1 below). The assessment further indicates that the target has not been exceeded for many years; this includes 2012, when the ASMFC cut Atlantic menhaden catch rates by 20 percent based on a flawed stock assessment.

“We’ve maintained for years that Atlantic menhaden is being managed sustainably, and today’s update assessment continues to prove our case,” said Peter Himchak, Senior Fisheries Scientist at Omega Protein, a member of the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition. “Coalition members who make their living in the menhaden fishery have worked diligently to safeguard this resource, and today’s findings validate their hard work.”

The Assessment Update approved today also shows an increase in Atlantic menhaden biomass and numbers of individual fish (see Figure 6.2.3.4 below). Taken in combination, positive trends for both biomass and numbers of individual menhaden are strong indications of a healthy menhaden stock.

In 2012, the ASMFC slashed Atlantic menhaden catch rates after a flawed stock assessment indicated menhaden was being overfished. However, a 2015 assessment using improved methods and better science showed that menhaden had not been overfished in 2012 or at any time since the 1960s, and that the stock was healthy. Based on these positive results, the ASMFC raised the catch quota for Atlantic menhaden in both 2015 and 2016, but catch rates remain below 2012 levels when quota reductions were implemented.

“This update assessment further confirms our view that the 2012 harvest cuts were unwarranted and not based on sound science,” said Jeff Kaelin, Government Relations Coordinator at Lund’s Fisheries, another Coalition member. “In large part due to those cuts, we are underfishing this resource and unnecessarily hurting the fishermen who depend on it. The ASMFC’s menhaden board has options before it that could restore the fishery to pre-2012 levels, and we ask that they give those options the consideration they deserve.”

About the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition 
The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition is a collective of menhaden fishermen, related businesses, and supporting industries. Comprised of businesses along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, the 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.

Forage Fish Should Be Managed on a Case-by-Case Basis: Menhaden Science Committee

Findings by ASMFC BERP Workgroup align with recent forage fish research by Hilborn et al.

WASHINGTON – July 31, 2017 – The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition. Saving Seafood previously covered Hilborn et al., which found that previous forage fish research may have overestimated the impact of forage fishing on their predators. Saving Seafood also produced a video about the study, which can be found here:

Earlier this year, a team of scientists led by Dr. Ray Hilborn found, among other conclusions, that forage fish are best managed on a case-by-case basis that accounts for their unique environmental roles. In a memo earlier this month, an inter-state scientific review committee tasked with incorporating the ecological role of menhaden into management determined that this conclusion aligns with their own findings.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (ASMFC) Biological and Ecological Reference Points (BERP) Workgroup, which is leading development of ecosystem-based fisheries management for Atlantic menhaden, reviewed the Hilborn et al. paper earlier this summer. It concluded that the paper’s recommendation of using stock-specific models to evaluate ecosystem needs were similar to models being developed by the workgroup.

“The [workgroup] is currently developing a suite of intermediate complexity menhaden-specific models that align with the general recommendations from both Dr. Hilborn and the 2015 Stock Assessment Peer Review Panel,” said the July 14 memo, Review of Hilborn et al. 2017.[1] “The [workgroup] anticipates that these models will be ready for peer review in 2019.”

The Hilborn et al. study, published in April in Fisheries Research, found that there were several variables in forage fish species that make imprecise, one-size-fits-all management approaches difficult. Most importantly, there seems to be little correlation between the number of predator species in the water and the number of forage fish, making it nearly impossible to determine a catch level that is appropriate for forage fish as a whole. Other variables include the natural variability of forage fish, which is different from species to species, and relative locations of predators and forage species.

“We suggest that any evaluation of harvest policies for forage fish needs to include these issues, and that models tailored for individual species and ecosystems are needed to guide fisheries management policy,” the paper finds.

The ASMFC will consider the work of the BERP, including its review of Dr. Hilborn’s paper, at its upcoming 2017 summer meeting, to be held from August 1-3 in Alexandria, Virginia.

[1] ASMFC Biological Ecological Reference Points Workgroup, “Memorandum: Review of Hilborn et al. 2017,” July 14, 2017