Saving Seafood

BEN LANDRY: Call to shut down menhaden fishery is unwarranted

March 2, 2026 – The following is an opinion piece by Ben Landry, vice president of public affairs for Ocean Fleet Services, the parent company of Ocean Harvesters, originally published in the Baltimore Sun:

On Feb. 16, The Baltimore Sun published an editorial urging a moratorium on menhaden fishing in the Chesapeake Bay (Virginia and Maryland have a small fish problem). Unfortunately, the piece contains errors and misleading claims that strongly suggest it was not independently researched, but instead repackaged long-running advocacy talking points from groups such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

Before endorsing what would amount to a shutdown of a historic fishery — and the hundreds of working waterfront jobs it supports — the editorial board owes readers something more than recycled press- release advocacy. Did the board reach out to Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission scientists or Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) biologists? Did it review the current stock status findings that explicitly state Atlantic menhaden are not overfished and overfishing is not occurring? Did it consider that the fishery is certified as sustainable under the Marine Stewardship Council program?

Several claims in the editorial need correction.

First, the editorial asserts a “reduction in the menhaden population” and suggests there is “too much evidence of overfishing.” That is demonstrably false. Marylandʼs own DNR juvenile striped bass survey reported last year that Atlantic menhaden were “widespread” in the Chesapeake Bay for the third consecutive year, with recent survey results among the strongest in decades.

ASMFCʼs benchmark findings are clear: Menhaden are not overfished, and overfishing is not occurring. And the fishery is MSC-certified for sustainability. Even last summerʼs menhaden die-offs — events The Sun itself has covered — underscore that there are significant menhaden concentrations in Maryland waters.

Second, the editorial claims that “more dead osprey chicks” are “starving from the reduction in the menhaden population,” and the photo caption amplifies an even stronger assertion: that Virginia “allows the killing of millions of this oily fish causing widespread osprey chick starvation” in tidal bay areas. That allegation is not based on science. Researchers have repeatedly cautioned against treating menhaden as a singular explanation for osprey outcomes. A 2024 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) presentation to the ASMFC and in a letter to Congress described osprey challenges as complex and multi-factor, noting a large long-term increase in the bayʼs osprey population before recent leveling. USGS has also made clear that osprey reproduction challenges are occurring in many places around the country — not uniquely tied to any one prey species, let alone one fishery.

Third, the editorial says striped bass “are in collapse” because the Chesapeake is a primary nursery. Striped bass are indeed struggling, and Maryland DNRʼs Young-of-Year Striped Bass Survey has documented below-average spawning success for the seventh consecutive year. But the editorial fails to acknowledge what ASMFC has documented about why striped bass are declining: The primary drivers are recreational overfishing (for much of the past decade), environmental conditions and disease — not menhaden harvest levels. The editorial also ignores that, until very recently, ASMFC found the recreational fishery overharvested striped bass for years; only recently has overfishing ended, while the stock remains overfished.

Fourth, the editorial proposes a moratorium “while a federally funded study takes place.” More science is always welcome, but “pause everything until science is finalized” is not how fisheries are managed under the Magnuson-Stevens framework or the interstate system that governs menhaden. Menhaden management already occurs through a formal, transparent ASMFC process. And there is already bay-focused scientific work underway: The National Science Foundation-affiliated Science Center for Marine Fisheries has funded a Chesapeake Bay menhaden research roadmap led by scientists from UMCES, VIMS and NOAA to inform any bay-specific cap with defensible science. A shutdown now — despite a healthy coastwide stock and clear findings that the stock is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring — would be an unnecessary and economically reckless “solution” looking for a problem.

Fifth, the editorial suggests the fishery can simply shift harvest elsewhere — “in Atlantic Ocean coastal waters … and in the Gulf of Mexico” — as if the bay closure would be painless. Weather conditions and migrations require access to the fish where they are and when they can be caught. That argument betrays a lack of understanding of fishing reality and is callous because it ignores the concentrated workforce and supply chain centered on Reedville, Virginia, and the Northern Neck — jobs with real wages, real benefits and real union protections that are not replaceable in those communities. A forced closure would hit working families first.

Finally, the editorial repeatedly misidentifies the company that harvests fish — another sign that basic research was not done. Omega Protein has not harvested for eight years. Since 2018, it has been a processor that manufactures products such as fish meal and fish oil from menhaden obtained from two sources. Most of the menhaden purchased by Omega Protein is caught by Ocean Harvesters, a majority-U.S.-owned fishing company employing U.S. captains and union fishermen — members of UFCW Local 400 — many from multi-generational fishing families, including minority fishermen. In addition, Omega Protein purchases from menhaden bait fishermen when market conditions are such that supply outstrips demand. If The Sun is going to editorialize about shutting down a fishery and disrupting a regional blue-collar economy, it should at least get the names and roles of the companies involved correct.

The Chesapeake Bay deserves thoughtful, science- based management — not policy-by-editorial fueled by activist narratives. The Sun should correct the record, engage directly with ASMFC and Maryland DNR scientists and treat working waterfront communities with the seriousness and respect they deserve.

New analysis: No, scientists didn’t “recommend” a 54% menhaden cut

December 3, 2025 —  The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

In the weeks since the 2025 ASMFC Annual Meeting, there’s been a widespread misconception circulated by environmental and recreational fishing groups that the ASMFC Menhaden Board’s technical and scientific advisors “recommended” a 50% or 54% cut (to 108,450 mt) to the Atlantic menhaden total allowable catch (TAC), and that the Commission ignored those recommendations. That is not the case. Rather, scientists ran a set of “if–then” scenarios for managers, without making a preferred TAC recommendation. The Technical Committee and the ERP Working Group supply projections and risk information; the commissioners decide policy.

The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition has undertaken a detailed analysis and thorough review of all the meeting materials and reports, and of the entire recording of the meeting available online. It shows there is nowhere the Technical Committee (TC) or the ERP Working Group “recommends” a 54% cut, or any specific TAC. Staff consistently present options and risks at the Board’s request, not a recommendation.

The only time a 54% cut is presented as a recommendation is when Commissioner Proxy Matt Gates (CT) incorrectly described the option provided at the Board’s request as a recommendation. His motion reads: “I would like to make the motion for the TAC recommended in the TC and working groups memo that achieves a 50% probability of achieving the ecological reference point F target… move to set the TAC… at 108,450 metric tons….”

What the record shows (brief)

  • No staff “recommendation” for 54%. Technical staff presented options and risk probabilities at the Board’s request; they did not tell the Board which TAC to choose. The sole place a “recommendation” is claimed is the Gates motion quoted above. The staff materials do not recommend that TAC; they simply show it as one scenario.
  • Why 2025 numbers differ from 2022. The 2025 update uses a lower natural-mortality (M) estimate, which re-scales the entire 1955–present series (average biomass ≈ 37% lower vs. 2022). That’s a model re-interpretation, not a stock crash, total biomass is slightly higher than in 2021.
  • Considering economics is required. Section 6(a) of ASMFC’s ISFMP Charter: “Social and economic impacts and benefits must be taken into account.” The Board did exactly that.
  • The chosen 20% TAC reduction is biologically conservative.Projections show 0% probability of exceeding the ERP F-threshold (no overfishing) in 2026–2028, and only 2–4% risk of dipping below the fecundity threshold, nearly indistinguishable from a ~54% cut on that metric.
  • Threshold vs. target, in plain terms. The threshold is the do-not-cross line that ensures enough menhaden for today’s predators. The targetassumes a future in which striped bass are rebuilt and fished at their own F-target. That’s not today’s world, striped bass are overfished and being rebuilt at lower F.
  • Cutting menhaden alone can’t rebuild stripers. As Dr. Katie Drew told the Board (Feb. 2020): “you have to adjust all of them at once… if you don’t adjust the striped bass fishing mortality nothing you do to menhaden will bring that population back… we need to adjust both of them together.”

Read the full analysis here

Examples of the inaccurate “recommendation” narrative (links)

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.

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 (FTHRESHOLD) “would cause declines in biomass for more sensitive predator species, particularly striped bass.”  “As a result, … the probability of exceeding the ERP FTHRESHOLD 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.

Prominent recreational fishing writer calls out sport fishing groups for their obsession with sustainable menhaden fisheries

November 13, 2023 – Charles Witek, a fisheries consultant, recreational fisherman, and writer of the “One Angler’s Voyage” blog, has recently called out sportfishing groups like the Coastal Conservation Association and Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership for their “aggressive effort to place new restrictions” on commercial menhaden fisheries at the expense of needed management measures for recreational species.

In an October 8 post focused on the Gulf of Mexico, “Menhaden advocacy: A low-cost cause for recreational fishing organizations,” Mr. Witek called menhaden “the perfect cause for such organizations to take up, as it allows them to assume the mantle of conservationists, while arguing for regulations that will only impact the commercial fleet and will not place any additional burden on the recreational fishery.”

Menhaden fishermen at work

But as Mr. Witek pointed out, the Gulf menhaden population is “in good shape.” The most recent benchmark stock assessment completed by the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission in 2018 found that menhaden were neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. The following year, the fishery was certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council. An updated stock assessment conducted in 2021 showed the stock remains healthy. Meanwhile, other species in the Gulf — including speckled trout targeted by the recreational sector — are not so healthy.

“Given the overfished state of the speckled trout stock one might logically expect Coastal Conservation Association Louisiana, which was such a strong advocate of additional regulations to protect the undoubtedly healthy Gulf menhaden stock, to demand that Louisiana take immediate, meaningful action to rebuild the speckled trout population,” Mr. Witek wrote. “However, just the opposite occurred.”

“When recreational fishing groups begin to focus most of their conservation efforts on menhaden stocks, which are generally healthy, and ignore — or worse, oppose — needed management measures for marine finfish that are often sought by anglers, such groups’ commitment to conservation might well be questioned,” he wrote.

In an October 26 post, “Conserving striped bass: Don’t be misled by menhaden,” Mr. Witek noted a similar dynamic playing out on the Atlantic coast, but replacing speckled trout with striped bass.

“Let’s get two things straight from the start: Striped bass are having some serious problems, while Atlantic menhaden are doing just fine,” Mr. Witek wrote.

The latest striped bass stock assessment by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission shows the stock is overfished; Maryland has experienced spawning failure for the past five years; Virginia has experienced spawning failure for the past three years. Meanwhile, Atlantic menhaden are neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing; the fishery is certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council; and managers have adopted ecological reference points, making it the first East Coast fishery to account for not just the health of the individual species, but also its role in the ecosystem.

“It’s completely clear, from a scientific perspective, that the current lack of striped bass has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of menhaden,” Mr. Witek wrote.

That hasn’t stopped recreational anglers like Phil Zalesak, president of the Southern Maryland Recreational Fishing Organization, from blaming the commercial menhaden fishery for the problems in the recreational sector. This can have negative impacts for striped bass conservation, according to Mr. Witek.

“Where Mr. Zalesak’s comments [at a recent ASMFC meeting] really went astray was when he noted that Maryland’s striped bass harvest had decreased by 72 percent since 2016, then alleged that such decrease was due to a lack of menhaden, and not overfishing,” Mr. Witek wrote. “That comment, more than any other that he made, exposed the danger of focusing on menhaden, rather than on striped bass biology, for if managers took that allegation at face value, it would mean that to rebuild the striped bass stock, their first concern should be rebuilding the menhaden stock, and not addressing striped bass fishing mortality. Such course could only lead to more problems for the bass population.”

It is important for fishery managers to stay focused on real conservation measures needed to rebuild the striped bass population and not get distracted by “unsupported allegations of a menhaden shortage,” Mr. Witek wrote.

“For make no mistake: There are people who are all too willing to stall the striped bass’ recovery, and to put the bass’ future in peril, in order to increase their short-term gains from the fishery.”

The ASMFC’s Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board “must hear our desire to reduce striped bass fishing mortality…It must hear of our concerns with spawning failure in the Chesapeake Bay…But the Board shouldn’t have to hear about menhaden at all,” Mr. Witek concluded.

Mr. Witek is an attorney who has held a seat on the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, served as president of the New York State Outdoor Writers’ Association, and represents New York on various fishery management bodies.

Panel rejects proposal to restrict menhaden fishing along Louisiana coast

November 9, 2020 — A growing conflict over Louisiana’s but largest but perhaps least-known commercial fishery came to a head this week when state leaders rejected a plan to restrict large-scale menhaden fishing near the state’s coastline.

The Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission on Thursday voted down a proposal backed by recreational fishing and conservation groups that would have established a menhaden fishing “exclusion zone” to protect fragile coastal habitat and marine species from the long nets and large vessels operated by the menhaden fishing industry. The zone, which would have extended one mile out along the entire Louisiana coastline, mirrored restrictions enacted in other states, including Mississippi and Alabama.

Also called pogies, menhaden are tiny silver fish that play an outsized role in the Gulf of Mexico’s fishing industry. By volume, the menhaden fishery is the largest in Louisiana and the Gulf, and the second in the U.S. Often boasting annual harvests of more than 550,000 tons, the menhaden fishery far outweighs the Gulf’s famed commercial catches, including crab and shrimp.

Read the full story at Houma Today

Adjudicator shoots down objections to MSC certification of Atlantic menhaden

August 1, 2019 — An independent adjudicator has dismissed nearly all of the objections raised against granting the Atlantic menhaden fishery certification by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).

Omega Protein, the Houston, Texas-based division of Canada’s Cooke filed for the MSC label for both Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico menhaden fisheries in June 2017 and received a positive recommendation from SAI Global for the Atlantic fishery in March 2019.

But the request also received two objections, one from the Nature Conservancy and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the other by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TCRP), the Coastal Conservation Association and the American Sportfishing Association.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News