The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) has decided to cut the coastal menhaden quota by 9 percent for 2027, reducing it from the current 186,840 metric ton (MT) limit to 170,000 MT.
Following the cut in 2027, the commission settled on another cut in 2028 which will reduce the quota to 155,000 MT, marking a 15 percent cut from the current limit. Those cuts are smaller than an originally proposed 39 percent reduction, which would have cut the quota heavily in 2027.
Ahead of the meeting, environmental and recreational fishing groups were calling for steep cuts to the menhaden quota, with some pushing for a total ban on commercial menhaden fishing in certain regions. Reasons cited for the desired cuts varied from a claimed link between declines in striped bass and the fishery to drops in the osprey population that environmental activists also blamed on the menhaden reduction fishery.
A group of U.S. lawmakers also called on the ASMFC to cut the quota of menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay, citing a lack of abundance data and the declines in osprey as justification for cuts.
Throughout the calls for reduced quotas, representatives of the commercial menhaden industry continued to point to a lack of any evidence that the fishery was causing adverse environmental impacts. The menhaden fishery, per the ASMFC’s own science before the meeting, was not overfished nor was it experiencing overfishing.
Reactions to the proposed quota reduction were mixed.
Ocean Harvesters and Omega Protein – the largest fisher and processor of the species on the U.S. East Coast – said the reduction was “unnecessary” but also said the commissioners in charge of the decision faced a difficult decision.
“We disagree with the quota reduction, but we appreciate the commissioners who listened to fishermen, considered the consequences for our communities, and worked through a difficult process,” Ben Landry, a spokesperson for the fishery, said in a release. “They deserve our thanks for their time and effort.”
Members of the industry criticized some of the environmental groups and fishing opponents and said they engaged in unnecessary attacks on commissioners and the industry.
“The Forage Fish Campaign accused the commission of protecting a single foreign-owned company. The American Saltwater Guides Association said fishing industry representatives were among the ‘least scientifically educated’ people in the room and suggested they cared only about their own wallets. Menhaden Defenders declared it a ‘dark day’ and said the commission had done ‘exactly the wrong thing,’” the American Small Pelagics Network said. “For these organizations, a commission that listens to fishermen and considers economic consequences is worthy of contempt unless it delivers the exact outcome they demand.”
The American Saltwater Guides Association, on its Facebook page, claimed the industrial menhaden and lobster bait industries “refuse to recognize science, don’t care about sustainability, and ultimately guaranteed the menhaden decline will continue."
"They got the most mic time with the loudest and least scientifically educated representatives in the room," it said. "
The American Small Pelagics Network said it condemns the language used against commissioners and managers and pointed out that when recreational striped bass quota reductions were considered, the organizations argued against them for economic reasons – similar to the menhaden industry’s arguments.
“Economic concerns were worthy of consideration when recreational fishing was affected; menhaden fishermen and their families deserve the same consideration,” the network said. “Commissioners heard those concerns and calls for deeper reductions. They rejected status quo and a substantially larger cut and then adopted a phased compromise. The organizations attacking them responded by insulting fishermen, disparaging commissioners, and suggesting that anyone who disagrees must be serving a corporate agenda. Their response says more about their approach to disagreement than the people who worked to reach a decision.”