2025 Forage Fish Conservation Wrap-Up

December 18, 2025

Late in the year, the menhaden reduction industry gained ground at dismantling hard-fought conservation wins for coastal ecosystems and sportfish populations. Where does that leave us now?

For our usual year-end forage fish wrap up, we decided this year to dive into the latest alarming menhaden regulatory decisions, what they mean, and let you know how you can continue to engage decision-makers to try to save the hard-fought, science-based wins that our angling and conservation community has worked so hard to put in place.

Atlantic Overview

As we reported two months ago, the Menhaden Management Board of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission voted in late October to cut the 2026 Atlantic menhaden quota by a mere 20 percent. This may sound like a lot, and while it is a moderate decrease, a revised stock assessment showed the menhaden population size is more than one-third lower than previously estimated, and that a cut of over 50 percent is necessary to ensure there are enough of these critical forage fish available in the water to support rebuilding the Atlantic striped bass population.

The decision to adopt a token reduction in the Atlantic menhaden catch quota disregards the science and input from ASMFC’s own scientists.

The Board also chose to only set the new quota for one year, rather than the full three years consistent with how the ecosystem-based framework is designed. This decision to adopt a token reduction in the coastwide quota disregards the science and input from ASMFC’s own scientists, abandons the Commission’s own ecosystem-based management framework, and undermines public trust in the ASMFC’s management decisions. In addition, even with this decrease in quota, it will likely not decrease coastwide harvest, negating the presumed conservation benefits that the cut could have.

From our perspective, the ASMFC’s decision:

1. Ignored the best available science in the stock assessment update, which showed that the Atlantic menhaden population is 37 percent lower than previously estimated, and that for years fewer forage fish have been in the water for predators to eat.

2. Abandoned the Commission’s own Ecological Reference Point (ERP) management framework, which indicated that even a quota cut of more than 50 percent would achieve only a 50/50 chance of not exceeding the ERP fishing mortality target. (See our earlier blog for an explanation of ERPs.)

3. Allowed one company operating in one state – Omega Protein, in Virginia – to overtly influence the coastwide decision-making process in their favor, to the detriment of not only the ecosystem, but other Atlantic states’ bait industries as well.

4. Disregarded the overwhelming majority of the public who commented in favor of a new quota that would have maintained the integrity of the ecosystem-based menhaden management framework (more than 1,100 opposition comments were generated through TRCP alone).

On a positive note, because this was only a one-year decision, TRCP will push for additional quota reductions in 2026 and 2027. Also, the Board did finally choose to initiate a process to address Chesapeake Bay menhaden management. Early next year, it will consider options for quota periods to distribute menhaden removals more evenly throughout the fishing season, as well as options to reduce the Bay’s reduction fishing cap, ranging from status quo to a 50 percent decrease.

The cap was put in place nearly two decades ago as a precautionary measure to protect predator diet needs in the Chesapeake, but due to industry opposition, efforts to gather data to justify any updates to the cap have been stymied. This process could yield significant benefits to the Bay ecosystem, which has faced multiple concerns recently tied to menhaden, including osprey breeding failures due to chick starvation.

Menhaden serve as a critical food source for striped bass, ospreys, and many other predators. Credit: Sergio Diaz

What’s Next for Atlantic Menhaden?

In February 2026, or at the latest, by next summer, the ASMFC should publish the draft addendum for public comment regarding Chesapeake Bay management. It’s imperative that you participate in that public process by submitting comments virtually or in-person at future public hearings. The TRCP and partners will be fully engaged in advocating for options that conserve menhaden for its environmental role in the Bay to sustain striped bass, osprey, and other predators – and we will be sure to provide more information on how you can take action next year.

Gulf Overview

As we reported last month, after facing intense industry pressure, the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission voted to proceed with a Notice of Intent (NOI) that is slated to reduce a half-mile buffer zone for industrial menhaden fishing off Louisiana’s coast to just a quarter-mile in most locations. This change could allow industrial menhaden harvest in waters as shallow as five feet—undoing a compromise reached in 2024 between anglers, conservation groups, the menhaden industry, and state officials. After a one-month public comment period, the NOI will move to natural resource committees in the state legislature for approval, where lawmakers have the ability to reject the proposed changes.

After a half-mile buffer restricting industrial menhaden fishing near Louisiana’s coast was put in place, fish-kill incidents declined by 81 percent.

The current buffer was established following multiple fish spills caused by menhaden harvest nearshore in 2023, with torn or overfilled nets wasting over 2.5 million menhaden and killing thousands of breeding-size redfish that washed up on public beaches. We calculated that after that buffer was put in place in 2024, fish-kill incidents declined by 81 percent in 2024-2025, compared to historical averages.

Also, a 2024 study found that approximately 150 million non-target fish are caught as bycatch each year by the menhaden industry, including 30,000 redfish and hundreds of thousands of other predators like spotted seatrout (speckled trout), black drum, and jack crevalle, as well as 25-million-plus sand seatrout, commonly called white trout. The Commission’s decision in November completely ignored this disturbing information, undermining public trust in Louisiana’s fisheries management. This move threatens fragile coastal habitats and fish populations in Sportsman’s Paradise and risks reversing the gains we have made to protect the forage fish base in the Gulf, which supports key sportfish populations and nearshore ecosystems.

What’s Next for Gulf Menhaden?

From now through Jan. 23, 2026 this NOI will be open for public comment that will be considered by the LWFC. Comments can be submitted directly to Jason Adriance, LDWF’s finfish program manager, or using the TRCP’s action alert system HERE.

Take action by telling the LWFC not to roll back the buffers:

TRCP also is providing another means to potentially reverse the NOI decision. You can sign a separate alert targeting state lawmakers asking them to reject the NOI.

Take action by urging lawmakers to reject the NOI:

We need your help by signing both alerts to let lawmakers and the Commission know that you oppose any rollbacks to the current buffer zones, to protect Louisiana’s nearshore ecosystems and public fisheries. We cannot let the menhaden industry bully the LWFC and Commissioners into making management decisions solely for their benefit. The Commission cannot responsibly abdicate its responsibility to serve all the people and natural resources of Louisiana.

Thank You for Your Support

Only together can we ultimately achieve long-term menhaden conservation to support recreational fishing and healthy coastal ecosystems. We appreciate your ongoing and necessary support. As always, feel free to reach out to our team at any time.

Banner image courtesy Joanna Steidle

Do you have any thoughts on this post?

Click here to cancel reply.

by: Dan Morgan

posted in: Forage Fish

December 11, 2025

Our Top Conservation Achievements in 2025

Your support helped make these conservation achievements possible.

In many ways, 2025 was a year defined by gridlock and uncertainty in Washington D.C. Partisan divides slowed much of Congress, budgets were tight, and long-term solutions often felt just out of reach. Yet even in this environment, one thing remains clear: when hunters, anglers, and conservation partners stay engaged and unite, conservation solutions take shape and harmful proposals sink.

Those moments underscored why steady engagement matters and they reinforce TRCP’s commitment to remain vigilant, build durable coalitions, and continue advocating for the balanced conservation solutions that safeguard America’s lands, waters, and wildlife.

In 2025, the hunting and fishing community stepped into the arena and delivered meaningful achievements that safeguarded access, strengthened habitat, and advanced bipartisan, durable solutions that will benefit the future of our sporting traditions. Here are just a few:

We Held the Line on Public Lands, Together.

Public lands are a cornerstone of America’s conservation legacy – and of our hunting and fishing traditions. In 2025, the sporting and conservation community achieved a significant win that safeguarded our nation’s public lands.

Working alongside a broad, bipartisan coalition, TRCP helped defeat proposals that would have mandated the sale of millions of acres of public lands as part of the budget reconciliation process. Through sustained advocacy and engagement with hunters, anglers, and Congress, those provisions were removed, ensuring that public lands remain in public hands.

That same commitment to collaboration was reflected in the formation of new bipartisan caucuses in Congress, efforts that TRCP helped propel forward by working closely with key lawmakers to grow membership and support early momentum. In the House, lawmakers from both parties launched the Public Lands Caucus to advance common-ground solutions that protect access, habitat, and America’s public lands legacy. In the Senate, the creation of the bipartisan Stewardship Caucus further reinforced the principle that conservation succeeds when leaders work together for the common good – and commit to increasing the pace and scale of stewardship across the public and private lands that hunters and anglers depend on.

Taken together, these underscore the strength of coordinated advocacy and the importance of staying engaged when public lands access and stewardship are on the line

We Expanded Access Through Practical Solutions

Access is fundamental to our outdoor traditions, and 2025 brought continued momentum behind tools that help hunters and anglers navigate the landscape with confidence.

Progress on MAPLand and MAPRoads Acts improved clarity around public access points and legal routes. Continued efforts on the MAPWaters Act advanced a clearer understanding of water access for anglers, while the MAPOceans Act aims to support transparency and access for recreational saltwater fishing.

Together, these initiatives reflect a bipartisan commitment to reduce confusion, avoid conflict, and help people enjoy the outdoors responsibly – proof that progress doesn’t always require sweeping reform to be meaningful.

Read more about how this suite of legislation aims to enhance access to your public lands and waters by digitizing public access records and paper maps HERE.

We Advanced Habitat and Forest Management That Works  

Strong conservation outcomes depend not just on safeguards, but on thoughtful, science-informed management and 2025 saw meaningful progress on both fronts.

Bipartisan momentum behind the Fix Our Forests Act reflected a shared recognition that healthy forests are essential to resilient wildlife habitat, strong fisheries and watershed health, safer communities, and sustained recreational access. This management-first approach mirrors TRCP’s emphasis on solutions that endure beyond a single season or policy cycle.

That same mindset guided progress on the Farm Bill, which added over $15 billion to the conservation baseline. These investments provide stability for private-land conservation programs and support the landowners who play a critical role in sustaining wildlife habitat across the country.

Targeted investments through USDA also advanced efforts to address Chronic Wasting Disease, supporting the long-term health of the big game herds hunters care deeply about.

We Strengthened Wildlife Connectivity and On-the-Ground Conservation

Some of the most tangible conservation gains in 2025 occurred where conservation meets daily life.

State-level investments in wildlife crossing projects, including efforts in Montana and New Mexico, strengthened habitat connectivity while reducing collisions and improving safety for both wildlife and people. These highlight the power of collaboration and the value of durable, locally supported solutions.

We Demonstrated that Conservation is a High-Return Investment  

In 2025, conservation continued to prove its value as a high-return investment for communities, jobs, and economic growth.

A new report showed that investments in fish and wildlife conservation generate significant economic activity nationwide – supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs, contributing billions to GDP, and serving as the bedrock of the $1.1 trillion outdoor recreation economy that many rural and gateway communities depend on.

For hunters, anglers, and community leaders alike, the takeaway is clear: conservation is not only good stewardship – it’s smart economics, delivering significant benefits that support local livelihoods and America’s outdoor heritage.

Read Conservation Economy in America: A Snapshot of Total Fish and Wildlife-Associated Direct Investments and Economic Contributions

We Maintained Focus on Bipartisan, Durable Solutions

Not every policy decision in 2025 aligned with the priorities of hunters and anglers – but those moments only reinforced why persistence matters. They sharpened our resolve to stay engaged, to keep building strong bipartisan coalitions, and to remain vigilant in advocating for balanced, durable, science-based solutions. Guided by our mission, TRCP is more committed than ever to standing up for the lands, waters, wildlife, and sporting traditions that define us.

Even as Washington, D.C. continues to navigate uncertainty, one thing remains evident: conservation advances when hunters, anglers, partners, and decision-makers step into the arena together. Collaboration matters. And showing up – year after year – matters. When we unite, we win.

Courtesy Library of Congress, Motion Picture & Broadcast Virgin Collection, item MP76000126

by: Guest Author Kevin Job

posted in: Forage Fish

November 25, 2025

Signs of a River Herring Resurgence in Connecticut Ignite Hope

Rebound closely linked to reduced industrial fishing for Atlantic herring and Atlantic mackerel – fisheries known for incidental bycatch of blueback herring and alewives

I can still hear the animated phone call from a breathless childhood friend after observing his first school of truly giant striped bass feeding during a local river herring run in the early 2000s. Being a few years older than me, he had just gotten his driver’s license and couldn’t wait to share his discovery with me the next evening. He said there were stripers feeding in the mouth of the brook last night that were so big “it sounded like Volkswagens being thrown in the water.”

Not one to ever turn down such an opportunity, we headed off that night to figure out the most creative way to get access to the location without trespassing. Unfortunately, the only access we uncovered required blindly inching our way along a quarter-mile of steep banks and knee-deep mud as we pushed toward the sounds of splashing fish. By the time we had finally dragged ourselves into position, the tide had fallen, the bass had moved out of casting range, and we were forced to listen to the commotion where they continued their assault on the large schools of alewives.

We repeated this trip for dozens of nights over the next few springs, ultimately landing many striped bass up to thirty-five pounds amongst the spawning herring. These were nights that I will never forget. The kind where friends stayed up until deep into the wee hours, laughing, celebrating, and lamenting over legendary fish that were hooked and many lost. But sadly, as time marched on, the alewives returned less and less each season, and the giant bass disappeared with them. By the time I graduated high school in 2007, this small herring run, along with most others in Connecticut, was gone and I wouldn’t see another alewife or striped bass in this location again until the spring of 2025, when another much-needed phone call finally came in.

Blueback herring populations in Connecticut have decreased 99.9 percent since 1985.

Working to Restore Plummeting Populations

Since beginning my career as a river herring biologist with the state of Connecticut in 2018, I have been working to build a network of professionals, researchers, and stakeholders, hoping to track population recovery of blueback herring and alewives, collectively known as river herring, across southern New England. We communicate constantly during the spring, and I am always hoping for a call like the ones I used to receive when river herring were plentiful.

Sadly, the majority of the calls I’ve received were from curious and often frustrated stakeholders asking where the herring had gone, or when were we lifting the harvest ban. These stakeholders remembered the “glory days” and were frustrated that decades of hard work had not brought these fish back. I too was frustrated, wondering why the investment of tens of millions of dollars across the state on projects that included the removal of dozens of dams, the construction of over fifty fishways, and the re-introduction of 156,000 pre-spawn alewives were not restoring herring runs. This lack of significant success occurred despite a full moratorium on the take of both river herring species in place in Connecticut since 2002, as in-river protections and restoration work were not enough to bring river herring back.

Blueback herring (left) and alewife during sampling at Pequonnock River fishway in Connecticut, May 2025. Credit: Marly Laberge

In the spring of 2022 and again in 2023, fisheries biologists, Tribal Elders, birdwatchers, herring wardens, and recreational anglers across Southern New England again watched with heavy hearts as the already minuscule river herring numbers collapsed further. Here in Connecticut, alewife runs diminished by 63 percent and 69 percent, respectively (a reduction of 350,000 fish), and we saw our second worst blueback herring returns since 1975, with only 570 fish returning to state-monitored runs in 2022. This was an astounding 99.9 percent decrease in blueback herring populations across Connecticut since 1985. In other words, this species was essentially extirpated in the state and alewives were holding on by only a thread with just 152,000 fish across Connecticut in 2023.

Dismal southern New England river herring runs forced biologists to look for answers outside restored rivers to the open ocean, where herring spend most of their lives.

So as the 2023 river herring runs ended, it was fair to say that many of us had all but lost hope in achieving a recovery for these species in southern New England. We had been watching each year with great envy and confusion as river herring runs in the Gulf of Maine continued to rebound in response to in-river restoration efforts nearly identical to ours. This reality forced managers in southern New England to again explain to our stakeholders that our runs were still too small to allow in-river harvest, while states outside our region like Maine and South Carolina continued to have enough river herring to keep their fisheries open. Our goal has been to reopen in-river recreational and commercial river herring fisheries that fuel local economies and inspire stewardship of the runs, but we are nowhere near the “escapement” goals (of enough fish surviving and escaping fishing pressure to return to freshwater spawning grounds) required to meet the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s requirements to open these fisheries to harvest.

This clear geographic bias that seemed to only be affecting the southern New England and Mid-Atlantic river herring runs forced many of us to look for answers outside the rivers, where the restoration work was completed, and inside the ocean where river herring spend the majority of their life.

TAKE ACTION FOR HERRING: TRCP offers information at the end of the blog on how you can make your voice heard to protect river herring.

Signs of Hope

In April 2025, I received the first of what would end up being dozens of phone calls and emails from stakeholders across Connecticut who were not only finally seeing river herring, but seeing large numbers in places they hadn’t seen them in decades. This first call was special, though, because it came from one of my seasonal resource technicians, and she was calling me from the very run I fished for striped bass over two decades earlier.

She said there were thousands of alewives there. Thousands. I’m pretty sure I blacked out from shock the moment I heard those words because I cannot remember anything about that day until the moment I finally climbed down the bank and peered into the pool myself. Swimming in front of me were scores of spawning alewives in a scene that put me right back where I had left off in high school, a scene I had been hoping to relive each spring since 2007.

A Connecticut alewife run thick with alewives (see lower part of image) during the strong 2025 herring runs. Credit: Kevin Job

In the weeks that followed, I would receive phone calls and emails like this from people across the state highlighting their amazement that they were seeing river herring again. Alewives running up small streams into people’s backyards, osprey dropping them in town parks and on roadways, anglers rediscovering large striped bass hot on the tails of the baitfish, and, most shockingly, a call describing “thousands of herring” at an alewife run in the center of Connecticut’s largest city. This was especially shocking because the call was in late May and alewives don’t usually run in Connecticut in late May; blueback herring do. Having never seen a blueback herring at that location, we quickly packed up the sampling gear and drove west to find roughly 10,000 blueback herring working their way up the fishway.

Searching for Answers

Where were these fish coming from? When I sat down and reflected upon the season, I wasn’t as surprised as I thought. Because the answer, after years of research, was very likely the result of increased at-sea survival of adult river herring.

The river herring rebound is likely the result of increased at-sea survival, following restrictions on industrial Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries.

Each year, the industrial Atlantic mackerel and Atlantic herring fisheries off the coast of New England are allowed to land and sell a combined total of roughly 5 million river herring and shad, fish not targeted but that swim with other species and are allowed to be retained, before they are shut down by catch limits. Since the river herring and shad catch cap program started, the overwhelming majority of all species landed by the fishery have been alewife and blueback herring, and the majority of those fish have been landed from the waters off southern New England.

When researchers looked at the river herring landed in the Atlantic herring fishery, they unsurprisingly found that the majority are genetically linked to the runs of southern New England and the mid-Atlantic states struggling to restore their river herring runs. The Gulf of Maine, where river herring runs are recovering at lightning pace, make up less than 10 percent of the reported catch cap landings since this program started. So why the sudden spike in southern New England in 2025?

Industrial Fishing Closures Coincide with the Rebound

In October of 2023, the industrial Atlantic mackerel fishery was essentially closed by low quotas, following concerns of mackerel stock collapse. This kept these large boats from targeting mackerel in the waters off southern New England and prevented the utilization of the 129-metric-ton river herring and shad quota each year. Similarly, the Atlantic herring stock has collapsed, and the allowed quotas are now the lowest in decades, forcing that industry to focus its limited efforts on a small and productive area off of Cape Cod each winter. As a result, the industry is now largely avoiding areas off Rhode Island and New York that they historically targeted, where the river herring/shad quota is the highest.

This has meant that the southern New England catch cap area, where historically high river herring catches have occurred as a result of fishing for Atlantic herring, has essentially been unfished by the fleet during the last couple years. Additionally, in 2023 and 2024, the now-limited fishery was prematurely shut down by river herring/shad catch cap quota triggers off this area near Cape Cod and was shut down again this year by extremely low Atlantic herring quotas that were reached after just a few days of fishing in January.

Together, these closures afforded southern New England river herring at-sea protections not seen since the late ’70s and ’80s when the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act forced foreign trawling vessels, which had collapsed our Atlantic herring, Atlantic mackerel, and river herring stocks back then, at least 200 miles offshore. So, in essence, management restrictions of two marine species – Atlantic herring and mackerel – also appear to have already allowed for the early recovery of river herring and alewives.

A striped bass caught during a blueback herring run in Connecticut, May 2025. Credit: Kevin Job

Ensuring a Return to the “Glory Days”

This spring, I found myself being pulled back to the herring runs I had haunted as a teenager, not as a biologist but with a fishing rod in hand and a smile on my face. As I quietly waded into position on my first night back, I could hear the telltale sound of herring spawning and striped bass in tow, while that long forgotten feeling of youthful excitement quickly flooded my veins. The first striped bass I hooked that night was only around 10 pounds, but it might as well have been 50 the way it made me feel as it screamed across the shallow pool, sending herring in all directions. As I released it, in the very place that brought me so much joy in my youth, I knew I had a lot of calls to make that night and a lot of joy to share.

This was a transformative year for river herring in southern New England, and I don’t want that to be lost on anyone. But this recent resurgence is by no means guaranteed to continue. Now is the time to stand up for the science and continue supporting regulations and protections that will help keep this momentum moving forward. The people of southern New England deserve to again harvest river herring and we have the ability to make that happen.

I think the English writer and philosopher Aldous Huxley put it best when he said, “That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.” So let us learn from the overfishing that has been allowed to occur in our waters and take great care moving forward to not let the same mistakes happen again. It’s time to learn from history.

Kevin Job, a native New Englander, is a fisheries biologist with the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. His work focuses on diadromous fishes including river herring and shad.

Make Your Voice Heard for River Herring

Here at TRCP, we have been keeping tabs on the upcoming decision points for Atlantic mackerel and Atlantic herring at their respective regional councils. There are multiple ways you can get involved to make public comments to let decisionmakers know that the recovery of these two species, and that of river herring and shad, should remain a top priority when setting commercial catch limits and bycatch caps. Now that the link between all these fish has been made clear, it is imperative that managers stay on track to keep rebuilding all of these critical forage fish – for future generations of predators on the water, and future generations of anglers.

The Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Council meets on Dec. 16 to set the Atlantic mackerel quotas for 2026-2027 and to discuss river herring and shad catch caps. You can submit written public comments here by Thursday, Dec. 11, speak in-person at the meeting in Washington, D.C., or participate remotely via webinar.

The New England Fishery Management Council meets on Dec. 4 to set 2026 priorities, which will hopefully include Amendment 10 to the Atlantic herring fishery management plan. We have been working to support Amendment 10 action since 2023, and it’s imperative that the Council doesn’t keep kicking the can down the road regarding this important potential management measure. The written comment deadline has passed for this meeting, but you can still speak in-person at the meeting in Newport, R.I., or remotely via webinar.

by: Jaclyn Lunaas

posted in: Forage Fish

November 20, 2025

Fact or Fiction: Debunking Gulf Menhaden Industry’s Deceptive Claims

The menhaden reduction industry has frequently and publicly tried to justify its Gulf harvest levels, destructive practices, and fishery management decisions in its favor; here TRCP breaks down its misleading claims

Last week, we posted a similar blog focused on misinformation coming from the menhaden industry on the Atlantic. In this blog, we’ll focus on misinformation peddled by the industry in the Gulf.

The menhaden reduction industry has benefitted from recent decisions affecting fisheries management on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts – with science-based cuts to catch quota being ignored and buffers that protect nearshore habitat and reduce bycatch slated for reduction. These decisions were guided by politics much more than science or public support. And that’s a problem, because menhaden are critically important bait fish that are preyed on by gamefish like redfish and tarpon, and sportfish like speckled trout, jacks, mackerel, and striped bass and serve as a necessary foundation for healthy ecosystems.

Despite these discouraging outcomes, the menhaden industry is seeking public sympathy in interviews with the media and in public hearings, complaining about financial woes and potential industry job cuts while boasting that they are committed to sustainable fisheries and healthy ecosystems. But is any of that actually true?

Recreational anglers and conservationists need to stay informed of the facts in the ongoing debate around menhaden management in the Atlantic and Gulf. Understanding complex fisheries management concepts is also important even when just assessing menhaden reduction industry-generated talking points in the “news” (which often isn’t news at all, as 2025 has seen a landslide of paid placements or “sponsored content,” and claims unvetted by journalists that appear on well-known news websites with only small disclaimers attached).

These misrepresentations matter because they’re already influencing management choices. One of the most consequential – and concerning – developments is happening right now in Louisiana.

Louisiana Moves to Allow Near-Shore Industrial Fishing

Two weeks ago, under industry pressure, the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (LWFC) voted to proceed with a Notice of Intent to reduce an existing half-mile buffer zone preventing industrial menhaden fishing near Louisiana’s coast to just a quarter-mile in most locations. This decision disregarded data that show the half-mile buffer is preventing fish kills that waste hundreds of thousands of menhaden (more commonly called “pogies” in the Gulf) as well as thousands of redfish and other pogy predators annually. It also largely ignored a recent study that showed industry bycatch of redfish and other important gamefish species is more likely in shallower, near-shore waters.

Below are menhaden reduction industry claims we’ve seen in the media and/or in public meetings recently that require clarification.

Industry Propaganda in the Gulf

Industry Claim (from LWFC meeting on Nov. 6): “The current buffer zone is cutting profits and workers’ jobs are at risk. Our fleet can’t catch enough fish elsewhere besides the area within a half-mile from shore to make enough money to maintain our financial performance.“

This claim is blatantly false, according to NOAA Fisheries data.

The menhaden industry has not provided concrete economic evidence for why the half-mile buffers should be reduced. They caught essentially the same number of fish in 2024 and 2025 while the buffers were in place as they did in 2020 and 2021 without the buffers. Further, since 2024, the value of their menhaden landings has actually increased by $60 million. And, in 2025 before even counting October’s harvest, the industry has already exceeded its 2024 catch by 93 million pounds.

The industry is not only clearly catching plenty of fish, since they weren’t complaining about having to cut jobs in 2020 and 2021, they are also increasing their total revenue as the value of each fish caught is higher than ever.

The industry is allowed to fish anywhere else besides inside the small buffer zone within a half-mile from shore (and a wider buffer of 1-3-miles in a few small areas off public beaches). Not only do they have full access to every other expanse of water in the Gulf and most areas inside Breton and Chandeleur Sounds besides this tiny, fragile nearshore area, but they have no limit to how many fish they can catch each year. Logic would dictate that they should be able to catch plenty of fish elsewhere, and that implying that the strip of area between ¼ and ½ mile from shore will make or break their financial performance is a sign of greed rather than need.

Industry Claim: “The results of a 2024 bycatch study funded by Louisiana ‘reaffirm what decades of science have consistently shown: Louisiana’s Gulf menhaden fishery is sustainable, selective, and not a threat to red drum populations.’”

This claim is short-sighted.

While the industry catches fewer non-target species than the maximum legal bycatch rate of 5 percent by weight, they are still catching more than 146 million fish as bycatch annually, according to the 2024 data, including more than 30,000 redfish (22,000 of which are spawning size, which is illegal for all Louisiana anglers).

In the areas where industry wants to roll back the buffers, redfish bycatch is highest during the spawning season from August-October, with up to 50 percent of the female redfish caught as bycatch actively spawning. The loss of redfish spawning potential to the state with even less protection in those areas could be very detrimental to overall redfish numbers as Louisiana tries to increase the redfish populations coast-wide.

In addition, the pogy industry kills 240,000-plus speckled trout , 81 million croaker, 25 million white trout, and 12 million spot each year. These are species not just sought by recreational anglers but also forage species that Louisiana predators rely on. So, the menhaden industry not only impacts the menhaden population itself, but populations of many other forage species critical to the ecosystem.

Industry Claim: “The fishery harvests less than 2 percent of the total Gulf menhaden biomass – helping to maintain ecological balance while preserving a key food source for marine predators.”

This claim does not tell the full story.

This assertion misrepresents what “total biomass” actually means and how fishing impacts the menhaden population. This claim is relevant for all ages of menhaden — from juveniles to spawning-capable adults — but the industry targets adult fish. If you consider how much of the spawning stock is removed each year, rather than total biomass, it becomes clear that the industry harvests a much higher percentage of the adult menhaden population.

In fact, based on the 2024 Gulf menhaden stock assessment, between 2013-2023 the industry removed between 12-27 percent of the age-1+ biomass, and between 36-70 percent of the age-2+ biomass. Gulf menhaden don’t fully mature for two years, but nearly a quarter of the annual catch also includes fish that have escaped the marsh nursery grounds but have not yet spawned. Also, 70 percent of the harvest for the entire Gulf comes from Louisiana state waters. That level of localized depletion has not been studied to analyze its effects.

Comparing menhaden harvest to total biomass including fish less than one year old underestimates the pressure the fishery puts on the harvestable stock. This downplays the true ecological impact of the fishery because it ignores age structure, recruitment, and the proportion of adult fish removed from the population each year.

Next Steps

We know fisheries science and management definitions, concepts, and outcomes can be hard for anyone to understand, making it difficult to determine the best decisions for fisheries we care about. We encourage you to reach out to TRCP if any fisheries jargon ever needs to be better explained to help protect menhaden and the sportfish that depend on them.

Stay tuned for information about how you can weigh in on upcoming menhaden management decisions to shape where the fishery is headed. Learn more about these small fish with a mighty purpose by visiting TRCP’s Forage Fish Recovery Page

Banner image courtesy David Mangum

by: Jaclyn Lunaas

posted in: Forage Fish

November 13, 2025

Fact or Fiction: Debunking Atlantic Menhaden Industry’s Deceptive Claims

The menhaden reduction industry has frequently and publicly tried to justify its harvest levels, destructive practices, and fishery management decisions in its favor; here TRCP breaks down its misleading claims

The menhaden reduction industry should by all counts be very happy with the outcome of recent decisions affecting fisheries management on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts – with science-based cuts to catch quota being ignored and buffers that protect nearshore habitat and reduce bycatch slated for reduction. Meanwhile, anglers and conservation advocates continue to scratch and shake their heads at decisions guided by politics much more than science. After all, nutrient-dense menhaden play a central role in marine food webs as baitfish providing an essential food source for economically important sportfish like striped bass, redfish, tarpon, and bluefin tuna, as well as predators like whales and ospreys.

Despite these discouraging outcomes, the menhaden industry is seeking public sympathy. In interviews with the media and in public hearings, its representatives say they have been and will continue to suffer financially, that they could face job cuts, and that they are committed to sustainable fisheries and healthy ecosystems. But is any of that actually true?

As recreational anglers and conservationists, it’s important that we all stay well informed of the facts when engaging in the ongoing debate around menhaden management in the Atlantic and Gulf. Understanding complex fisheries management concepts is also important even when just assessing menhaden reduction industry-generated talking points in the “news” (which often isn’t news at all, as 2025 has seen a landslide of paid placements, and claims unvetted by journalists, that appear on well-known news websites with only small disclaimers attached).

In this blog, we’ll focus on misinformation peddled by the industry on the Atlantic front. Next week, we’ll offer a similar post that focuses on the Gulf.

Chris Crippen/Virginia Institute of Marine Science

Recent Vote on Atlantic Menhaden Ignores Science

As we reported two weeks ago, the Menhaden Management Board of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) failed to cut the 2026 Atlantic menhaden quota by nearly enough to acknowledge the latest science showing that the menhaden population is far lower than previously estimated. Instead of the more than 50 percent cut necessary to rebuild the Atlantic striped bass population and support menhaden’s ecosystem role, only a 20 percent quota cut was made – which will not lower coastwide harvest for the menhaden reduction industry at all, based on 2024 commercial landings.

Below are a few major claims that we’ve seen in the media recently that deserve a serious second look.

Industry Propaganda in the Atlantic

Industry Claim: “Maintaining the status quo or making, at most, a modest, precautionary trim is consistent with risk policy; in particular, a reduction on the order of 10% eliminates overfishing risk in 2026 and remains extremely low if carried forward, so deeper cuts are not supported by the risk framework.”

This claim doesn’t tell the real story.

Within the Atlantic menhaden management framework, the ASMFC uses an ecosystem-based “fishing mortality threshold” to define whether menhaden are undergoing overfishing or not. There is a range of fishing pressure for menhaden between an ecosystem-based “target” and threshold which the Menhaden Management Board has the ability to choose from, each option representing various levels of risk for overfishing. The ecosystem-based target is just what you’d imagine, a target or best-case scenario for fishing mortality, that won’t remove too many fish from the water. The threshold, on the other hand, represents the highest level of fishing mortality that the Board can allow before the fishery is considered to be undergoing “overfishing,” thus warranting corrective action.
A fishing mortality rate below the ecosystem-based target would be the most precautionary scenario, where we can be pretty sure, based on the science available, that we have enough menhaden in the water to feed striped bass and other predators. ASMFC assumed we were at this level based on the previous science, but with this new stock assessment, realized that they erred in their estimations and that fishing mortality was/is above the target.
A fishing rate above the target, but below the threshold, is a riskier scenario. This is where there are still menhaden being left in the water for predators, but not enough to support striped bass if they were at a rebuilt biomass. This level is where we have previously been fishing at, based on the new stock assessment update, and where the 2026 fishing level will be as well. So, not enough for striped bass if they were at their full biomass target.
Only a fishing rate above the threshold is considered “overfishing,” and would warrant Board action to decrease menhaden fishing pressure. Even keeping the same coastwide quota that we’ve had for the past 3 years in 2026 would present essentially zero risk of crossing the threshold, so the Board is not worried about overfishing from a technical standpoint. Where the rubber meets the road is that we now know that even with the recent 20 percent quota decrease, more menhaden will be taken out of the water than should be left to support striped bass populations as they rebuild over the next few years.
If menhaden harvest ever reaches its fishing mortality threshold, striped bass numbers will fall even more, even if striped bass themselves continue to be fished at or below their own mortality target. While this scenario is not likely with a 20 percent quota cut, which is what the industry touts, the contradiction of minimal conservation measures made for menhaden – a food source critical for striped bass – with the extreme striped bass management measures anglers have made sacrifices for, for years now, is alarming.

Industry Claim: “There will likely be some operational adjustments required at our Reedville [Virginia menhaden processing and reduction fleet base] facility to comply with a 20 percent harvest reduction.”

This claim is conspicuously misleading.

Omega Protein/Ocean Harvesters will not feel the hit of this quota reduction, while other Atlantic states with menhaden bait fisheries will. The move to reduce the coastwide quota by 20 percent was not based on science or the ASMFC’s ecosystem-based framework, but was a number originally put forward by the ASMFC’s Virginia delegation, because it would not materially impact the Commonwealth’s landings.
The reality is the reduction industry has not been able to meet their full quota in years, and is catching around 80 percent of their current allocation (in other words, 20 percent less than the current quota, or the full amount of the new quota set for 2026). Likely, the only reason Virginia representatives were against the measure in the final vote was because it was a one-year decision, rather than one that would have given the reduction industry three years of fishing at this set quota.
So the new quota will not significantly cut coastwide harvest or Virginia’s harvest, but where the cuts will actually be felt is by the states with active bait fisheries in the north, such as in Maine, who have to settle for the leftovers after the reduction industry (one company) gets nearly 70 percent of the allowable menhaden catch.
The industry frequently makes claims that any impacts to their ability to catch menhaden will cost jobs. But what wasn’t taken into consideration by the Board was that striped bass anglers have taken significant cuts to their striper access for many years now – which hurts jobs in the charter fishing, bait/tackle, tourism, and boating industries. Those sacrifices seem in vain now, since no matter what happens with striped bass catch, we aren’t leaving enough forage in the water for stripers to reach their biomass target by 2029.

Industry Claim: “We support moving forward with targeted new Bay science to guide any future Chesapeake Bay-specific decisions, so that upcoming choices are grounded in robust, transparent analysis.”

This claim is hypocritical on its face.

For the past three years, Omega Protein/Ocean Harvesters has actively lobbied against efforts in Virginia to fund science projects that would guide menhaden management in the Bay. These are projects that they were involved in developing with other stakeholder groups and state scientists from the very beginning.
Bay-specific menhaden management should be grounded in science and transparency, but the industry is clearly only interested in biased science to benefit their own agenda, because not so coincidentally, just before this past ASMFC meeting, the industry’s self-funded research group announced its own project to determine the scientific basis for their Bay fishing cap, rather than rely on an publicly funded study. Sound fishy to you?
The 2025 stock assessment update showed very clearly that cuts to the coastwide menhaden quota were necessary moving forward to maintain the integrity of the ecosystem-based framework that the industry claims it supports. In 2022, when the science then indicated a quota increase was possible, the industry was fully on board with using the science to their advantage to be able to catch more fish. Now, when the science suggests a major quota reduction is in order, the industry decided it didn’t want to follow the science anymore.

Next Steps

Fisheries science and management definitions, concepts, and outcomes can be hard for anyone to understand. That makes it that much more difficult to determine if decisions that can affect fisheries we care about are good ones, or bad. We hope this breakdown of the facts has been helpful and encourage you to reach out to TRCP if there’s anything else we need to focus on to best arm you with the knowledge necessary to help protect menhaden and the sportfish you care about.

Stay tuned for a similar blog next week on misinformation coming from the Gulf menhaden industry, and for information about how you can weigh in on recent menhaden management decisions and shape where the fishery is headed.

Banner image courtesy Joanna Steidle