January 9, 2012 — The following is an excerpt from the National Geographic online blog post "The Little Fish That Could—Maybe It Will", written by Carl Safina and Elizabeth Brown:
Over the past several months, conservationists, fishermen, and the public have been writing to fishery managers about how to save Atlantic menhaden (also called bunker) – arguably one of the most important fish in the sea. And this week, they scored a victory.
For decades, fishermen on the U.S. east coast have been allowed to catch unlimited amounts of this small, but important, fish. As a result, Atlantic menhaden populations have greatly declined – by around 90 percent. Captain Dale Tripp, a longtime Cape Cod fisherman, said “When we first started fishing for menhaden it was not a problem to go out with just a grappling hook and catch 20 in 20 minutes,” but “Now, you can’t go out with a gill net and catch 20 in two hours.”
The decline has been blamed on the “reduction fishery,” which catches the majority of Atlantic menhaden each year. They grind them up and use them for fish-oil dietary supplements, fertilizers, and animal feed.
Read the full story at National Geographic
Analysis: A recent National Geographic online blog post, “The Little Fish That Could—Maybe It Will,” by Carl Safina and Elizabeth Brown, highlighted recently implemented harvest cuts for Atlantic menhaden by the board that manages the species, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC).
The post states that “Atlantic menhaden populations have greatly declined – by around 90 percent.” Here, the authors reference a claim that has been broadly circulated through petitions and advertisements by the Pew Environment Group. In doing so, Pew selected a year of record population highs to begin this analysis, creating an overstated picture of population decline, while ignoring substantial periods of the fishery’s history which demonstrate the natural fluctuation of the population.
Current menhaden biomass levels are similar to those seen in the 1960s, which were followed by record high population estimates in the 1970s and 1980s, even without a fisheries management response. A recent analysis by the Providence Journal and Politifact Rhode Island, found Pew’s assertion to be ”mostly false,” stating that “the statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.” "There's no question there's been a decline downward," stated Mark Gibson, deputy chief of the marine fisheries division of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management in the article, "But when you have a fish stock that varies up and down across time, you can cherry-pick your window across time, say it declined and get a whole bunch of people alarmed."
The full time series shows that the menhaden population is highly variable by year, and periods of high population are more likely to be the result of favorable environmental conditions than a reduction in fishing activity.
The relationship between menhaden and environment is recognized both by NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Office, which writes , “menhaden recruitment appears to be independent of fishing mortality and spawning stock biomass, indicating environmental factors may be the defining factor in the production of good year classes,” and the ASMFC, which concluded that fluctuations in menhaden abundance may be “almost entirely driven by non-fishery sources.”
It is misleading to blame this alleged “decline” solely on the menhaden reduction fishery. A more thorough review of relevant data regarding Atlantic menhaden, as well as comments from the regulatory bodies which oversee this historic fishery make this clear.