Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

Ocean Harvesters Responds to Chesapeake Bay Foundationโ€™s August 7 Press Release

August 8, 2025 โ€” The following was released by Ocean Harvesters:

A press release issued yesterday by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) continues a multi-year pattern of gross dishonesty, as it presented an incomplete and misleading narrative regarding menhaden management in the Chesapeake Bay. CBFโ€™s misleading release includes a statement from Virginia Executive Director Chris Moore that ignores and disparages the established science, and the regulatory framework that ensures the fishery remains sustainable and responsibly managed.

In response, Ocean Harvesters has issued the following:

The CBF release refers to โ€œgrowing warning signs around the Chesapeake Bayโ€:

โ€œThere are clear signs of peril in the Chesapeake, and menhaden are one of the connecting threads.โ€œ

This claim is not supported by any independent, peer-reviewed science, but rather represents the biased opinion of a special interest group. The assertion that โ€œthere are clear signs of peril in the Chesapeake, and menhaden are one of the connecting threadsโ€ overstates both the available scientific evidence and the known ecological dynamics of the Bay. While ecosystem concerns merit monitoring, attributing broad Chesapeake Bay challenges to already conservative menhaden harvest regulations is not supported by the best available science.

In 2024, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) presented data to the ASMFC on osprey populations which showed osprey reproduction challenges and nest failures occurring on both the Atlantic and Pacific Coast, including many areas with no menhaden fishery at all. In a letter to Congress earlier this year, USGS said it found no direct link between regulated menhaden harvests and declining osprey populations. The federal agency emphasized that multiple, complex factors, including weather, predation and prey access, contribute to ecological trends in the Bay.

 

Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey present a slide to the ASMFC showing that the recent leveling-off in Maryland and Virginia osprey populations, after years of explosive growth, is a phenomenon also being seen in states across the nation, on both the East and West Coast.

Ocean Harvesters menhaden fishermen.

 

The statement includes: โ€œThis new timing of intense fishing pressure may be contributing to the problems facing the Chesapeake Bay.โ€

Any adjustment in the timing of Bay fishing is minor and reflects natural shifts in the seasonal population dynamics of menhaden, not a quantifiable increase in harvest pressure or ecological harm. No scientific evidence has established any link between this timing shift and the broad ecological challenges described in the release.

While the press release references anecdotal concerns from Maryland fishers, it omits mention of well-documented water quality issues in Maryland that may also explain the localized fishery observations cited.

Another claim in the statement reads: โ€œOne foreign-owned company consistently prevents progress in Virginia, and now coastwide at the ASMFC.โ€

This statement is inaccurate. Omega Protein is a Virginia-based processing company, and the menhaden are harvested by Ocean Harvesters, a separate American-owned and operated company whose crews are overwhelmingly local, unionized, and multi-generational, represented by UFCW Local 400, AFL-CIO. This domestic fleet works in full compliance with harvest controls, vessel reporting, and ecosystem-based management thresholds set by the ASMFC. CBF is clearly attempting to mislead the audience with distorted information and is crossing a very serious ethical line of misinformation that merits further scrutiny.

CBFโ€™s repeated implication that the industry has obstructed scientific research misrepresents the actual facts. Ocean Harvesters supported a comprehensive ecosystem study of the menhaden fishery developed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) in 2021. However, the proposal that later emerged in the Virginia General Assembly used a lower cost, novel methodology that had not undergone scientific peer review. The industry raised legitimate concerns-not about research itself, but about relying on an untested approach for such a politically charged issue. CBF has repeatedly and inaccurately characterized this as blanket opposition to science. In fact, the industry continues to support the original, science-based study design developed by ASMFC, and no menhaden research could be conducted without longstanding industry cooperation.

The statement concludes: โ€œThe Chesapeakeโ€™s fisheries and predators canโ€™t wait. Menhaden are key to a thriving Chesapeake Bay, and a healthy, productive Chesapeake is vital to the entire Atlantic coast.โ€

There is simply no Chesapeake Bay crisis that would threaten fisheries or predators. The menhaden fishery is already one of the most scientifically scrutinized in the United States.

The menhaden fishery is currently:

  • Not overfished, and overfishing is not occurring, as confirmed by repeated stock assessments.
  • Certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)
  • Governed by ecosystem reference points that account for predator-prey relationships
  • Subject to real-time reporting, seasonal harvest caps, and rigorous monitoring under ASMFCโ€™s management plan

Here is the true threat: CBFโ€™s statements add up to nothing more than scare tactics that threatens the livelihood of hundreds of blue collar, multi-generational employees, many of whom are minority and UFCW Local 400 union workers, in Virginiaโ€™s Northern Neck.

About Ocean Harvesters
Ocean Harvesters owns and operates a fleet of more than 30 fishing vessels in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. The companyโ€™s purse-seine fishing operation is exclusively engaged in the harvest of menhaden, a small, nutrient-dense fish used to produce fish meal, fish oil, and fish solubles. Both its Atlantic and Gulf Menhaden fisheries are certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council. Committed to responsible fishing operations, Ocean Harvesters is proud to be heir to a fishing legacy that extends nearly 150 years.

Omega Protein urges scientific review before menhaden fishery cuts

July 31, 2025 โ€” Menhaden processor Omega Protein and its harvesting partner Ocean Harvesters have urged the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to conduct further scientific reviews before considering potential reductions to the Chesapeake Bay menhaden fishery.

In a letter to the ASMFC, Omega Protein Senior Scientific Advisor Peter Himchak argued that recent concerns linking menhaden fishing to declines in osprey populations are being overstated, calling for a broader investigation into possible causes.

Himchak, a former fisheries biologist with the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife and longtime advisor to the ASMFC and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, criticized what he called an โ€œinordinate amount of focus on menhaden generally, and the reduction fishery in particular,โ€ in discussions of osprey declines.

In particular, he pushed back against recommendations made by the ASMFCโ€™s Work Group on Precautionary Management in the Chesapeake Bay, calling them โ€œdraconianโ€ and warning that implementing restrictions without clear evidence of depleted menhaden stocks or proven impacts on osprey risks harming an industry that supports hundreds of jobs and has operated for over 150 years.

Read the full article at Aqua Feed

Omega Protein and Ocean Harvesters Urge Science-Based Review Before Imposing New Menhaden Restrictions

July 29, 2025 โ€” The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

In a letter submitted to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), Peter Himchak, Senior Scientific Advisor to Omega Protein, warned that โ€œthere has been an inordinate amount of focus on menhaden generally, and the reduction fishery in particularโ€ in discussions about recent osprey declines in the Chesapeake Bay.

Omega Protein, which processes menhaden into fishmeal, fish oil, and related nutritional products, is supplied by Ocean Harvesters under a long-term harvesting agreement. Himchak submitted the letter on behalf of the company ahead of the ASMFCโ€™s Summer Meeting.

Himchak, who served for 39 years as a fisheries biologist with the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife and as a long-time advisor to both the ASMFC and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, sat on the ASMFCโ€™s Atlantic Menhaden Technical Committee and Stock Assessment Sub-Committee from 1988 until 2006.

In the letter, Himchak criticized the ASMFCโ€™s Work Group on Precautionary Management in Chesapeake Bay for proposing โ€œdraconian management recommendations โ€˜without determining if there is or is not an adequate supply of menhaden to support predatory demand in the Bay.โ€™โ€ He warned that moving forward with such actions without first determining whether there are, in fact, fewer menhaden in the Bay or whether the fishery has any impact on osprey โ€œrisks gravely impacting a more than 150-year-old industry and hundreds of jobs while doing nothing to improve the osprey situation.โ€

Himchak wrote that the ASMFCโ€™s Technical Committee (TC) already has a significant workload in advance of the Commissionโ€™s Annual Meeting, but raised four areas of scientific inquiry the TC could investigate that would provide the Board with more complete information. 1) He asked whether โ€œthe phenomenon of reduced osprey production [is] confined to the times and areas in which the menhaden reduction fishery operates,โ€ referencing USGS data showing declines in osprey abundance in coastal areas of multiple statesโ€”not just the Chesapeakeโ€”and increases in interior regions. He also noted that the fishery does not begin fishing until May or laterโ€”after migrant ospreys arrive in the region from late February to early March and begin building nests from mid-March to mid-Aprilโ€”raising questions about how the fishery could influence ospreyโ€™s months-earlier decisions about where to nest.

2) He wrote that there have been sizable increases in populations of multiple menhaden-dependent predators since at least the turn of the century, and that a stomach contents analysis of striped bass, which are only somewhat dependent on menhaden, indicated they โ€œare not starving and would be considered healthy.โ€ Therefore, he asked, โ€œis it more likely that ospreys are being outcompeted or that the reduction fishery uniquely impacts osprey?โ€

3) Regarding eagle-osprey interactions, he noted a recent Maryland DNR release announcing โ€œlarge increases in the stateโ€™s bald eagle population.โ€ He referenced myriad studies finding that bald eagles are โ€œkleptoparasiticโ€โ€”a term used to describe their well-documented habit of attacking hunting osprey to steal their food or prey on adults, young, and eggs. Citing a study from Voyageurs National Park, he wrote that โ€œincreased numbers of eagles were associated with a reduction in the numbers of osprey nests, their nesting success and heronry size,โ€ and asked whether โ€œissues of competition and depredation [can] be ruled out as a cause of ospreyโ€™s lack of breeding success.โ€ He further pointed to โ€œsignificant scientific and anecdotal evidence of the dominant and adverse impacts eagles have on osprey.โ€

That concern was echoed in a newly released Saving Seafood special report titled โ€œBald Eagle Recovery in Chesapeake Bay Raises Red Flags for Osprey.โ€ The report compiled over three decades of peer-reviewed research, field observations, and published accounts documenting instances in which eagles had a negative impact on osprey populations. In one study, researchers found โ€œeagle abundance was negatively associated with nest reuse (i.e., persistence) and success of ospreys.โ€ Significantly, the researchers found โ€œlittle evidence of bottom-up limitations,โ€ such as poor weather or declining fish stocks, and emphasized the role of eagle aggression, including harassment and food theft. While this body of research does not prove the resurgence of bald eagles in the Chesapeake to be the cause of osprey reproduction issues, it does indicate it is a possibility deserving of further investigation.

The full report is available at: https://www.savingseafood.org/science/bald-eagle-recovery-in-chesapeake-bay-raises-red-flags-for-osprey

4) Himchak also asked the Technical Committee to consider whether osprey foraging success is being affected by climate-driven environmental changes, including storm frequency, shoreline hardening, warming waters, or hypoxia. Citing a 2024 study by Bryan Watts, he noted that โ€œdeliveries of all forage species to osprey nests declined steadily from 1974 to 2021,โ€ and asked whether โ€œospreysโ€™ apparent lack of foraging success is tied to changes in local conditions that are impacting either local abundance of forage or ospreyโ€™s hunting success.โ€

He concluded the letter by writing, โ€œThe commission must be guided by science. Precipitous actions, taken in the name of precaution, are not always harmless. Neither Ocean Harvesters nor Omega Protein can survive without the current low level of access to the menhaden resource in the Bay. There simply are not enough โ€˜fishable daysโ€™ โ€“ that is, days where the weather and sea conditions allow vessels to operate โ€“ in a year to safely conduct a profitable fishery solely in the ocean. The menhaden fishery is managed in the most conservative manner in its 150 year or so history, and the reduction fishery is operating at its lowest sustained levels โ€“ in the Bay and overall โ€“ for as long as we have reliable records (i.e., since the 1950s). Precaution is already the policy. Before taking actions that could cause irreversible economic harm to this historic fishery, the Board should ensure that all reasonable avenues of inquiry into the issues facing osprey are explored.โ€

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.

ASMFC 2025 Summer Meeting Final Agenda and Materials Now Available

July 23, 2025 โ€” The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissionโ€™s Summer Meeting will be August 5 โ€“ 7, 2025 at The Westin Crystal City. This will be a hybrid meeting (both in-person and remote) to allow for participation by Commissioners and interested stakeholders. The room block is now closed; if you need assistance reserving a room, please contact Lisa Carty at lcarty@asmfc.org.

 The final agenda and meeting materials for the Summer Meeting are now available athttps://asmfc.org/events/2025-summer-meeting/; click on โ€œMeeting Materialsโ€ under the relevant Board/Committee name to access the documents for that Board/Committee. For ease of access, materials for all boards have been combined into one document โ€“ https://asmfc.org/resources/management-meeting-materials/2025-summer-meeting-materials/. Supplemental materials will be posted to the website on Wednesday, July 30. 
 
Please note: the Coastal Sharks Management Board meeting, previously scheduled for Wednesday, August 6 (11:30 AM โ€“ 12:15 PM) has been canceled. The Weakfish Management Board meeting, which was previously scheduled for Tuesday, August 5 (1 โ€“ 2 PM) will now occur Wednesday, August 6 (11:30 AM โ€“ 12:15 PM). The timing of other meetings on August 5 has been slightly modified. Be advised the agendaโ€™s schedule is subject to change; the order in which the agenda items are listed is subject to change, and other agenda items or meetings may be added as necessary.

Charter fishing captains sue to overturn striped bass regulations

May 27, 2025 โ€” Mid-Atlantic charter fishing captains are leading a federal court challenge to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and its decisions limiting the striped bass seasons.

The charter operators say they are taking aim at the ASMFCโ€™s actions to limit the 2024 season โ€œthrough a combination ofshortening the fishing season; reducing the size of removable fish; lowering commercial quotas; and limiting recreational fishers on charter boats to one fish per day.โ€

In a May 14 announcement about the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., the charter captains cited Maryland Department of Natural Resources reporting after the close of the 2024 fishing season as confirming the associationโ€™s predictions โ€œthat the ASMFC rule changes would devastate the industry with a revenue drop-off of up to 75 percent.โ€

Maryland Charter Boat Association president Brian Hardman โ€œconfirmed those results and reported that over 50 companies have already been forced out of business and have had to put their vessels on the market at โ€˜fire sale prices,โ€™โ€ the captains say.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

ASMFC Approves Amendment 4 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Northern Shrimp

May 11, 2025 โ€” The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission approved Amendment 4 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Northern Shrimp. In response to the continued poor condition of the northern shrimp stock, Amendment 4 modifies the first objective of the FMP to recognize the influence of environmental conditions on stock productivity and lengthens the amount of time the Northern Shrimp Section can set a moratorium from one year to up to five years. The Section can call a meeting at any time to review information relative to the fishery and the resource and initiate management action if necessary.

Amendment 4 also adds management triggers to the FMP as part of the annual stock monitoring process. Management triggers include recruitment and temperature triggers that signal potential improvement in stock conditions. The recruitment trigger will be achieved when the stock experiences non-failed recruitment for three consecutive years. If achieved, a stock assessment update will be conducted. If the recruitment trigger is not achieved, but non-failed recruitment occurs in two out of three years, the Section will consider conducting a winter sampling program without the use of size-sorting grates. This program will allow the Northern Shrimp Technical Committee to evaluate stage and length frequencies, and year class persistence before initiating a full assessment update. The temperature trigger will be considered reached when two out of three consecutive years of winter surface temperature and spring bottom temperature in the Gulf of Maine fall below the 80th percentile of the reference period. If achieved, the Section will consider a winter sampling program. These triggers are intended to help the Section identify if the stock is viable enough to support a fishery.

Finally, Amendment 4 adds the specifications setting timeline and management triggers to measures subject to change through adaptive management, allowing these management measures to be changed in the future via an addendum rather than an amendment.

All provisions of Amendment 4 are considered effective immediately. Amendment 4 will be available on the Commissionโ€™s website, https://asmfc.org/species/northern-shrimp/, by the end of May. For more information, please contact Chelsea Tuohy, Fishery Management Plan Coordinator, at ctuohy@asmfc.org or 703.842.0740.

 

Horseshoe Crab Board Approves Addendum IX Addendum Allows Multi-Year Specifications for Male-Only Harvest

May 8, 2025 โ€” The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissionโ€™s Horseshoe Crab Management Board approved Addendum IX to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Horseshoe Crabs. The Addendum allows the Board to set specifications for male-only harvest. It also establishes a method for managing male-only harvest limits during multi-year specifications periods, reestablishes seasonal harvest restrictions, and clarifies policy related to harvest caps for Maryland and Virginia.

Addendum IX responds to recommendations from the July 2024 Horseshoe Crab Management Objectives Workshop, which convened a group of stakeholders to explore management objectives for the Delaware Bay-origin horseshoe crab fishery. Workshop participants recommended the Board establish an interim solution to maintain male-only harvest while changes to the Adaptive Resource Management (ARM) Framework are explored to better align the model with stakeholder values.

The Addendum allows the Board to set multi-year specifications for up to three years until 2031 based on the ARM Framework. In interim years when the ARM is not used, the Board will manage maximum male harvest limits based on Delaware Bay region spawning survey data.  Addendum IX also reestablishes a harvest closure for the Delaware Bay region states from January 1 through June 7. Lastly, the Addendum clarifies the policy included in Addenda VII and VIII for applying Maryland and Virginia harvest caps; these caps further restrict harvest for Maryland and Virginia when female harvest is implemented in the Delaware Bay region.

Addendum IX will be available on the Commission website at https://asmfc.org/species/horseshoe-crab/ by next week. For more information, please contact Caitlin Starks, Senior Fishery Management Coordinator, at cstarks@asmfc.org or 703.842.0740.

Read the release from the ASMFC 

 

Menhaden fishers urge ASMFC to maintain quotas in face of NGO criticism

May 6, 2025 โ€” The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition and six shop stewards representing union fishermen participating in the Chesapeake Bay menhaden fishery are urging the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to maintain current allowable catch levels in the face of NGO criticism.

The ASMFC Menhaden Management Board is meeting on 7 May to discuss management of the species. In a letter to the board, members of the UFCW Local 400 union called on board members to listen to fishermen and adopt regulatory practices based on โ€œsound scientific principlesโ€ rather than listen to environmental groups that claim the fishery is responsible for declines in other species in the Chesapeake Bay.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

DARAWN KENNER: Facts, not rhetoric, should drive menhaden decisions

May 6, 2025 โ€” In the debate over the future of the Atlantic menhaden fishery, working families are being pushed to the margins. The fishermen, plant workers and coastal community members who have sustained this industry for generations are too often falsely portrayed as obstacles to conservation. Meanwhile, environmental activist groups are assumed to speak for the public good. But regulators and members of the public should not accept the premise that these groups speak for the public interest simply because they say so on their websites.

Blind trust in activist groups has serious consequences. It gives disproportionate influence to organizations with agendas shaped not just by science or stewardship, but by fundraising goals and ideology. Take, for example, the recent formation of the Atlantic Menhaden Chesapeake Bay Work Group. Its assumption, that menhaden harvests are driving a decline in fledgling osprey survival, is not supported by the best available science. Yet it has shaped public discourse and policy proposals, in part because its leaders come from high-profile nonprofits such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the Audubon Society.

Letโ€™s be clear: We are not against responsible conservation. Many of us are fourth- or fifth-generation members of this fishery. Our lives depend on healthy ecosystems, and we support science-based management to ensure that menhaden and the marine food web remain strong. We welcomed the development of Ecological Reference Points (ERPs), which incorporate predator needs into harvest decisions. But even as those were adopted, some activists criticized them โ€” not because the science was flawed, but because the outcome didnโ€™t slash harvest levels to their liking.

This reveals a deeper truth: For some groups, no amount of responsible management is enough. They move from one manufactured crisis to the next, each time casting commercial fishermen as the villain. It is not members of the charter and for-hire sectors โ€” comprised of hard-working watermen like ourselves โ€” but well-funded industry organizations such as the American Sportfishing Association and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership that lead these attacks on our livelihoods. Complaints about the reduction fishery are as old as the fishery. The same recycled arguments have been made since the 1800s.

Read the full opinion piece at the Virginian-Pilot

American Lobster Board Approves Addendum XXXII to Repeal Addendum XXVII Gauge and Escape Vent Measures

May 6, 2025 โ€” The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissionโ€™s American Lobster Management Board approved Addendum XXXII to Amendment 3 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American Lobster. The Addendum repeals all gauge and escape vent size measures from Addendum XXVII. Measures related to the v-notch possession definition and the issuance of trap tags are maintained.

In October 2023, under Addendum XXVII a series of changes to the current gauge and escape vent sizes in Lobster Conservation Management Areas (LCMAs) 1 (Gulf of Maine), 3 (federal waters), and Outer Cape Cod was triggered based on observed declines in recruit abundance indices. The Board postponed the implementation of Addendum XXVII to January 1, 2025 to allow the Gulf of Maine states the opportunity to coordinate with Canada regarding possible trade implications and give the industry and gauge makers additional time to prepare for these changes. In October 2024, the Board further delayed implementation of the gauge and vent size measures, and v-notch possession definition of Addendum XXVII to July 1, 2025.

Addendum XXXII responds to industry concerns about the potential economic impacts of an increase to the minimum gauge size in the Gulf of Maine. By repealing the gauge and vent size measures, the Gulf of Maine states will have the opportunity to engage with the lobster industry, including Lobster Conservation Management Area Teams, to identify alternative conservation measures to protect the Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank stock. Maine and New Hampshire reported to the Board that they have already begun convening stakeholder meetings to discuss the state of the fishery and potential management approaches.

Addendum XXXII will be available on the Commission website, asmfc.org, on the American lobster webpage by next week. For more information, please contact Caitlin Starks, Senior Fishery Management Plan Coordinator, at cstarks@asmfc.org or 703.842.0740.

 

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • โ€ฆ
  • 124
  • Next Page ยป

Recent Headlines

  • Are Gulf sharks really an โ€˜overwhelming problemโ€™? Itโ€™s complicated, experts say
  • US judge blocks commercial fishing in Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument
  • Judge blocks Trump bid to allow fishing at marine monument
  • New Chesapeake striped bass fishery plan sparks debate
  • RHODE ISLAND: Federal officials look to stop illegal fishing fleets near RI coast
  • NOAA Fisheries increases Gulf red grouper catch limit by 50 percent
  • NEW JERSEY: Belford Seafood Co-Op President Says Why He Joined Lawsuit Against Empire Wind Farm
  • Seafood inflation at US retail increased again in July; consumers continue turning toward value

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California China Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Hawaii Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon South Atlantic Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright ยฉ 2025 Saving Seafood ยท WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions

Notifications