From the assessment:

Stock Status Current benchmarks for Atlantic menhaden are F 30%,
F 15%, FEC 30%, and FEC 15%. The current benchmarks are calculated through spawner-per-recruit analysis using the mean values of any time-varying components (i.e., growth, maturity) over the time series 1955-2013 and full fishing mortality rate defined as the maximum rate across ages for each year. Based on the current
adopted benchmarks, the Atlantic menhaden stock status is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring. In addition, the stock is currently below the current fishing mortality target and above the current FEC target. The fishing mortality rate is currently at F65%,
which is the lowest F in the time series.

The complete stock assessment is available at http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/download/S40_AtlMenhadenSAR_CombinedFINAL_1.15.2015.pdf?id= DOCUMENT&utm_source=2014+Atlantic+Menhaden+Stock+Assessment +MFC+release+FINAL&utm_campaign=Gulf+menhaden+not+overfished&utm_medium=email

then why are there so few pogies in the boston area ? and when a pod does shows up the siener scoops them right up:wall:

then why are there so few pogies in the boston area ? and when a pod does shows up the siener scoops them right up:wall:

Goes in cycles.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Goes in cycles.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

been a long set of cycles , 5 years since we saw a good run of pogies

Yep, finally the Atlantic Menhaden stocks are currently NOT experiencing overfishing, the bleeding has truly stopped. That is only step one. Many of the Northeast recreational organizations belong to something called the Menhaden Coalition. Here is a post I edited for length by one of the member orgs (Menhaden Defenders). I completely agree with this evaluation of the current situation.

....This is exciting for menhaden advocates because it means that the catch limits that we all fought for back in 2011/2012 have started to work.

The reduction industry doesn't share this opinion, and feels that this announcement is a green light to continue business as usual and go back to unlimited catch. But those of us on the water know otherwise. There are still many areas along the coast that are NOT seeing menhaden, either juvenile or adult. While the latest announcement is awesome news and just the beginning of good things to come, its important to realize that we are still closer to the bottom than we are to the top when it comes to stock status.

It will be exciting to watch as Omega protein, the one and only company that still grinds bunker up (reduction) for fish meal and oil fights to increase and retain their own catch limits as the bait sector (think recreational fishing, crab & lobster bait) struggles to provide domestic fisherman with fresh whole baitfish with a small and limited allocation.

Its unfortunate and hard to believe that in recent years the bait sector has chosen to align with Omega as we (Menhaden Defenders) have always advocated for a 70/30 split (70% reduction,30% bait) but profit monger Omega has yet to yield and help family owned and operated guys out. We recall vividly from back in the day that the recreational anglers actually fought together with the bait boats/pound netters to kick Omega out of (NJ and other) state waters.

Menhaden Defenders and the overall Menhaden Coalition still has work to do. We can not back off promoting conservation and moderation of catch of the "most important fish in the sea" until we have a balanced population at historic ABUNDANT levels from Maine to Florida!

Menhaden Defenders and the overall Menhaden Coalition still has work to do. We can not back off promoting conservation and moderation of catch of the "most important fish in the sea" until we have a balanced population at historic ABUNDANT levels from Maine to Florida!

No consistent with national guidelines. Some would argue that there has never been "overfishing." The last stock assessment did not pass peer review and was discarded as not being worthy of being called management advice.

omega.

No consistent with national guidelines. Some would argue that there has never been "overfishing." The last stock assessment did not pass peer review and was discarded as not being worthy of being called management advice.

The science and decisions between the "rejected" assessment and the two actions since then are not the current question and you know that. Also, I am not making an overfishing argument, that is a bit foolish considering the recent science. I would point you at the year class data from the assessment as the biomass is made up of some strange year class distribution. The stock is better but not even close to what standard science considers robust. But this is all side conversation again not germain to the coming debate.

My point is that the response to this assessment should be about bringing some more fairness/balance in the allocation of the overall harvest. The reduction industry has already telegraphed it wants to roll back catch limits for its own sector. Do you think 80% of the sustainable harvest should be allocated to one company for one purpose while only 20% is allocated to the rest of the nation aka the bait sector and recreational harvest?

Have you even read national Standard 1?

Many a court has affirmed that MSY does not mean a stock should benefit only one company or one sector?

My point is that the response to this assessment should be about bringing some more fairness/balance in the allocation of the overall harvest. The reduction industry has already telegraphed it wants to roll back catch limits for its own sector. Do you think 80% of the sustainable harvest should be allocated to one company for one purpose while only 20% is allocated to the rest of the nation aka the bait sector and recreational harvest?


In theory I would agree with you, but as a practical matter all of the northeastern states have given the bait/recreational sector free rein to catch as much as they can. None of the northeastern states have curtailed their catch, all of them have treated the entire bait/recreational sector as "bycatch" to avoid having to restrict the catch.

So I might turn the question around to; "is it fair than only one sector of the fishery has been restricted while the other sectors have been been given free rein to catch whatever they can"?

Personally I would much prefer an open discussion as to what is the "proper" distribution of the catch, rather than the subterfuges used in the past. Hopefully, this stock assessment, which shows that the sky really isn't falling will give us the latitude to have that discussion.

Personally I would much prefer an open discussion as to what is the "proper" distribution of the catch, rather than the subterfuges used in the past. Hopefully, this stock assessment, which shows that the sky really isn't falling will give us the latitude to have that discussion.

I could not agree more. Make no mistake about it, we all know the monitoring, reporting, by catch loophole and other parts of the plan regarding the bait sector are a joke.

Thank you Patrick, for what you do.

Set your goals low enough and you can reach them. The fishery manager's creed.

Here is the link to another view of the assessment...Can we all agree the Chesapeake Bay foundation is a pretty decent source for analysis ?

http://www.cbf.org/news-media/newsroom/2015/01/16/cbf-issues-statement-on-new-menhaden-stock-assessment