Listen to the article
Menhaden Fisheries Coalition Challenges “False” Claims About Virginia’s Menhaden Fishery
The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition (MFC) has issued a strong rebuttal to recent claims made by Will Poston of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) regarding the status of Virginia’s menhaden fishery. The coalition describes Poston’s statements as “false and misleading,” arguing that they misrepresent scientific data and the current state of menhaden management.
At issue is Poston’s characterization of Virginia’s 2026 legislative session, which the MFC claims distorts lawmakers’ decisions to reject new fishing restrictions. According to the coalition, these proposals lacked scientific justification, as Atlantic menhaden are already managed under the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) using ecological reference points specifically designed to account for the species’ role in the ecosystem.
The MFC particularly contests Poston’s assertion that “new coastwide science found the population of menhaden is nearly 40 percent smaller than previously estimated,” calling this framing “one of the most misleading lines” in his piece. The coalition cites the ASMFC’s direct response to this claim, which explained that the difference in estimates primarily stems from “a change in the estimate of natural mortality” rather than an actual decline in fish populations.
“The 2025 update indicates total biomass has actually slightly increased since 2021,” the MFC notes, quoting the ASMFC. “The lower estimate of biomass from the current assessment compared to the previous assessment is a result of a change in our understanding of the stock rather than a change in the stock itself.”
The coalition also challenges Poston’s connections between osprey chick mortality and menhaden harvesting. They point to the U.S. Geological Survey’s position that multiple factors affect osprey productivity, including contaminants, disease, predation risk, parental condition, brood size, weather conditions, as well as prey abundance and access.
Similarly, the MFC disputes claims that declining bait fishermen catches prove the Bay is being depleted by commercial fishing, describing this as “an anecdote dressed up as population science” that ignores numerous other factors affecting catch levels.
The coalition strongly denies Poston’s allegation that scientific research “has repeatedly been delayed by Omega Protein and their Richmond lobbying firm.” Instead, they highlight industry support for research initiatives, including a Science Center for Marine Fisheries (SCEMFIS) project to produce a research roadmap for menhaden in the Bay. This project involves researchers from William & Mary, the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, and NOAA to identify research needed to support science-based harvest caps.
To counter Poston’s narrative, the MFC points to broader data from the ASMFC’s 2025 assessment, which shows that recent coastwide age-1+ biomass remains roughly double the levels seen in the early 1970s, even with revised modeling assumptions. Meanwhile, current coastwide reduction landings are only one-third to one-half of 1970s and 1980s levels, with a tight 51,000-metric-ton cap on Chesapeake Bay reduction fishing.
Maryland’s survey work further supports the MFC’s position, with the state’s Department of Natural Resources reporting that menhaden abundance in 2024 was “nearly equal to the previous year, which was the highest measured since 1990.” The department also stated in October 2025 that “Atlantic menhaden and bay anchovies were widespread in the Bay for the third consecutive year.”
The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition represents menhaden fishermen, related businesses, and supporting industries along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The organization conducts media and public outreach to inform stakeholders about issues related to the menhaden fishery, which it emphasizes is currently certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, described as “the international gold standard for seafood sustainability.”
The coalition concludes that Poston’s characterization amounts to “advocacy masquerading as analysis” rather than honest scientific communication about the state of Atlantic menhaden stocks and their management.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
As someone with an interest in sustainable fishing practices, I appreciate the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition pushing back on what they see as misleading or unfounded claims. However, I’d want to review the evidence from both sides before forming a firm opinion on the matter.
This certainly seems like a complex issue with differing perspectives. I’d be curious to learn more about the scientific data and management approaches referenced by both sides. Maintaining a sustainable menhaden fishery while accounting for the species’ ecological role is an important balance to strike.
Kudos to the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition for actively engaging on this issue and pushing back against what they see as misleading claims. Robust public discourse on resource management is important, even if the specifics get technical.
This seems like a classic case of competing interests and perspectives when it comes to natural resource management. I’m glad to see both sides articulating their positions, even if they disagree. Hopefully the decision-makers can find a way to reconcile the different concerns.
This highlights the complexities involved in managing a fishery that serves both commercial and ecological needs. I imagine there are valid arguments and perspectives on both sides, so I hope the decision-makers are able to carefully weigh the available scientific data.
The claims about the menhaden population being 40% smaller seem quite significant, if true. I wonder what the ASMFC’s specific response was and how they arrived at their assessment. Transparency around the data and science is key for these types of resource management decisions.
The Chesapeake Bay is such an important and sensitive ecosystem. While I can understand the Coalition’s desire to maintain current fishing practices, the Foundation’s concerns about protecting the overall menhaden population should also be taken seriously. Finding the right balance is crucial.
As someone who follows news on energy and commodities, I’m particularly interested in how this debate over the menhaden fishery could impact related industries and supply chains. The scientific data and management approaches will be crucial in determining the appropriate next steps.
As someone who follows news on mining and commodities, I’m intrigued by the implications this could have for the menhaden industry and related supply chains. The scientific data and management approaches will be crucial in determining the appropriate next steps.