The Virginia Marine Resources Commissioners voted 5-3 on April 23 in Newport News, Va., to deny a petition from the Chesapeake Legal Alliance and Southern Maryland Recreational Fishing Organization that would have placed a moratorium on menhaden purse seine fishing in Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay.
Virginia is the only state on the Atlantic coast that allows large menhaden reduction fishing. Omega Protein, owned by Cooke Inc. of Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada, and Ocean Harvesters, firms that process and harvest the fish, are the largest reduction menhaden fish companies operating on the East Coast. Omega and Ocean Harvester are two of the largest employers on Virginia’s Northern Neck and corporate offices are located in Reedville.
The petition also called for VMRC to require:
- Set a limit of no more than 60% of current purse seine menhaden landings within Virginia waters.
- Codify a 1-mile shoreline buffer and establish a permanent 1-nautical mile buffer along Virginia's shoreline prohibiting the use of menhaden purse seines.
- Fund and implement a menhaden population study.
- Implement and enhance the Atlantic Menhaden Research proposal to investigate localized depletion to determine local impacts of menhaden fishing in the Bay.
- Establish proper industry oversight requiring increased vessel and landings monitoring and reporting to ensure compliance and reduce bycatch and impacts on Bay habitats.
The meeting addressed the pros and cons of each item. In the end, VMRC commissioners resisted passing a motion by commissioner Heather Lusk and seconded by commissioner Patrick Hand to consider a permanent 1-nautical-mile restricted buffer along all the shoreline of Virginia and for more monitoring and reporting to ensure compliance and reduce bycatch.
The motion never made it to a vote, as commissioners balked at the cost of having to pay for fish inspectors on menhaden vessels and felt that the partial 1-nautical mile shoreline buffer established last year in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between VMRC and Ocean Harvesters/Omega Protein agreeing to put limits on menhaden fishing in some areas of Chesapeake Bay would suffice
The MOU restricted areas in the bay from being fished on weekends during busy recreational holidays, not to fish within one-half mile on either side of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel, and not to fish within a 1-mile limit along a portion of the Eastern Shore on Chesapeake Bay and on the western shore in the Hampton area.
David Reed, executive director of the Chesapeake Legal Foundation, said that the MOU is no more than a “handshake deal with no sanctions for violations—(and in some ways) it is less than a handshake agreement.”
VMRC officials stated that the MOU was more than a “handshake agreement” and there had been no violations of the MOU by Ocean Harvesters since the agreement was finalized.
The public comment period covered ospreys, striped bass, cormorants, brown pelicans, weakfish, climate change, ocean currents, bait and charter boat fisheries, problems with commercial fishing in the Atlantic Ocean verses working in the more protected Chesapeake Bay waters, the local economic gains of both the menhaden fishery and sports-fishing businesses, etc. with proponents and opponents speaking on the impact, or lack of impact, on menhaden.
Shanna Madsen, the commission’s deputy chief of the Fisheries Management Division, gave an extensive report and stated that the current science shows that menhaden are not being over-harvested in the mid-Atlantic region.
Madsen, however, noted a hole in the science. Menhaden catch quotas are figured on the overall Atlantic menhaden stock data, which is calculated by the Atlantic State Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). This includes the Chesapeake Bay.
Madsen said that VMRC needs a menhaden study specific to Chesapeake Bay to get a clearer picture of the impact of the menhaden harvest on the overall stock inside the bay. The petition addressed that point – calling to “fund and implement a menhaden population study.”
No information is available that determines localized depletion of menhaden, said Madsen. “I would be ecstatic if we had the funding to conduct such a study. That would tell us whether or not the catch in the bay can be higher or lower – or should (commercial fishing of menhaden) exist at all. We have historical landing data within the bay to go by but not localized science.”
The Virginia General Assembly postponed that possibility in the last session when HB-19 was tabled. The bill called for a $3.6 million study of the bay’s menhaden population. The GB Rules sub-committee tabled the bill to be considered in the 2025 session.
There appeared to be some common thread between groups concerning a need for a study. Scientists, proponents, and opponents of the menhaden fishery, and other stakeholders all said they wanted the study. Still, there were accusations from menhaden fishing opponents that Ocean Harvesters and Omega Protein had lobbied against HB-19.
Ocean Harvesters CEO Monty Deihl said that the firm did not lobby against the bill and the confusion stemmed from the firm’s lobby group being in Richmond on the same day the Right to Fish HB-928 bill and HB-19 came up. “We were there to support the Right to Fish bill not to lobby against HB-19,” he said. Deihl also said that HB-19 was one of 77 bills the committee reviewed that day with only six or seven moving out of the committee.
The Right to Fish bill was signed into law last month by Gov. Glenn Youngkin, to protect commercial watermen from interference when working. The creation of the bill came about because in September 2023 a protester on a jet ski ran inside of a purse net being set and out again before the two purse boats came together.
After all public comment, Virginia Institute of Marine scientist Rob Latour, a member of the VMRC menhaden advisory committee, addressed issues brought up by spokespersons for charter boat fishing groups, Audubon societies, sports-fishing groups, osprey scientists and Ocean Harvesters.
Latour said that many of the issues brought up by opponents of menhaden fishing are associated with climate change rather than overfishing of menhaden in the bay. He noted that the current science shows that the fishery is not being overfished.
He also said Ocean Harvesters perhaps did not lobby against HB-19, but they were not there that day to support the bill either and that the industry is quick to use data “that helps them and does not encourage other studies.”
After three and a half hours of talk, there were two voices that were clear. Ocean Harvesters and Omega Protein will fish again this season in Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay.
The other voice was from speaker Dale Neal who was in favor of the petition for a moratorium.
“We want you out of the bay. With every defeat that we have suffered it has only made us stronger and we are building an army to stop the fishing,” said Neal. “We will eventually break the loyalty of those politicians who have kept you going!”
VMRC authorized staff to study the overall impact of a 1-nautical mile buffer along all of the shores of Virginia and reducing the number of days Ocean Harvesters' boats are allowed to fish.
