The Yellow Perch management in Maryland’s portion of the Chesapeake Bay and tidal rivers has been a long, for lack of a better word, ordeal. Two more meetings were announced today. Attend if you can. What happens with the management of yellow perch has repercussions in the management of other species.

YELLOW PERCH PUBLIC MEETING
Tuesday, September 9, 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

Tawes State Office Building, 580 Taylor Ave. in the Cafeteria in Annapolis (Anne Arundel County)

Recreational anglers are invited to attend a public meeting to contribute their input on the draft management objectives for the recreational yellow perch fishery and draft recreational management options for 2009 and beyond. Results from the updated yellow perch stock assessment and monitoring projects will also be presented.

If you cannot attend, but would like to provide input, you may request a list of management options after the meeting date and send your recommendations by Sept. 24 to Rick Morin, rmorin@dnr.state.md.us. Questions may be directed to 410-260-8272.

YELLOW PERCH PUBLIC MEETING
Wednesday, September 10, 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

Tawes State Office Building, 580 Taylor Ave. in the Cafeteria in Annapolis (Anne Arundel County)

Commercial anglers are invited to attend a public meeting to contribute their input on the draft management objectives for the recreational yellow perch fishery and draft recreational management options for 2009 and beyond. Results from the updated yellow perch stock assessment and monitoring projects will also be presented.

If you cannot attend, but would like to provide input, you may request a list of management options after the meeting date and send your recommendations by Sept. 24 to Rick Morin, rmorin@dnr.state.md.us. Questions may be directed to 410-260-8272.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, aka NOAA Fisheries) is taking public comment through September 22, 2008 on new guidelines for managing fisheries under the reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Proposed Rule revises the National Standard 1 Guidelines, which provide the eight Regional Fishery Management Councils with guidance on how to set catch limits in order to prevent overfishing and achieve the optimum yield for all federally-managed fisheries.

At the request of the National Coalition for Marine Conservation (NCMC) and the Marine Fish Conservation Network, the NMFS proposal includes guidance on setting catch limits in order to protect predator-prey interactions, with emphasis on “maintaining adequate forage for all components of the ecosystem.” The councils are asked to consider managing forage species such as herring, mackerel, squid and sardine at a population level higher than the biomass associated with achieving the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) “to enhance and protect the marine ecosystem.”

The NCMC commends NMFS for making these additions to the NS1 Guidelines, which for the first time give the councils specific advice on how to consider ecological factors in setting allowable catches. NCMC began pushing for such changes shortly after the MSA was reauthorized in January 2007.

Please write to NMFS and express your strong support for establishing a higher standard of conservation for forage fish in the National Standard 1 Guidelines. In addition, urge the agency to strengthen the guidelines by:

* Calling on the councils to set population targets for forage fish significantly higher than the MSY level.

* Recommending fishery managers disperse catches of forage fish by area and season in order to prevent localized depletion of prey and make sure adequate forage is available to predators at key times and in sensitive areas.

HOW TO SUBMIT COMMENTS:
All comments must include the identifier RIN: 0648-AV60 in the subject line and can be submitted electronically or by fax.
Electronically:   All electronic public comments must be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Under “Search Documents” type in 0648-AV60 (identifier number) as your keyword. Then under “Magnuson Act, Annual Catch Limits,” “send a comment or submission.”   Attachments are accepted.

Fax to: 301-713-1193,  Attention Mark Milliken/NMFS.
Comments must be received by received by September 22, 2008.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Read more about the Forage First! campaign.

Be sure to check out:  Taking the Bait — Are America’s Fisheries Out-Competing Predators for their Prey?

Download a Forage First! Fish File, an educational fact sheet.

Last week at their 3-day summer meeting, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) took important steps toward improving management of menhaden, river herring and American shad – species that are particularly important as prey for striped bass and numerous other predators.In a public statement at the start of the August 20th meeting, NCMC president Ken Hinman reminded the ASMFC Atlantic Menhaden Management Board that we are now halfway through the five-year cap on menhaden harvest in Chesapeake Bay, that ASMFC-requested research is underway looking into the status of menhaden as a forage fish, and that a new stock assessment will be performed in 2009. “The ball you’ve handed the scientists is about to be tossed back into your court,” Hinman said. “The Board needs to begin now figuring out how it’s going to use the available information to implement a new management regime when the present one expires in 2010.”

After a number of Commissioners shared their concern that the move to an ecosystem-based approach to managing the menhaden fishery had “lost momentum,” (which perplexes me that commissioners act on momentum vs. a smart way to manage fish populations) the Board accepted NCMC’s recommendation to appoint a Working Group to develop ecological reference points – e.g., target population size, age structure, and set-aside for predators – by the completion of next year’s stock assessment. ASMFC staff were directed to identify participants, including scientists and managers with experience in ecosystem-based management, and develop a work plan by the Commission’s next meeting, in October 2008.

Commission Also Prioritizes Investigating At-Sea Bycatch for River Herring and Shad Recovery

The following day during the meeting of the ASMFC Shad and River Herring Management Board, a draft river herring amendment was approved for public review that included strong options for regulating bycatch in other fisheries, both in state and federal waters, with emphasis placed on bycatch limits, mandatory reporting, and monitoring programs that allow for reliable estimation. At-sea bycatch is a prime suspect in the decline of both alewives and blueback herring. Landings of these species have fallen by 90% in the last twenty years, coinciding with a rise in mid-water trawling for sea herring and Atlantic mackerel.

Similar options to address bycatch were chosen for an American shad amendment, which is being developed in response to the grim findings of a 2007 stock assessment. “I am greatly encouraged that the Board recognized that at-sea bycatch is also a major threat to American shad stocks, which like river herring are at historic lows. The Board voted 17-1 to include recommendations from both the stock assessment team and the advisory panel (AP) that called for quantifying bycatch and employing observer coverage to verify reporting,” said NCMC Executive Director Pam Lyons Gromen who serves on the Shad and River Herring AP and was present at the Board meeting. The AP also recommended research to identify the major predators of shad in order to quantify consumption, information which is needed for managers to ensure that enough shad is left in the water to fulfill their role as prey. The draft shad amendment is scheduled to be released for public review in November.

There has been a lot of talk from stiped bass anglers all along the east coast and though out the Chesapeake Bay about the Striped Bass population. Some claim it’s declining, some say it’s fine, some say it’s so fine that striped bass are eating all the crabs in the Chesapeake and we should harvest more then we ever have (that last part is more of a smartypants comment based on a previous blog post here) I am not that old, but I have been around to see some really good striped bass fishing in the Chesapeake Bay and along the Alantic Coast. When I say “good” I mean a lot of fish and a lot of big fish. After the mortorium we had that “good” fishing. The last few years I have to say that I have seen less and less big fish in the Chesapeake as well as along the Atlantic Coast. However,  that is just my experience and it’s certianly not based on a scientific experiement. At the same time I also hear anglers double my age saying the same thing. One friend who is in his early to middle 60’s has been fishing and targeting big striped bass his whole life. He says the same thing, simply not as many big fish. This is a guy that chases them all along the east coast every year and has been for decades. And there are a lot of guys like him I talk with that share the setiment. Even some editors/wrtiers of some magazines in the northeast have been suggesting we do not have as many striped bass and certainly not as many big striped bass as before. Are we overharvesting? Do the striped bass not have enough to eat? Is the habitat decreasing where they live and spawn meaning less fish? Is it a combination of two or all three? I do not know the answer, but a report was released the other day that suggests the Striped Bass population along the east coast is healthy. What “healthy” means I have yet to figure out. More to come on this from me as I do some reseach, but in the mean time read below and see what you think. Comments are welcome.

———–

Updated Biological Reference Points for Atlantic Striped Bass Confirm Previously Released Stock Status

The Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board approved new estimates of the biological reference points established in Amendment 6, as well as improved estimates of female spawning stock biomass for 1982-2006 (see accompanying Table 1 and Figures 1 & 2). This action was taken in response to recommendations of the 46th Stock Assessment Review Committee, which reviewed the 2007 striped bass stock assessment.

With these updates, the stock status of Atlantic striped bass remains not overfished and not experiencing overfishing. The new estimate of female spawning stock biomass (SSB) in 2006 (40,639 metric tons) is above the new threshold and target levels (30,000 mt and 37,500 mt, respectively). The 2006 estimate of fishing mortality (F) from the statistical catch at age model (0.31) is below the new threshold of 0.34. Retrospective estimates of F from the statistical catch at age (SCA) model, as well as tag-based estimates of F, indicate that the 2006 fishing mortality is likely below the target F rate, which remains at 0.30.

In its review of the 2007 stock assessment, the Review Committee recommended that the Striped Bass Technical Committee reconsider the ratio of male to female fish used in the estimation of female SSB. The Review Committee also recommended that the Technical Committee re-estimate the fishing mortality threshold based on data from the new preferred assessment model (the SCA model), and that the female SSB target and threshold be linked to the new assessment. The estimates of these reference points for Amendment 6 were based on data from the 2001 virtual population analysis stock assessment. Implementing these changes to the biological reference points does not change their definitions, but rather updates them with new data and estimates of stock size.

The Technical Committee undertook the recommended work. Based on biological sampling data, new estimates of the sex ratio at age were developed, resulting in the improved estimates of female SSB for 1982-2006. Included in this time series was a new estimate of female SSB in 1995 (29,985 mt), the year the Atlantic coast stock was declared restored, and the value upon which the management program female SSB threshold is based. Given that Amendment 6 set the female SSB target as 125 percent of the female SSB threshold, the Technical Committee recommended an updated female SSB threshold of 30,000 mt and an updated female SSB target of 37,500 mt.

The Review Committee’s recommendation to update the F threshold meant re-estimating FMSY, the fishing mortality rate that allows for maximum sustainable yield. Using the new estimates of female SSB and age-1 recruitment from the 2007 assessment, the Technical Committee adopted a model averaging approach to account for uncertainty in the stock-recruitment relationship. The resulting estimate of FMSY was 0.34, which the Technical Committee recommended to the Board for use. The F target in Amendment 6 of 0.30 remains the same because it was not based specifically on estimates of stock size, but is based on the objective to maintain an age structure that provides adequate spawning potential to sustain long-term abundance of striped bass populations.

Figure 1. Atlantic Striped Bass Female Spawning Stock Biomass Estimates and Biological Reference Points
Amendment 6 defines the female SSB threshold as the 1995 level of female SSB, when the stock was declared restored, and the female SSB target as 125 percent of the female SSB threshold. The old female SSB threshold and target are based on data from the 2001 virtual population analysis, while the new female SSB threshold and target are based on data from the 2007 statistical catch at age (SCA) model, incorporating an empirical (based on data) sex ratio. Both sets of female SSB estimates are from the 2007 SCA model; however, the new set incorporates the same empirical sex ratio.

Figure 2. Atlantic Striped Bass Fishing Mortality Estimates and Biological Reference Points
Amendment 6 defines the F threshold as FMSY, and the F target based on management objectives. The old F threshold is based on data from the 2001 virtual population analysis, while the new F threshold is based on data from the 2007 statistical catch at age (SCA) model. Estimates from the SCA model were preferred by the 46th Stock Assessment Review Committee for comparison to biological reference points. However, estimates from the tag-based catch equation (CE) model, as well as retrospective estimates of F from the SCA model, are used to indicate that the terminal year F estimate from the SCA model is likely overestimated and will decline below the F target with the addition of future years of data.

For more information, please contact Nichola Meserve, FMP Coordinator, at (202) 289-6400 or nmeserve@asmfc.org.

I have written a lot about shad and herring, thought everyone should know about the public meetings taking place along the east coast.

Previous posts that are worth reading
Protect Shad at Sea
Herring Hearsay In what should be America’s most important river-herring refuge superstition suppresses these imperiled fish by Ted Williams
Industrial Herring Trawlers Threaten New Englands Ocean - Could This Explain the Shad Collapase Along the East Coast?
Susquehanna American Shad down 90% this Year - Crisis Fisheries Management…again

——–

The Commission’s Shad & River Herring Management Board has approved sending forward Draft Amendment 2 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for River Herring for public review and comment. It seeks input on proposed requirements for population and bycatch monitoring, as well as commercial and recreational management measures. It is anticipated that the majority of coastal states will be conducting public meetings on the Draft Amendment; information on those meetings will be released once they become finalized.

The Draft Amendment has been developed in response to widespread concern regarding the decline of river herring stocks. While many populations of blueback herring and alewife, collectively known as river herring, are in decline or remain depressed at stable levels, lack of fishery-dependent and independent data makes it difficult to ascertain the status of river herring stocks coastwide. Between 1985 and 2004, commercial landings of river herring dropped by 90 percent from 13.6 to 1.33 million pounds. In 2007, Commission member states reported river herring landings of approximately 1.1 million pounds. In response to declining stocks within their own waters, four states — Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and North Carolina — have closed their river herring fisheries. River herring stocks are a multi-jurisdictional resource occurring in rivers and coastal waters. River herring bycatch continues to be a significant concern. Preliminary analyses indicate that, in some years, the total bycatch of river herring species by the Atlantic herring fleet alone could be equal to the total landings from the entire in-river directed fishery on the East Coast.

The Draft Amendment proposes a suite of management measures to address these concerns and ensure the survival and enhancement of depressed stocks or the maintenance of presently stable stocks. The Draft Amendment proposes mandatory data and bycatch monitoring provisions, as well as options to close fisheries by river system or establish a coastwide moratorium on the river herring fishery.  Specific commercial measures include area closures, escapement provisions, and landings reductions by river systems, as well as limited access. Recreational measures include recreational license/permit, limiting recreational harvest by the days of the week, coastwide creel limit, gear restrictions, and area or seasonal closures by river system.

The Draft will be available by early September and can be obtained by contacting the Commission at (202) 289-6400 or via the Commission’s website at www.asmfc.org under Breaking News.  For more information, please contact Toni Kerns, Senior Fisheries Management Plan Coordinator for Management, at (202) 289-6400 or tkerns@asmfc.org

It’s summer here in the Maryland portion of the Chesapeake Bay and while that means vacations and fun on the water for many humans, it means tough times for fish, crabs and other marine species in the Chesapeake. During these high water temperature months we experience dead zones because of algae blooms that are a result of pollutants such as run off from fertilizer and other like substances. The blooms suck all the oxygen out of the water in the lower depths which basically kills everything below. More scientifically speaking, when the algae dies it sinks to the bottom and decreases the amount of oxygen available in the bottom waters, a process called , killing all the fish, crabs and other species as well as their food sources.

Those of us who live and fish in and around the Chesapeake Bay have been aware of these dead zones or red tides as they are sometimes called, for some time now. Striped Bass this time of year are almost always found in the upper water column, generally from 15ft and above. It’s the only place they can get oxygen to breathe.

A US-Sweedish report was released last week suggests that dead zones are increasing all over the world. Dead zones have been steadily increasing over the past five decades and now encompass 400 coastal areas of the world. Dead zones now comprise around 245,000 square kilometers (95,000 square miles), according to researchers Robert Diaz of the Marine Sciences Institute at the College of William and Mary in Virginia, and Rutger Rosenberg, a marine scientist at Gothenburg University in Sweden.

“The formation of dead zones has been exacerbated by the increase in (pollution) … fueled by riverine runoff of fertilizers and the burning of fossil fuels,” the study said.The phenomenon, called eutrophication, is caused by industrial pollution as well as runoff of water containing phosphates and nitrates into the oceans.

“From 1970 to 1990, the hypoxic zone on the northwestern continental shelf of the Black Sea has expanded to 40,000 square kilometers (15,500 square miles),” the study stated. “However, since 1989, the loss of fertilizer subsidies from the former Soviet Union reduced nutrient loading by a factor of two to four, with the result that by 1995 the hypoxic zone had gone.”

Baiscally if these dead zones increase it will reduce where fish can live. With that means fish as a food source decreases. What would life with out fish, crabs, shrimp lobsters or other marine species look like? A heck of a lot of chicken and beef. Not that that is the end of the world, but think about it and what an impact that would have on food availaibly around the world. Hard to even phanthom. Scarey? It scares the heck of of me. Think about it the next time you fertilize your yard or pour other types of chemicals into the enviroment. With a little work we can reduce these dead zones, it just takes us wanting to.

Just in from the National Coalition of Marine Conservation

——-
As the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) deliberates over whether or not to approve a permit for a single vessel to explore a west coast longline fishery in federal waters (3-200 miles off the U.S. coast), the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has turned its attention to the high seas (seaward of 200 miles). The Council recently announced alternatives for a high seas longline fishery, which is being developed as Amendment 2 to the Fishery Management Plan for West Coast Highly Migratory Species (HMS FMP). Minimally, the fishery would consist of 20 vessels deploying over 1 million hooks. An option for an unlimited fishery (in terms of vessels and hooks) is also presented. The law requires NMFS to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the proposed action, and comments from the public are being accepted until September 8, 2008.

Contact the National Marine Fisheries Services to oppose the west coast high seas longline fishery, and to demand that they include in the EIS a comprehensive analysis of the impact on all species expected to interact with the proposed fishery.Despite some modest successes in gear modifications, longlines kill indiscriminately with detrimental effects on sea turtles, marlin, sharks and other imperiled species.

Read the full story on our web site which includes instructions on sending comments.

 I heard the Clean Boating Act bill below was going to pass, and just got word President Bush signed the bill into law yesterday. Definitely saves a lot of problems in the way of people having to get permits and such, but I am not sure the act should be called the “clean” boating act. Maybe it should be called the “still allow some dirty water act”.  I think we all need to be aware that anything we dump overboard effects water quality which in turn effects fisheries. Think about that before you throw anything overboard or what types of cleaning agents you use to clean your boat.

————————————–

PRESIDENT SIGNS CLEAN BOATING ACT LEGISLATION
Aboard Air Force One late yesterday, President Bush signed S. 2766, “The Clean Boating Act of 2008,” which permanently restores a long-standing exemption for recreational boats from permitting requirements under the Clean Water Act. This signing of the bill is the capstone moment of a two-year campaign to eliminate an onerous permit program for recreational boaters that would have dictated maintenance and operation procedures, potentially subjected boaters to citizen lawsuits, and put recreational boats under a penalty system designed for industrial polluters.

With the President at the signing are (left) Representatives Steven C. LaTourette (R-OH), a champion of this common sense legislation and (center) Patrick Tiberi (R-OH).

BoatU.S. has worked with the National Marine Manufacturers Association and a coalition of stakeholders as well as a bi-partisan group of House and Senate legislators. “However, the real success of this campaign rests squarely on the shoulders of this country’s millions of recreational boaters and anglers,” said BoatU.S. Vice President of Government Affairs Margaret Podlich. “Without their loud collective voice, we would not have reached this momentous event.”