Jump to content

OMEGA Menhaden Over Catch

Rate this topic


stripedbassking

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CWitek said:

That's what I was trying to say--that salmon are countable.  Other fish, probably not so much.  And to the extent that Atlantic salmon are farmed on the East Coast--mostly, I think, in Maine, as far as US waters go--the farmed numbers far exceed the wild.  There are so few coming back to Maine rivers that the numbers are in single, double or triple-digits, generally far fewer than exist in a single pen.

I really don't think that's the case with Atlantic Salmon. They are farmed from ME to Norway, to Chile, to Washington state, to Canada and I don't think anyone has any idea of how many fish there are in the wild. With the right data sets you could probably count all the fish in pens, but I don't see what good that would do. Anyway. I really don't think they are either countable or worth counting. Just FYI I saw a release of "NOAA and USFWS Release Atlantic Salmon Recovery Plan." which says that wild fish returns in all the ME rivers is about 1,000 fish.

====Mako Mike====
Makomania Sportfishing
Pt. Judith, RI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MakoMike said:

Just curious, where is your local waters?

 

Do you have a cite to any study that shows that Stripers, bluefish and weakfish "feed primarily on menhaden"? I know they, along with many other species, will eat menhaden, but I question if menhaden is their primary forage.

No disrespect but I would say based on my observations that it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if Bunker is available and gamefish, Stripers, Blues, Weaks are in the vicinity that they are primarily feeding on the bunker.  Bunker is numero uno.  The best fishing I’ve ever seen or heard of is usually directly coorelates to Bunker being around.  With a lack of Bunker all the aforementioned gamefish seem to be able to sustain themselves on other baits though the fish in my observations are less healthy than those stuffed with Menhaden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MakoMike said:

I really don't think that's the case with Atlantic Salmon. They are farmed from ME to Norway, to Chile, to Washington state, to Canada and I don't think anyone has any idea of how many fish there are in the wild. With the right data sets you could probably count all the fish in pens, but I don't see what good that would do. Anyway. I really don't think they are either countable or worth counting. Just FYI I saw a release of "NOAA and USFWS Release Atlantic Salmon Recovery Plan." which says that wild fish returns in all the ME rivers is about 1,000 fish.

The same forage don't extend from Maine to Norway.  We have a number of different stocks.  But if we agree that there are about 1,000 salmon in Maine, including all of the rivers that currently support runs, I hope we can agree that there are more than 1,000 salmon in pens--at least, there were the last time I was around the Cutler/Lubec area, where the pens were very common.  So in that region, the penned fish are far more abundant than the wild, and would consume more forage than the wild fish require.

 

I can't speak for Iceland, Scotland or Norway; don't know much about what goes on there.  But in the Canadian Maritimes and Quebec, they keep pretty good tabs on the salmon runs, too: I suspect that they could give you a decent estimate of the salmon there, too, and compare them to the aquacultured fish.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 mins ago, CWitek said:

The same forage don't extend from Maine to Norway.  We have a number of different stocks.  But if we agree that there are about 1,000 salmon in Maine, including all of the rivers that currently support runs, I hope we can agree that there are more than 1,000 salmon in pens--at least, there were the last time I was around the Cutler/Lubec area, where the pens were very common.  So in that region, the penned fish are far more abundant than the wild, and would consume more forage than the wild fish require.

I will definitely agree that there are more than 1,000 fish in pens. I'm not so sure that the same forage doesn't extend from ME to Norway. But I'm pretty sure that almost none of the forage consists of menhaden, which is where we started off this discussion. :)

====Mako Mike====
Makomania Sportfishing
Pt. Judith, RI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, MakoMike said:

Just curious, where is your local waters?

 

Do you have a cite to any study that shows that Stripers, bluefish and weakfish "feed primarily on menhaden"? I know they, along with many other species, will eat menhaden, but I question if menhaden is their primary forage.

pplied bioenergetics models for dominant Chesapeake Bay piscivores, striped bass (Morone saxatilis), bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis), along with site-specific data on diets, growth, and energy density, to examine trophic linkages and the relationship of predatory demand to prey supply. Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus), bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli), and spot (Leiostomus xanthurus) accounted for 65–99% of the annual biomass of piscivore diets (excluding age-0 striped bass that ate mostly invertebrates). The diets of young piscivores were dominated by anchovy, but menhaden and spot became increasingly important to older fish. Young (age < 2) striped bass ate mostly benthic prey. Older striped bass fed increasingly on pelagic sources, primarily menhaden, but bluefish and weakfish increased benthic resource use from 10% at age 0 to 50% by age 2. Comparison of consumption (supply) to demand (potential consumption) measured the suitability of Chesapeake Bay for predator production. Bluefish came closest to achieving their demand for prey, suggesting that they are more successful predators than either striped bass or weakfish. Results suggest that Chesapeake Bay may be a better nursery than production area for older fish, and prey supply (not temperature) may account for the movements and use of the estuary by older piscivores.

 

 

datory demand and impact of striped bass, bluefish, and weakfish in the Chesapeake Bay: applications of bioenergetics models

ArticleinCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52(8):1667-1687 · April 2011with 83 Reads
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overton et al. (2008) suggested a greater role of Atlantic Menhaden of all ages in Striped Bass diets. Atlantic Menhaden were often dominant prey in studies of Striped Bass diets in the Chesapeake Bay and the mid‐Atlantic region and were important prey in New England waters (Walter and Austin 2003; Walter et al. 2003; Rudershausen et al. 2005; Nelson et al. 2006; 

Striped Bass and Atlantic Menhaden Predator–Prey Dynamics: Model Choice Makes the Difference

James H. Uphoff Jr. 
 
Alexei Sharov
First published: 05 July 2018
Published in the journal of the American Fisheries Society
 
 
These observations indicate that the remnant menhaden population can no longer fulfill its role as the primary prey species for striped bass because of ecological depletion
 
Members of the ASMFC Multispecies Technical Committee and others have worked to develop a multispecies Virtual Population Analysis (MSVPA) model to explore important predator-prey interactions among key ASMFC-managed species, including Atlantic menhaden as the primary forage fish and striped bass, bluefish, and weakfish as predators.
 
   An outbreak of disease among striped bass has coincided with the decline of their forage base. Striped bass with sores and lesions (ulcerative dermatitis) were first documented in 1994 by Dr. Eric May of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources.
   Since 1997, striped bass have shown a high prevalence of anomalies (skin abrasions, lesions or bacterial infections). Most of the Bay’s striped bass suffer from poor nutrition and approximately half of the population is infected with the disease, Mycobacteriosis.
    Most of the striped bass also had no fat in their body cavities and showed signs of poor nutrition.
   Griffin stated: “Atlantic menhaden was the primary prey of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay in the early 1950s…predation demand was only slightly below prey supply throughout the modeled year for all ages.” At that time, the estimated Atlantic coast population of forage size menhaden (ages 0-2) averaged 795 billion. Griffin’s modeling using data for the same time period estimated menhaden made up 77 percent of the Bay’s ages 3-6 striped bass diet.
 
Between 1997 and 2000, an outbreak of skin lesions and observations of emaciated striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), in upper Chesapeake Bay were attributed to a perceived shortage of its main prey, Atlantic menhaden, Brevoortia tyrannus Latrobe. 
 
 
Chesapeake Bay Ecological Foundation, Inc. Easton, MD 21601 410-822-4400 MENHADEN CRUCIAL TO STRIPED BASS HEALTH & CHESAPEAKE BAY ECOSYSTEM Presented to Forage Action Team – Sept. 2016 Quarterly Meeting
 
 
Edited by TimS
commercial links removed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, MakoMike said:

 I'm pretty sure that almost none of the forage consists of menhaden, which is where we started off this discussion. :)

Agreed

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   I'm not sure what you mean by the statement " I'm pretty sure that almost none of the forage consists of menhaden, which is where we started off this discussion". I'm not arguing, just think I'm missing something. Is that meant to say that none of the striped bass forage consists of menhaden? Please explain.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, baldwin said:

   I'm not sure what you mean by the statement " I'm pretty sure that almost none of the forage consists of menhaden, which is where we started off this discussion". I'm not arguing, just think I'm missing something. Is that meant to say that none of the striped bass forage consists of menhaden? Please explain.

 

Charles and I had moved on to taking about Atlantic Salmon and that statement was concerning the forge base for Atlantic salmon. BTW - Thanks for the references.

Edited by MakoMike
====Mako Mike====
Makomania Sportfishing
Pt. Judith, RI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CWitek said:

Agreed

   Fisheries science has to be one of the most difficult disciplines in which to justify your findings. There are just so many variables that we don't even know about, errors in reporting,...

   I tend to lean on the side that feels that if we're going to err in any direction, we're better off erring on the side of conservation. At least if we're wrong in that direction we still have fish left to manage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 mins ago, baldwin said:

   Fisheries science has to be one of the most difficult disciplines in which to justify your findings. There are just so many variables that we don't even know about, errors in reporting,...

   I tend to lean on the side that feels that if we're going to err in any direction, we're better off erring on the side of conservation. At least if we're wrong in that direction we still have fish left to manage. 

Agreed.  The more uncertainty that exists, the more caution is indicated.  The regional fishery management councils try to capture that when they set the catch limits, but some do it better than others.

"I have always believed that outdoor writers who come out against fish and wildlife conservation are in the wrong business. To me, it makes as much sense golf writers coming out against grass.."  --  Ted Williams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, baldwin said:

   Fisheries science has to be one of the most difficult disciplines in which to justify your findings. There are just so many variables that we don't even know about, errors in reporting,...

   I tend to lean on the side that feels that if we're going to err in any direction, we're better off erring on the side of conservation. At least if we're wrong in that direction we still have fish left to manage. 

The MAFMC has a policy that is designed to do just that.

====Mako Mike====
Makomania Sportfishing
Pt. Judith, RI
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...