Report on the Sustainability and Economic Impact of the Atlantic Menhaden Fishery

Executive Summary

This report analyzes the operational and management practices of the Atlantic menhaden fishery, with a specific focus on its alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The fishery demonstrates a commitment to sustainable resource management, contributes significantly to local economies, and operates under a robust, science-based framework. The findings counter recent criticisms by highlighting the fishery’s adherence to principles outlined in SDG 14 (Life Below Water), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

SDG 14: Life Below Water – Sustainable Marine Resource Management

Commitment to Sustainable Fishing Practices

The Atlantic menhaden fishery is managed in strict accordance with scientific principles to ensure the long-term health of the marine ecosystem, directly supporting the objectives of SDG 14.

• Stock Health Assessment: The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), the primary governing body, has repeatedly confirmed that the menhaden stock is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring.
• Ecological Reference Points (ERPs): Management of the fishery utilizes advanced ERPs. This ecosystem-based approach accounts for the needs of predator species, ensuring that harvesting levels do not disrupt the broader food web. This method was developed with input from environmental and recreational groups, reflecting a holistic view of marine conservation.

Analysis of Ecological Impact

Concerns regarding the fishery’s impact on predator species, such as osprey, are not substantiated by comprehensive data. The ecological dynamics are complex and influenced by multiple factors.

1. Osprey Population Data: While some studies have been cited to suggest a negative link, the Chesapeake Bay osprey population has increased by nearly 1,800% since 1960.
2. Multiple Environmental Factors: The U.S. Geological Survey notes that osprey breeding success is influenced by a range of variables, including prey abundance, climate change, predation risk, and weather conditions, indicating that fishing is not the sole or primary determinant.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth & SDG 1: No Poverty

Contribution to Local Livelihoods and Economies

The menhaden fishery is a vital component of Virginia’s coastal economy, providing stable employment and economic security, which are central tenets of SDG 8 and foundational for achieving SDG 1.

• Local Employment: The fishery employs American crews, specifically coastal Virginians, many of whom are union members with UFCW Local 400. The assertion that the industry involves “foreign” harvesters is factually incorrect; fishing operations are conducted by Ocean Harvesters, a U.S.-based and -controlled company.
• Economic Stability: The jobs created by the fishery support local families, generate tax revenue, and sustain coastal communities, preventing economic decline and contributing to poverty reduction. The workforce includes multi-generational fishing families, highlighting the industry’s deep-rooted social and economic value.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions & SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

Adherence to Scientific Governance and Collaboration

The fishery operates under the oversight of strong institutions and actively participates in scientific research, demonstrating a commitment to the principles of SDG 16 and SDG 17.

Institutional Oversight

• The ASMFC serves as a strong, science-based institution that ensures the equitable and sustainable management of marine resources, preventing conflicts and promoting fair access.

Commitment to Science and Partnership

1. Participation in Research: The industry has actively participated in 15 scientific studies in recent years to improve understanding of the marine environment.
2. Support for Validated Science: The industry’s objection to a recent study proposal was based on its reliance on an untested, lower-cost methodology, not an opposition to science itself. The industry continues to support the original, scientifically validated study design proposed by the ASMFC.
3. Call for Coexistence: The industry advocates for the equitable sharing of marine resources, recognizing the value of both commercial and recreational fishing. This position promotes a collaborative approach to resource management, urging a move away from divisive rhetoric and toward a partnership model for the sustainable use of the Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Ocean.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses issues related to the menhaden fishery, which connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary focus is on the balance between economic activities, environmental conservation, and scientific management of marine resources.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The article emphasizes the economic importance of the menhaden fishery for local communities. It highlights the creation of jobs and the contribution to the economy, which are central themes of SDG 8. The author defends the industry by stating it would “harm Virginia workers” to halt the harvest and that the jobs “support coastal economies and families, and generate tax revenue.” The mention of “union members in UFCW Local 400” also points to the goal of decent work.

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The entire debate revolves around the sustainable management of a marine species (menhaden). The article addresses concepts like overfishing, ecosystem health, and science-based management. It mentions that the “Atlantic menhaden fishery is among the most sustainably managed in America” and that the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) has confirmed it is “not overfished and overfishing is not occurring.” It also discusses the fishery’s potential impact on predators like “osprey” and the use of “ecological reference points (ERPs), which consider predator needs.”

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  This goal is connected through the principle of sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. The article’s core argument is about the responsible harvesting (production) of menhaden. The claim that the fishery is “sustainably managed” and operates under “strict oversight” directly relates to ensuring sustainable production patterns.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  The article implicitly discusses the need for and challenges of partnerships between different stakeholders. It mentions the interactions between commercial fishers, “recreational fishing groups,” scientific institutions (“Bryan Watts, Ph.D., of William & Mary”), and regulatory bodies (“Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC)”). The author’s final statement that “Recreational fishing, commercial fishing and conservation can and should coexist” is a call for the kind of multi-stakeholder cooperation that SDG 17 promotes.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  • Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men. The article’s defense of the “livelihoods” of “Virginia workers” and “American crews” directly relates to this target of maintaining employment.
  • Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers. The mention of “union members in UFCW Local 400” implies an organized labor force with protected rights, aligning with this target.

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  • Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems. The discussion about managing the fishery to consider the needs of predators like “osprey” and the use of “ecological reference points (ERPs)” reflects efforts to manage the broader ecosystem.
  • Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing. This is a central theme. The author asserts that the fishery is managed by the “ASMFC” and that “overfishing is not occurring,” which directly addresses the goal of regulating harvesting to ensure sustainability.
  • Target 14.a: Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology. The debate over the validity of scientific studies is relevant here. The author notes the industry has “participated in 15 scientific studies” and supports the “original, science-based proposal” from the ASMFC, highlighting the role of science in fishery management.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  • Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. The entire article is a debate about whether the menhaden fishery constitutes sustainable management of a natural resource. The claim that it is “among the most sustainably managed in America” is a direct reference to this target.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  • Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships. The article describes the complex relationship between the commercial fishing industry (private), recreational fishers (civil society), and the ASMFC (a public/governmental body), illustrating the dynamics of such partnerships.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article mentions or implies several indicators that could be used to measure progress:

• For SDG 14 (Life Below Water)

  • Indicator for Target 14.4: The proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels. The article directly references this with the statement from the ASMFC that the fishery is “not overfished and overfishing is not occurring.” This serves as a direct measure of sustainability.
  • Indicator for Target 14.2: The use of ecosystem-based management approaches. The article mentions the use of “ecological reference points (ERPs), which consider predator needs,” which is a specific management tool that can be tracked as an indicator of progress.
  • Indicator for Target 14.2: The health of related species populations. The article discusses the “osprey populations,” citing their “nearly 1,800% increase in the Chesapeake Bay since 1960” as an implied indicator of ecosystem health, while also noting they are “leveling off recently.”
  • Indicator for Target 14.a: The number of scientific studies and research initiatives. The article states that the “industry has participated in 15 scientific studies in recent years,” providing a quantitative measure of engagement in research.

• For SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth)

  • Implied Indicator for Target 8.5: The number of jobs supported by the fishery. The article refers to “Virginia workers,” “American crews,” and a specific “15-person union-member crew,” implying that employment numbers are a key metric of the industry’s value.
  • Implied Indicator for Target 8.5: Contribution to local and national economies. The mention that the industry helps “support coastal economies and families, and generate tax revenue” suggests that economic impact assessments and tax revenue data are relevant indicators.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: pilotonline.com