Circus Comes to Town: Striped Bass Board Meeting Recap

Feature Photo: A crew chasing a blitz in the fog from the movie Hard Lined.

Yesterday, the ASMFC Striped Bass Management Board hosted a six-hour striper management marathon that consisted of multiple attempts to ignore the latest data and hijack progress in bad faith. Thankfully, all three of these efforts failed, though some by a very slim margin (including tied voting). While only slightly cracked open, the door for positive action isn’t completely closed yet. This blog provides an overview of what went down and where things are going for striped bass. If you prefer to consume your news in audio format (with some additional comedic relief & storytelling), tune in to our Rapid Reaction podcast “The Striped Bass Circus” EP 161 available now on all major podcast platforms – Apple Podcasts & Spotify.

Pre-Meeting Refresher:

A few weeks ago ASGA kicked off a campaign for necessary Striped Bass Board management action. We wrote extensively about striped bass and also just published a podcast with questions and answers about the stock.  These resources are lengthy but intended to be comprehensive. You can also read our Official letter to the Board and see the list of signatories. The sobering Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass Young of the Year survey results took center stage. 

Yesterday at the ASMFC Annual Meeting, the Board reviewed the results of the 2024 Striped Bass Stock Assessment. Things are not in a good place. Striped bass will not rebuild without major management changes. Unfortunately, there was uncertainty in the Assessment’s projections; the Technical Committee could not definitively settle on what removals in 2024 and 2025 will look like as the 2018-year class recruits into the slot limit. Assuming removals increase or remain low results in either a 4% or 46% reduction to rebuild by 2029. That disparity in scale of required reductions leaves the Board with a lot of discretion. This Board does not have a good history of acting on behalf of the resource, and this is ultimately the final opportunity we will give this group to take this situation seriously.

The meeting kicked off at 1:30pm EST while people were getting back from lunch. It came to an end as the sun went down. For hours, hundreds of attendees listened while a few heartfelt commissioners fought for fairness in striper management, under siege by those prioritizing their interests above the health of the resource. There were over 200 attendees at the start of the meeting. Over half the audience had dropped off after 4+ hours. Unfortunately, less than a half dozen public comments on management action were heard. The meeting began with presentations from a No-Targeting Workgroup (WG), the Striped Bass Technical Committee (TC) & the Stock Assessment Subcommittee (SAS). 

The WG presented their findings from a review of existing no-targeting closures for striped bass in state and federal waters, including the impacts of striped bass catch and relief effort and the enforceability of said measures.

Then, the SAS presented the latest update from the 2024 Atlantic Striped Bass Stock Assessment. The assessment currently finds the fishery overfished but not experiencing overfishing in 2024, which we would largely attribute to a drop in effort due to lack of abundance. One key detail about the current state of the assessment is that it’s currently incomplete, as it does not have “Wave 4 MRIP data”. This will be the last wave of catch data plugged into the model for the calendar year.

After the SAS presented, questions regarding the data were fielded. A few “misguided stakeholders” took this an opportunity to slip their comment in, while those who played by the rules sat eagerly waiting for an appropriate opportunity that never arrived.

This first motion submitted on behalf of Massachusetts is pictured below. This motion is key as it operates as the anchor for the discussions. These meetings are run through the parliamentary procedure of “Robert’s Rules”. If you’re not aware of the format, it can be confusing. Heck, even if you are aware, it can still be a pain to track. This anchor motion drove the rest of the meeting, as all others had to then be submitted as “substitutions” to replace this original motion. The important dynamic to focus on with this motion is that it pushes for action from both recreational and commercial sectors for the 2025 season. No kicking the can until 2026 or 2027. Ms. Nicola Meserve who submitted the motion recently took over for Mike Armstrong. Massachusetts has a legacy of conservation when it comes to this Management Board. It’s safe to say that Nicola is trying to uphold that legacy. While this motion is far from a one-stop fix for all the issues with this fishery, it was a motion that could pass, and it ultimately did. For now, we’ll take what we can get.

Immediately, the bad actors attack the motion that could potentially restrict their access to slaughtering the 2018-class entering the stock.  This substitute motion was proposed by none other than “striped bass conservation extraordinaire” Mike Luisi from Maryland. His substitution is listed below and took over the Board debate. The most infuriating part about the debate about these substitution motions is that it detracted from the real conversation about conserving this resource and chewed up time for additional voices to participate. Mr. Luisi’s motion aimed to take no action for 2025 and start an addendum process that would implement changes for the fishery by Jan 1 2026. What a heartfelt dedication to conservation!… This was the “kick the can” attempt we expected, which aims to preserve one more year to hammer the last above average year class entering the slot.  Thankfully, this substitution failed. Final vote: 6-9-0-1.

States that voted in favor of the bad substitute motion: NJ, NOAA, DE, MD, PRFC, VA

States that voted against the bad substitute motion: RI, MA, CT, NY, NH, ME, DC, NC, PA

Abstentions: FWS

Immediately after this first substitution fails, we have a second one thrown on the table. The second substitute motion is from Mr. Greer, seconded by Mr. Clark (DE).  In short, this motion changed verbiage to imply that action for 2025 was optional at best, and that the commercial sector would be spared from any 2025 action. If passed, the Board would also “consider action for both recreational and commercial measures” about 14 months from now. This is very similar to the first substitution, except it left action for 2025 on table, if only focused on the recreational sector. Remember, ASGA has been explicit about our desire to see equitable reductions from both recreational and commercial sectors. As our Official Letter to the Board called out, the commercial fishing in the Chesapeake Bay and anchored gill net fisheries that intercept fecund striped bass entering their spawning estuaries must be curtailed. The striped bass commercial fishery in Maryland has not taken a reduction in over a decade while the Maryland recreational fishery has almost collapsed. It is illogical that approximately 80% of commercial landings come from Maryland while experiencing 6 years of spawning failure. The harvest, not quota, must be heavily reduced. The anchored gill net fisheries in Virginia and Delaware are no longer sustainable, considering the repeated spawning failures in both estuaries. We are aware that recreational effort has been grossly overestimated by NOAA. That means that commercial striped bass harvest is a much higher percentage of total harvest than previously estimated. Thankfully we survived this substitution yet again, though barely. The final vote was a failure by tie: 7-7-2-0.

States that voted in favor of the second substitute motion: NH, DE, MD, PRFC, DC, VA, NJ

States that voted against the bad substitute motion: ME, NC, PA, NY, CT, MA, RI

Abstentions: NOAA, FWS

At this point, we’re back to the original motion from Ms. Meserve. There’s one final small proposed amendment that would swap the verbiage in the original motion regarding commercial changes. That verbiage would read “commercial measures” instead of “commercial quotas”, aiming to gain some flexibility and make other changes to reduce their impact, instead of just how many fish they kill. There was a fantastic comment before the vote by Marty Gary (NY) that deserves to be amplified. As he so aptly stated, “…I am very uncomfortable with the inability to quantify this. We’re at a point with this stock where no one is going to get a pass. We’re all in this together. All the sectors have to work together, with what we have left and the absence of reproductive success.[…] This could amount to a ‘pass’ by some people’s interpretation and I’m just not comfortable with it.”

Thank you, Mr. Gary for speaking on behalf of equitable conservation. Our resources need more voices like yours. We have one final vote that again fails 8-8-0-0.

States that voted in favor of the unnecessary amendment: RI, NC, VA, DC, PRFC, MD, DE, ME

States that voted against the verbiage amendment: NH, PA, FWS, NOAA, NJ, NY, CT, MA

After hours of dancing around the room, the original main motion went to vote and passed 14-1-0-1. New Jersey was the only null vote, which is not to the surprise of many. 

So… Where do we go from here?

The Technical Committee was tasked with developing options for 2025 reductions that have a 50% chance of reaching the target by 2029. The Board has also asked to see what a 60% chance of hitting the target would look like. This was good to hear. To reach a 50% chance, the reduction will include options for seasonal harvest closures, no-targeting options and possibly a new slot to protect the 2018 year class. The full list of TC tasks can be found below.

ASGA will actively monitor the development of these options and provide all the resources necessary to have an impact at this critical meeting in December. Advocates will once again need to heed the call in less than two months time. While yesterday’s meeting was not the fairytale ending many desired, we have partially dodged another serious case of “kick the can down the road” and have the opportunity for change in 2025. We must take full advantage of this opportunity – because striped bass deserve better.

Our new rapid reaction podcast episode provides a recap of the madness from today’s striped bass circus. Grab some popcorn and enjoy the show…