AT THE ASMFC: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE

 

I just learned that Pat Keliher, the long-serving head of Maine’s Department of Marine Resources, will be retiring from that position, and so will also be leaving his post as Maine’s Administrative Appointee at the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.  He will be missed, even though he is leaving behind Megan Ware, another very capable Maine fisheries manager who has long served as his proxy and, in doing so, has created her own legacy in fisheries conservation and management.

I have known Pat for nearly 30 years, dating back to the late ‘90s when we were both involved with the Coastal Conservation Association.  At the time, he was the Executive Director for CCA’s Maine chapter, who ran a fundraising, membership, and advocacy program that made Maine a standout among CCA’s four New England chapters.  I was the Chair of CCA New York, a member of CCA’s national executive board, and also the chair of CCA’s Atlantic States Committee, which primarily dealt with issues arising at the ASMFC.

In that role, I worked with Pat quite a bit, and was always impressed by his calm and rational demeanor and his commonsense approach to fisheries issues.  It was an approach and demeanor that he carried into his work at the ASMFC (and, I’m certain, in Maine, although I had no occasion to work with him there), where he was often forced to deal with difficult issues affecting two of the most controversial species managed by the Commission, striped bass and American lobster (although two other species, American eel and Atlantic menhaden, also provided more than their share of headaches).

Perhaps the best example of his leadership, his rational approach to fisheries management, and his conservation philosophy can be found in comments he made while serving as the Chair of the ASMFC in 2021, when he addressed the May meeting of the Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board as they were drafting the document that eventually became Amendment 7 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Striped Bass:

“Thank you for allowing me just a moment to address the Board as the Commission’s Chair.  As you all know, striped bass is known as the Commission’s flagship species.  You also likely know that Congress acted back in 1984, and passed the Atlantic Striped Bass Act.

“This was the beginning of the moratorium years, a time we all sacrificed, and a time that the recovery of this flagship species began.  Since then, we as a management body have strived to address and maintain the recovery in a way that benefitted the fish, and the fisheries that support it.  Throughout this time, we’ve continued to exercise our state’s rights, and put forward our opinions on management that is best for both the species and our state’s interest.

“I would say we’ve likely had mixed results over the years.  That brings us to today, I feel there is a lot at stake, not only for striped bass, but for ASMFC as well.  Some are stating that the Commission has a credibility problem, that we’ve taken our greatest fisheries management success story and reversed it.

“Whether you agree or disagree with these comments, you must agree that we are at a crossroads with management, and today we are deciding which way we’ll turn.  Things are changing.  Many species the Commission manages are seeing shifts in their abundance, and distribution.  Striped bass are not immune to this change, as our stock assessment shows that the stock is overfished, and overfishing is occurring.

“While I personally don’t think we’re at a point we were in 1984, the downward trend of the stock is evident in the assessment.  For many of the Commission species, we’re no longer in a position to ‘hold out hope’ that things will revert to what they’ve been previously, if we just hold static.  Change is happening too fast, and actions need to be taken.

“Today I would ask this Board to think about what is best for the species, but also what is best for the future of the Commission.  I suspect that this will be a painful discussion, and sacrifices needed to find a way forward.  The small amount of pain now pays us dividends down the road.  Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to address the Board, and good luck with this meeting.  Thank you.”

We need more voices like Pat’s at the Commission, and his will be hard to replace.

The past year also saw the retirement of Dr. Michael Armstrong, the former Deputy Director of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries.  I didn’t know Dr. Armstrong.  I never met him face-to-face, and never even communicated with him over the phone or by email, but I was very aware of the leadership role that he played, and the respect that he was given.

Because of the importance of the East Coast striped bass fishery, and the prominence of that species at the ASMFC, I was most aware of his leadership on the Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board, where he was always a champion of conservative management and the long-term health of the fishery. 

Anyone who has spent very much time listening to that management board debate issues knows that there is a contingent of representatives who always try to delay management actions, and when delay seems unlikely, do their best to convince the Board to adopt half-measures that are inadequate to end overfishing or rebuild the stock, but instead would maintain landings at unsustainably high levels.

Dr. Armstrong was skilled at blunting such efforts, never afraid to stand up for the resource and paint a very explicit picture of what everyone stood to lose from delay.  He crafted a significant win in May 2023, when he convinced the Management Board to adopt emergency measures to reduce recreational landings after unexpectedly high landings in 2022 made it unlikely that the stock would rebuild by 2029, the deadline derived from the management plan, if fishing mortality was not cut.  He said to the Board,

“I guess the challenge here is convincing you that this is an emergency…The problem is, we have an entire year of fishing on a very, very strong year class.  Emergency measures haven’t been used much, maybe half a dozen times or so.  The definition is circumstances under which conservation or coastal fishery resource or attainment of fishery management objectives, that’s the key, has been placed substantially at risk by unanticipated changes in the ecosystem for stock, or the fishery.  Let me address the unanticipated first.  We doubled harvest almost.  I went back into the time series for MRIP, all the way back to ’81, and that has only happened a couple of times, the last time being over 30 years ago.

“Although I think we all sat around saying, this is a big year class, you know harvest will go up.  We could not have anticipated that it was going to go up by double.  It’s never had that.  Now, that being said, I have faith that MRIP is right.  We do 6,000 intercepts a year in Massachusetts, about 5,000 are for striped bass.

“That is a lot of data.  You can complain about MRIP for other species.  I think they got it right, especially on a coastal, without breaking it up into modes and waves and everything else.  What we saw was the ’22 harvest completely derailed the rebuilding down to 14 or 15 percent chance of getting there.  I told you a little about what we looked at our recreational fishery, and really great graphics of the 2015 was about 55 percent into the slot, and we doubled the harvest.

“There is no question in my mind that there is zero percent chance of the harvest going down.  I mean the PSEs on this estimate are fine, they are as good as they’ve always been.  I mean there is always biased things that can change, but I have faith that the harvest this year will be the same, or I would say greater, because the entire year class is in the slot.

“We’re going to have to deal with that, and it’s going to get more and more difficult if harvest is huge again this year…We had anglers say last year was the best fishing they’ve ever had, and a lot of it was environmental conditions and the presence of menhaden.

“But also, the presence of a really big year class.  I mean there is just no question that they are more available this year.  How could harvest go down?  There is also, I think we have all seen this, I would call it irrational exuberance by the fishing community.  When fishing gets good, fishing effort goes up, and probably not in a linear fashion.

“People coming off a great year, I’m guessing that effort will go up much more.  We’ll get the casual anglers will be going out more.  We have no output controls, and that makes it very difficult managing the striper fishery.  I proposed this because I don’t want to be further behind the eight ball.  I don’t want to see another projection again that includes 11 percent probability of restoration, and any, I’ll leave it at that.”

There was some resistance to Dr. Armstrong’s motion, but he laid the argument out so well that, in the end, only New Jersey—perhaps the state most implacably opposed to striped bass conservation effortds—voted against.  His absence from the Management Board is certainly being felt.  It’s hard not to wonder whether, if he had still been seated at the table, the vote at the December 16, 2024 Board meeting might have gone a different way, although such musings are probably a little unfair to Massachusetts' current representative on the Management Board, Nichola Meserve, who has proven herself to be a champion of bass conservation in her own right, and did everything that she could do to adopt needed measures for the 2025 season.  The vote just didn't go her way.

Both the Maine and Massachusetts delegations remain in good hands, and the traditions of stewardship set by both Pat Keliher and Dr. Armstrong will remain behind.  While we often hear anglers criticize the ASMFC—and that criticism is not without cause—what we don’t hear often enough is recognition and appreciation of what a number of dedicated fisheries managers are trying to accomplish when they are part of a management board.

For Pat Keliher and Dr. Armstrong were not alone in their efforts to responsibly manage the striped bass and other species.  There are a host of other state managers—and some governors’ appointees, legislative appointees, and legislative proxies, too—who speak out for conservative, sustainable fisheries management, intended to keep stocks healthy in the long term.  All of them deserve our thanks.

Because there are also the others, who seek short-term advantage for their state, their favored sectors, and perhaps, at times, for themselves, regardless of the scientific advice, or the impact their actions might have on the health of fish stocks.  They’re the ones who tarnish the ASMFC’s name.

But that’s why the Kelihers, the Armstrongs, and all of the other dedicated managers matter.  They stand between us and the irresponsible few.

They aren’t appreciated enough for what they have done, and continue to do.