Thursday, August 28, 2025

TOO MANY STRIPED BASS

 

Up in Canada, some say, they have a problem.

There are just too many striped bass.  As a result, the Atlantic salmon population is crashing.

At least that’s what Atlantic salmon anglers claim.

The Canadian Maritimes host separate, geneticallyidentifiable striped bass stocks.  The largest spawns in the Miramichi estuary, which is located in the Province of New Brunswick.  The Miramachi has, historically, also hosted a strong run of Atlantic salmon, which has declined substantially in recent years.  Salmon anglers blame a resurgent striped bass population for the salmon’s ills.

The salmon fishermen argue that the bass are eating most of the smolts—the young, recently-hatched salmon that have grown large enough to leave the rivers and head out to sea, where they will spend most of their lives.  They claim that a 20-year study, which found that between 55 and 75 percent of the smolts made it out of the rivers and into the open Atlantic in the early 2000s, but less than five percent did so in 2022 and 2023, demonstrates that the bass are killing off the Atlantic salmon population.

For, in the same Canadian waters, striped bass have staged what, to striped bass fishermen, at least, has been a magnificent recovery. 

In the late 1990s, the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans believed that the entire female striped bass spawning stock biomass was composed of fewer than 5,000 individuals, and closed the commercial and recreational fisheries as a result.  Perhaps in response to that action, female spawning stock biomass quickly increased, and was estimated at about 900,000 fish in 2019. 

The increasing striped bass population led the Department to reopen the recreational fishery in 2013, and to allow some commercial fishing, first by indigenous Tribes, and later by others.  Last year, it increased the Tribal quota from 50,000 to 175,000 bass and also increased the recreational bag limit from three fish to four (there is also a slot size limit of 50 to 65 centimeters, or roughly, 19.7 to 25.6 inches).  Earlier this year, the Department ordered the 43 commercial gaspereau (the regional name for the alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus) fishermen in the region to retain the first 500 striped bass measuring between 50 and 65 centimeters that they incidentally capture this season.

A 2024 stock assessment update suggests that the reopened fisheries may have had a significant impact on the female spawning stock, which had declined to an estimated 334,900 individuals.

That reduction was not enough to satisfy the Atlantic Salmon Federation, an organization of recreational fishermen that argues for salmon conservation, and insists that Canada reduce the female striped bass spawning stock to just 100,000 fish.

But, despite the one study that the salmon advocates quote, the science doesn’t necessarily support the claims of out-of-control striped bass predation on salmon smolts. 

A survey of striped bass stomach contents, conducted in 2022 by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, found that 68 percent of the bass sampled had nothing in their stomachs at all, suggesting that they didn’t feed heavily when they congregated in the Miramichi estuary to spawn.  Of the bass that did have something in their stomachs, alewives—gaspereau—and some smelt dominated.  Although some salmon smolt were present, they made up a very small proportion of all stomach contents.

A scientific paper, titled "Multi-species Considerations for Defining Fisheries Reference Points for Striped Bass from the Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence,” written by Department of Fisheries and Oceans biologist Gerald Chaput, advised that

“It is not clear from the available studies that reducing striped bass spawner abundance to a level of the mid-2000s, i.e. 100,000 spawners or less (as requested by [the Atlantic Salmon Federation]), would improve the acoustic tagged smolt survival estimates or the population level relative survival rates derived from the cohort model, nor landings of gasereau [sic] and rainbow smelt in the commercial fisheries.”

But the Atlantic salmon anglers were not to be deterred.  When the Department of Fisheries and Oceans declined to cull the bass population back to just 100,000 spawning-age females, they formed an organization, Save Miramichi Salmon Inc., which sued the Department, seeking to compel it to reduce the striped bass population.

A spokesman for the organization alleged that

“DFO mismanagement and bad science over several years are destroying a National and Provincial treasure—the Miramichi Atlantic Salmon—and immediate remedial action is required now.”

The complaint—what in Canadian jurisprudence is known as a “Statement of Claim,”—makes for interesting reading.

For example, when describing the Atlantic salmon, it alleges that

“Atlantic salmon (salmo [sic] salar), referred to as the ‘King of Fish’, are a species of salmon native to waters throughout the North Atlantic Ocean.  Atlantic salmon is endemic to the Miramichi River system.

“Atlantic salmon have frequented the Miramichi River since the end of the last ice age and are of significant cultural and economic importance to Canadians, including, but not limited to, Indigenous Canadians and non-indigenous communities on the Miramichi since European settlement…  [numbering omitted]”

But when describing the striped bass, the allegations are far less fulsome, stating only that

“Atlantic striped bass (Morone saxatilis) are a species of rockfish which live throughout the Atlantic coast of North America, including the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

“Striped bass are commercially and recreationally significant fish, and, historically, were subject to significant commercial harvest.  [numbering omitted]”

No mention of bass being endemic to the Miramichi estuary, and no mention of their long presence and well-established role in the estuary’s ecosystem.  And no mention that Atlantic salmon, too, were “historically…subject to significant commercial harvest.”

The Claim’s language strives to make it clear to the court that while Atlantic salmon are the “King of Fish,” striped bass are nothing but an upstart commoner, and more, a commoner that is committing acts of treason against the crown.

The Claim makes allegations like

“Because of geographical separation and historic numbers, and standing net and sport fisheries, striped bass did not, historically, have a significant impact on the number of Atlantic salmon smolts migrating to the ocean, feeding only on a limited number of smolts during the annual migration, primarily from the Northwest and Little Southwest Miramichi systems.

“In the 1980s, populations of striped bass in the Miramichi River were considered stable and healthy despite being significantly lower than they are today.  [numbering omitted]”

The problem is that the phrase "historic numbers" is vague enough to mean whatever the plaintiff might want it to mean.  It’s a particularly amorphous concept when it comes to natural resources such as salmon and bass, when “historic” conditions, due to intentional and unintentional human manipulation of the environment, may be very different from what the default—the pre-human or, in a North American context, the pre-European—conditions of the resources might have been.

In that regard, it’s not the “historic,” but instead the prehistoric, conditions that should be used as a benchmark.

Applying that benchmark to the Miramichi’s salmon and striped bass, it’s impossible to note that both lived in apparent harmony for many centuries—for millennia—without bass driving down the Atlantic salmon population.  

For thousands of years before there were significant net fisheries—other than those of the Tribes, once they arrived—and before there were any recreational fisheries at all, Atlantic salmon and striped bass both utilized the Miramichi estuary and, given by the numbers of fish the first explorers found, somehow managed to thrive.

Maybe it was because the bass and the salmon were geographically separated, as the plaintiffs contend, although that seems unlikely, as healthy populations tend to expand into all suitable space.  

The fact is that we have no idea what the spatial distribution of either species was when Jacques Cartier first explored what is now the Gulf of St. Lawrence in 1534.  Any allegation that the species were spatially separated at that time is the merest speculation, without supporting facts; it is far more likely that any separation that occurred happened later on, after human influence drove down the region’s salmon and striped bass populations.

In any event, the 1980s hardly define either “historical” times or a healthy striped bass population, and to try to define ecological relationships on the basis of what has occurred in the past 50 years, or even the last century, is a fool’s errand. 

But where things really get interesting is in the Claim section, “Atlantic Salmon—Decline and Cause”, which alleges

“In or around 2010, Atlantic salmon returns to the Miramichi River began to decline rapidly.  Between 2010 and 2024, the river’s salmon population declined by approximately 96%.

“The decline in Atlantic salmon in the Miramichi River corresponds to the rapid growth of striped bass, a known predator of juvenile salmon, in the same areas.

“In 2019, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans [which is composed of politicians serving in Canada’s Parliament, and not of fisheries scientists] issued a report identifying the rapid increase in the Gulf of St. Lawrence striped bass population as placing strain on struggling Atlantic salmon populations.  The Parliamentary committee recommended [the Department of Fisheries and Oceans] implement management measures that prioritize the long-term balance of fish species in the Miramichi River, including establishing upper and lower limit reference point thresholds which should be adjusted according to justifiable scientific evidence.  [numbering omitted]”

Apparently, the recreational fishing interests bringing the lawsuit are trying to blame the striped bass for the Atlantic salmon’s woes.

But the salmon’s problems, across the entire North Atlantic basin, run deeper than that.

One paper, published in 2022 in Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, was titled "The Decline and Impending Collapse of the Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar)  Population in the North Atlantic Ocean:  A Review of Possible Causes”.  It blames illegal open-ocean fishing for the widepread salmon declines, saying

“Adult returns to many Atlantic salmon wild and hatchery stocks of the North Atlantic have declined or collapsed since 1985.  Enhancement, commercial fishery closures, and angling restrictions have failed to halt the decline…The decline and collapse of stocks has common characteristics:  1) cyclic annual adult returns cease, 2) annual adult returns flatline, 3) adult mean size declines, and 4) stock collapses occurred earliest among watersheds distant from the North Atlantic Sub-polar Gyre (NASpG).  Cyclic annual adult returns were common to all stocks in the past that were not impacted by anthropogenic changes to their natal streams.  A flatline of adult abundance and reduction in adult mean size are common characteristics of many overexploited fish stocks and suggest illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fisheries exploitation at sea.  Distance from the NASpG causing higher mortality of migrating post-smolts would increase the potential for collapse of these stocks from IUU exploitation…Distribution in time and space of former, legal high-sea fisheries indicated fishers were well-acquainted with the ocean migratory pattern of salmon and combined with a lack of surveillance since 1985 outside Exclusive Economic Zones or in remote northern regions may mean high at-sea mortality occurs because of IUU fisheries.  The problem of IUU ocean fisheries is acute, has collapsed numerous stocks of desired species worldwide, and is probably linked to the decline and impending collapse of the North Atlantic salmon population.”

Whether or not that conclusion is correct, the paper reminds us that the decline in salmon populations isn’t limited to the Miramichi River, and is occurring even in places where there are no striped bass.  A United Kingdom-based conservation group, the Missing Salmon Alliance, notes that

“Wild Atlantic salmon have declined by around 70% across the North Atlantic over the last few decades.  In Great Britain the species was listed as endangered by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in December 2023, with British salmon having suffered an additional 30-50% decline since 2006 and a projected 50-80% decline between 2010 and 2025.”

The Alliance suggests that changes in the marine environment, which have caused a decline in the zooplankton, have also created food chain issues for juvenile salmon.

The North Atlantic Salmon Fund, an conservation group originally founded in Iceland, to address the steep decline in that nation’s Atlantic salmon population, has now extended its reach to include the entire North Atlantic ocean.  It notes that

“Like elsewhere in the world, Canadian stocks have been in rapid decline for the past 40 years…Human interference, industrial aquaculture included, is the considered the [sic] largest threat to Canadian stocks…

”…While the historic decline of salmon stocks is largely due to low survival rates at sea, there are always larger declines where fish farming is close to wild salmon…”

And climate change also plays a role.  Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans notes that

“Rising water temperatures, lower water levels, and more frequent extreme weather events are all contributing to the decline of salmon populations.”

Specific to the Miramichi, an article authored by a graduate student at the University of New Brunswick—Saint John noted that

“With warmer summers, the water temperatures are beginning to stray away from the Salmon’s optimal temperature (4-12o C), approaching the upper threshold temperatures in which they can survive (28o C being lethal, and anything over 20o C impeding survival).  Over the summer of 2017, the Miramichi River contained periods where water temperature readings exceeded 30o C!”

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans went on to advise that

“in the Miramichi River, the annual abundance of the past decade have frequently been at record lows, particularly for the earlier maturing one-sea-winter salmon.  Salmon populations in the southern regions are impacted by rapidly changing marine, estuarine and freshwater environments, and by anthropogenic stressors, including land-use and the spread of invasive species.”

So it’s clear that there are many factors causing the decline of the Miramichi’s salmon.  Striped bass do not bear the sole responsibility.

Still, it would be wrong to completely discount striped bass predation.  When any fish is at a very low level of abundance, any removals, regardless of cause, will have an adverse effect on the stock.  As the Department of Fisheries and Oceans observed,

“Migrating smolts face predation from species such as striped bass and cormorants, while adult salmon may be preyed on by seals or other larger predators.  Though natural, predation can exacerbate challenges associated to human activities, climate or ecosystem shifts for Atlantic salmon throughout its range.”

In other words, striped bass predation didn’t cause the Atlantic salmon runs to collapse, but they may be making it more difficult for such runs to be restored.

A similar view was expressed in the 2024 paper, “A Review of Factors Potentially Contributing to the Long-Term Decline of Atlantic Salmon in the Conne River, Newfoundland, Canada”, which appeared in Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, where the authors observed that

“Impacts on Atlantic salmon due to predation are more likely to be a result of cumulative effects by a variety of species along with other anthropogenic factors rather than any one individual component.  [One team of researchers] state that predation is a natural phenomenon and one that does not necessarily imply that it is a particular driver of the current population declines of salmon.  [Another team of researchers] have similarly noted that predation impacts on Atlantic salmon are not likely to be the primary cause for population declines in the North Atlantic but as others have noted predation may act to keep depressed populations from recovering.  [citations omitted, emphasis added]”

Another, comprehensive study of the Atlantic salmon’s decline, “The quest for successful Atlantic salmon restoration:  perspectives, priorities, and maxims”, which appeared in the ICES Journal of Marine Science in 2021, even suggested that efforts to control predation could be bad for the salmon, noting that

“Control or removal of predators may have similar counterproductive effects.  Predators often select slow, weak, or sick prey such that predation is compensatory and, in some cases, may allow disease to spread, in instances where predation of diseased animals is more frequent.”

So, taking all of the above into account, it’s clear that the striped bass is not responsible for all of the ills besetting the Miramichi’s Atlantic salmon runs.  But the bigger point of this post is to examine, in detail, why the striped bass ought not to be blamed for the ills besetting any other marine resource, even though the bass might eat a few fish every once and again.

Yet that’s a theme that we hear again and again.

For many years, New York’s striped bass anglers were dismayed to hear one of the state’s representatives on the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board repeatedly suggest that striped bass were too abundant, and were driving down the populations of other managed species, saying things like

is this an attempt by the state to maybe address the concern that the stock of striped bass in Chesapeake Bay is growing much greater than anticipated and is having an additional negative effect on menhaden?..

“…I was concerned about your concern that there are a greater number of larger and older fish within the body—or residing here year after year.  The question is has that increased significantly, to have a detrimental effect on the menhaden that are available, as we heard in the report yesterday that they appear to be under duress.”

And

“I’ve often asked the question as how many more striped bass do we have to have in the ocean and do the surplus, quote-quote, above the threshold—and there are some folks that are not going to like what I say, but the reality is what kind of damage are these fish doing to the sub-species [sic] below them, including the forage fish that other species are feeding on?..

“The bottom line is that they’re opportunists, whatever is there they’re going to eat, so to speak…

“The question that still remains open and unanswered is what are the extra fish above and beyond the threshold doing to the other sub-species?  I’m not trying to start a fight with anybody.  I’m just saying it is a question.  Look at what happened to winter flounder.  We blame weather conditions and water conditions, lack of eelgrass, lack of phytoplankton, zooplankton, et cetera, on that end, and yet what is eating them?”

His answer, of course, to purported declines in the menhaden and winter flounder populations was the same one that the Atlantic salmon anglers have to declines in their favorite fish:  There are too many striped bass.  They’re eating them all.

And far too many other folks also feel that way.

At the October 2014 meeting of ASMFC’s Atlantic Striped Bass Management Board, as the Board debated adopting Addendum IV to Amendment 6 to the Atlantic Striped Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan, the Board’s first, hesitant effort to address what was a clearly declining striped bass stock, Kelly Place, then the Chair of the Striped Bass Advisory Panel, argued that

“there could be a trophic collapse if the striped bass abundance increases…

“…if you have record young of the year, you’re going to have record competition for the same food resources…we’ve got an amazing abundance in the Chesapeake Bay of channel bass, puppy drum, red fish.

“They are in the same trophic level, they’re eating the same things, they’re eating the same thing all the way up into freshwater and all the way down to the ocean…”

Clearly, there are too many striped bass.

Because, at the same meeting, Russel Dize, Maryland’s Legislative Proxy, complained

“I’ve been a commercial fisherman for 55 years in Maryland.  I’ve watched the striped bass come and go.  At this time, we’ve probably got more striped bass in the bay than I have ever seen in my life.  We’ve got so many striped bass that it’s affected our crab-catching industry.  We are probably down to a low ebb last summer on crabs.

“One of the predators is rockfish, striped bass.  When the charterboats catch the striped bass and they clean them, you can count anywhere from ten to forty striped bass in the belly of a rockfish.”

  Too many striped bass once again.

It’s not overharvest by Maryland’s watermen that’s the problem with the Bay’s blue crab population.  It’s not hypoxia, or the loss of seagrass, or any other possible cause that caused the Bay’s crab population to drop.

It’s too many striped bass.

It’s always too many striped bass.

From Maryland to the Miramichi, too many striped bass are the cause of all our fisheries problems, starting out with Atlantic salmon and ending up with winter flounder. 

They do so much harm that you have to wonder how any fish survived in those thousands of years between the retreat of the Wisconsin Glacier and the arrival of the first European settlers, who came to North American shores and, finally, put out their nets in the spawning rivers and began to save the the continent's marine resources from the ravages of the striped bass.

Or, perhaps, you have to wonder whether some of these folks are getting things backwards, and that the fish didn’t need the Europeans to save them from the striped bass, but rather that the fish needed someone to save them from the rapidly multiplying Europeans and their generations of progeny, who merely find it convenient to blame the striped bass from the consequences of their own actions.

 

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment