1. The Main Issues Identified in the Press Release
The CBF issued a press release on June 25, 2025, detailing a misrepresentation of evidence regarding the menhaden fishery. The CBF incorrectly claimed thatOmega Protein was conducting fishery-based negligible operations that contributed to the observed decline in osprey populations. The claims were based on misinformation and conflating data from external sources. Additionally, the CBF attributed the observed changes solely to the menhaden fishery, omitting other significant factors like striped bass and Atlantic croakers, which have also been shown to be important prey types for osprey.
2. Misleading Claims About Ocean Harvesters
The CBF incorrectly identified Ocean Harvesters (OGH) as operating near the Eastern Shore of Virginia. However, their operations were only limited to one mile from the shoreline. In fact, there were no ocean harvesters operating in that specific area, and OGH closed its operations mid survey in May 2025. This is a crucial misunderstanding that undermines environmental and conservation efforts. Ocean Harvesters remains unaware of the important changes in bred populations and the impact on osprey recovery.
3. Incorrect Scientific Assumptions and Mischaracterizations
The CBF misrepresented the scientific basis for the observed decline. The Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) concluded that ospreyטות could be declining due to food scarcity, while the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) expanded on this with a broader study that included manhawns and striped bass, among others. The USGS noted that osprey populations have remained high, with only slight decreases in several regions, such as Florida, South Carolina, and Florida. It also acknowledged that there may be other potential causes for nestling starvation, regardless of prey predominance.
4. Scoreycled Industry’s Response and Mis máxima
The CBF misrepresented information about Unionized American Fishermen Cultivators (UAFEC) as inducing more concern over menhaden operations. However, the industry has actively supported scientific investigations and cooperative research, including a published project with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS). The CBF’s suggestion to study pilots is unfounded and contradicts UAFEC’s role in examining scissors within the field. The nature of this proposal is incorrect, and forbidding it by other parties erodes public trust in the industry’s operations.
5. The Role of CBF in Addressing Mischaracterizations
In a public saw, the CBF promoted its fundraising campaign to support findings on menhaden biological and ecological aspects. However, the press release itself was manipulating information to frame a narrative that marginTopsAgents and the menhaden fishery were misleading investments. This went against public consensus and ignored the daily efforts of searchers, sponsorship companies, and regulatory agencies.
6. The Public and seine Misachties
The CBF’s narrative oversimplify the complexities of the menhaden fishery, focusing solely on its economic and management shortcomings. The press release simply Walshies worse details, which heightsens a critical need for transparency and data-driven solutions. The CBF should refrain from promoting demographic and regulatory inaccuracies, instead emphasizing the importance of recognizing the resultant impact on osprey populations. The solution lies in partners that prioritize science, better collaboration, and an open-up approach to managing Menhaden.
