# Omega set it's own cap!



## Dixie719 (May 12, 2003)

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servle...&cid=1031784412827&path=!news&s=1045855934842


----------



## Cdog (Mar 18, 2002)

Omega said it will limit its menhaden harvest inside the bay to 131,000 metric tons per year through 2009.

The company caught 99,300 metric tons of menhaden from the bay last year, out of a total 184,000-metric-ton harvest, Gascon said. It caught 124,300 metric tons from the bay the year before, out of a 166,000-metric-ton catch.

Omega has averaged a take of 110,000 metric tons of menhaden from the bay over the past five years, said Jack Travelstead, chairman of the commission's menhaden management board.


Yippeee. They set the cap higher than what they have been catching in the past 5 yrs. Gee thanks Omega...  :--|


----------



## Zombie (Jul 26, 2005)

Omega thinks they own the bay, set their own cap, thats [email protected]%$#^


----------



## Dixie719 (May 12, 2003)

Cdog said:


> Yippeee. They set the cap higher than what they have been catching in the past 5 yrs. Gee thanks Omega...  :--|


Sounds more like a goal to hit doesn't it!  :--|


----------



## Custer (Jun 14, 2001)

Dixie719 said:


> Sounds more like a goal to hit doesn't it!  :--|


Now ya gettin it...

they want us to believe that they will "hold back" and suffer...

Yeh right.

Has anyone checked out their lobbying efforts ?

We got some legislator ass to kick.


----------



## johnnyleo11 (Dec 17, 2003)

CDog,

You should email that information to the writer of the article so they can do a follow up.


----------



## Cdog (Mar 18, 2002)

johnnyleo11 said:


> CDog,
> 
> You should email that information to the writer of the article so they can do a follow up.


Johnny, that was directly from the article.


----------



## Advisor (Jan 12, 2003)

I can't believe this Omega spokesman really thinks anyone would accept that cap as a concession to over harvest  !!! I feel for the workers that are employed at the processing plants. Yes, they could loose their jobs; but, when I stack that up against the health of the bay and the overall economy of Virginia, Maryland, Washington, and Pennsylvania. I neglect to mention all the coastal states.
There is a _REASON_ that other states have restricted menhaden harvests. Lets find out what their reasoning is and use it in our fight. This is only one fight we should be involved in ... We are loosing our rights to beach access. He!!, we're loosing the beaches altogether!!
We, as a group, must  start making a lot of noise and getting public opinion turned around or we are gon'na loose our sport except where they [government] lets us go and I don't like that one da#* bit!!!


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

Interesting move on their part--make it look like you're voluntarily restricting yourself.

Some of you may take this as bad news. I don't. This is the move of a company that is very aware that the public is watching.

But still a goofy tactic--sort of like a drunk saying, "That's it. Only 10 shots of bourbon a night. I've gotta' slow down!"


----------



## Sandcrab (Mar 20, 2002)

*What a bunch of crap!*

They need to get their butt out of the bay - Period! MD is complaining that the striped bass (OK - "Rockfish") are eating the bay's crab population...wonder why? 

Sandcrab


----------



## bttrthanandrew (Jun 2, 2005)

*crap*

what kinda $hit is omega tryin to pull, theyre making themselves look so stupid, dixie719 is right, its a goal for em to hit.


----------



## Flounderman (Feb 4, 2001)

*Article smells like dead fish*

 I called up the article and sent the following to the author, via email reply option on bottom of article.

"Your title is very misleading. Omega didnt put a cap on anything. They posted a goal that is in excess of what they have been taking. This is not objective reporting but biased in favor of Omega. Your article smells like dead fish.

Glen Caldwell
Virginia Beach, VA"

Suggest that you too can voice your opinion directly with the clown that wrote the article, should you feel so inclined.


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

Flounderman so you are not falling for old shell game they have decided to play. I knew you were to smart for that. What a joke they are offering.


----------



## blue bird (Apr 25, 2003)

It's time to write our Virginia Legislature representatives. The first thing I'd suggest to them is that the mendhaden fishery be placed under the jurisdiction of the Virginia Marine Resources Commission. Secondly, I'd suggest a reasonable cap be placed on the fisheries of say 103,000 metric tons from the bay. I'd argue that no one would go out of business or lose their jobs with this reduction of the five year average by only 7 metric tons.

I'm sure that there are several of you who don't agree with this suggestion. Getting things improved enviromentally is like a chess match. It takes strategy. Omega Protein has taken the stance that any cap is one step from being driven out of business in Virginia. This argument has some truth to it. (That's why the fishermen used the same type of argument about the temporary closure of the Point.) If Omega Protein has to admit that they are over-fishing the bay then the public will demand that the study be done to determine the extent the bay is over-fished. They don't want the study done because that would shed scientific data on the whole issue and end this stand off of mere opinion. Their whole battle plan is to keep this issue in the realm of opinion. We the public need to let the legislature know we want the studies to be conducted so there is scientific proof of the condition of the mendhaden fishery.

Omega Protein reminds me of the dairy farmers I knew growing up that would add water to their milk to increase their production, but complain that the price of the milk was going down. They didn't understand the forces of supply and demand. Omega Protein would be better off to allow some reduction of the bay's fishing to improve the quality and supply of menhaden and cool the public opinion on this issue. They'd also benefit from increased prices.


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

Headlines aren't written by newspaper reporters--they're put together by a group called the copy desk. And it's unlikely that someone on their copy desk was trying to mislead--they go through dozens of stories a night and sometimes miss the meaning of the story.


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

Blue Bird one other thing that needs to be looked at is what would Omega do to make up this shortfall of raw materials. The answer is fish harder in the Ocean. Also it is intresting that for ccounting purposes the fish caught between the CBBT and the Bay line are classified as Ocean fish.


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

What's really bizarre about what's happening is that this is the result of conservation measures in other states--by kicking Omega out, they've been forced to concentrate on the one remaining state they can fish, and they're knocking it silly.

I fear for this fall. When the great schools of bunker that are miles long come sweeping out of the bay, the boats will be waiting. I swear, if I spend another day tracking a school just to see it swiped before it comes onshore at the Lesner, I'm going to go postal.


----------



## Dixie719 (May 12, 2003)

Heck,

I've seen them the past two times I've been out at the CBBT tunnel fishing here in late July/Early August!


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

Just remember they use the CBBT as the dividing line for reporting. East is not in the Bay quota.


----------



## rattler (Jul 3, 2004)

kind of reminds me of "KEPONE"...you could keep fish on one side of the hrbt, but not the other side...they talk about 250 jobs in reedville...what about the loss if no one comes to fish the bay...thousands of jobs and millions of $$$...between the loss of bait fish and dead zones in the bay and contaminated beaches...things are not looking good...i've written everyone i can think of...whats left to do... :--|


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

They're a publicly traded company under the NYSE symbol OME

Look at that 5-year graph. They're doing pretty well. I bet if you could graph the uptick in stripers with sores, it'd look almost identical.


----------



## AL_N_VB (Apr 3, 2002)

sand flea said:


> But still a goofy tactic--sort of like a drunk saying, "That's it. Only 10 shots of bourbon a night. I've gotta' slow down!"




HEY! ,
I resemble that remark!.or do mean resent?


----------



## blue bird (Apr 25, 2003)

Digger, I think you missed my major point. Getting the menhaden management in the hands of the Virginia Marine Resource Commission is the first order of business. The caps values cannot be determined until the studies are made. However, as long as the control of the menhaden management is under the Virginia Legislature who has no clue to fish populations any cap value is going to be surrounded by very heated battles by Omega. What I suggested was just a way to budge the boulder a little.


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

Bluebird I really don't remember the VMRC going more conserative than what the AMFSC has required(I'm sure Tom can tell you when that has happened and I'm sure it is rare). Although I agree it would be easier to explain to a few then the many(Gen Assm). But unless the AMFSC cuts the harvest then nothing will happen. Heck I believe that th odds are better in the US Houses vs the states.


----------



## Flounderman (Feb 4, 2001)

*Time to call BIG Brother*

I agree with digger. I am a member of CCA, RFA and Chesapeake Bay foundation, all of which are lobbying strongly to protect the menhaden. If you are unaware of RFA's efforts check them out at www.joinrfa.org since all the states except Virginia and North Carolina have protected menhaden, it ups the ante in Virginia. As much as I hate to see federal government get involved in anything, I think based on Virginia's poor perfomance, it is the best way to go. But of course as we did in WW II we can fight on both fronts at once and win!

Glen


----------



## Tom Powers (Aug 2, 2001)

Digger is partially correct VMRC has done more conservitive measures, than required by ASMFC, but not very often. Three examples that I can recall are going to 5 fish rather than 6 on flounder in 2004 (maybe it was 2003). 

Reducing the bag limit on Cobia and spade fish from 2 to 1 and from 6 to 4 respectively. Although on these two they did not apply the same restrictions to commercial fishermen.

The former just kind of happened during the Commission meeting where the general rules were hotly contested (closed two weeks in the summer or larger size limt kind of deal) The latter two only happened after extensive lobbying by CCA and the recreational fishing clubs who, without exception, wanted the same limits to apply to both the commercial and recreational sectors.

Usually the goal is to try and harvest the "allowed" amount for fear of future cuts being based on "this year's" harvest. This is especially true with the commercial fisheries. 

I could not say what VMRC would do if they were managing menhaden. I am confident that it would not be to remove purse seines from the bay or to take major reductions in the bay harvest without substantial science to back it up.

Tom


----------



## fishloser (Jul 18, 2002)

Tom Powers said:


> Digger is partially correct VMRC has done more conservitive measures, than required by ASMFC, but not very often. Three examples that I can recall are going to 5 fish rather than 6 on flounder in 2004 (maybe it was 2003).
> 
> Reducing the bag limit on Cobia and spade fish from 2 to 1 and from 6 to 4 respectively. Although on these two they did not apply the same restrictions to commercial fishermen.
> 
> ...


Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I'm willing to bet Omega has their hands in every one of our representatives pocket. Until we, the voters, stop sending the same representatives to Richmond and Washinton, year after year, we are not going to see significant changes. 

One of these days, we the voters, are going to stop listening to "crap" our reps say and start actually looking at how they have voted on these issues.


----------



## vbman2004 (Aug 4, 2005)

*Omega*

You are correct about the hand in the pockets. Look at anything out there, it is how you lobby and how much money you put into congress/house that makes things happen. A few examples, ever wanna know why you can rent movies, video games but not pc software? This is one of the only examples of this type of lobbying. It happens all the time, with junk food pushers (that want to stay in the school cafeterias) all the way up to the cigarette companies that are wanting to push their wares on 18 years olds (and not raise the limit to 21)...

chris


----------



## blue bird (Apr 25, 2003)

Digger and Tom, does the ASMFC place any restrictions on the amount of harvest? I was under the understanding that there was no limit of the tonnage of Omega's harvest. Does the Virginia Legislature answer to the ASMFC about the menhaden harvest in our waters? Who do we want to manage the menhaden fishery?

I realize that the VMRC would probably not give us exactly what we would like, but is it not a step in the right direction of improving the menhaden fishery?


----------



## Digger (Jan 4, 2000)

Bluebird not currently although there were meetings held recently(I had it stickedy to the top of the forum) in July.

http://www.pierandsurf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18397&highlight=Menhaden+meeting


Hopefully something will come out of this. It will take a while for the Science to make a decision so for a while it is going tobe political.

I would hope the VMRC would help but remember the make up.


----------



## Tom Powers (Aug 2, 2001)

Let's see 

Yes the Virginia Legislature does have to follow ASMFC directives. Otherwise the Secretary of Commerce (the guy in Washington) will shut down the fishery.

ASMFC currently has not placed any restrictions on the menhaden fishery (that my change tomorrow (Aug 16th). 

Tom


----------

