Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

What’s Driving High Egg Prices: Bird Flu, or Corporate Greed?

News Feed
Wednesday, March 12, 2025

Bird flu is sweeping through egg-laying chickens in the United States at an unprecedented rate. So far in 2025, 30 million layers, as they’re known, have been culled, close to the 38 million killed throughout all of last year: Nearly 10 percent of the country’s annual number of egg-layers have been wiped out. But one of the big questions, as egg prices become a potent political football, is this: Are these shocking infection rates and cull tallies to blame for skyrocketing prices? Or is something else going on?Last month, Democratic lawmakers including Elizabeth Warren, James McGovern, and Cory Booker cast doubt on the idea that highly pathogenic avian influenza, known as HAPI, alone was to blame for soaring egg prices, writing in a letter to the Trump administration that “egg producers and grocery stores may leverage the current avian flu outbreak as an opportunity to further constrain supply or hike up egg prices to increase profits.” In the past few days, multiple outlets have reported that the U.S. Department of Justice is now opening an investigation into egg producers’ practices.Trump administration officials have, meanwhile, offered puzzling and sometimes contradictory insights. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, recently said that health agencies will not recommend poultry vaccines. (This recommendation would typically come through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, over which Kennedy has no jurisdiction.) “We’ve in fact said, at the USDA, that they should consider maybe the possibility of letting it run through the flock so that we can identify the birds and preserve the birds that are immune to it,” Kennedy said on Fox News recently. Brooke Rollins, USDA secretary, suggested that consumers concerned about egg prices could try their hand at backyard poultry farming. Few people seem to doubt that bird flu is playing some role in current prices. Food economists say we’re currently seeing a classic example of what happens when an inelastic product, or something that people typically buy no matter the price, becomes scarce and retailers begin bidding against each other to keep their shelves full. “I’m going to bid more than Aldi or Trader Joe’s is going to bid, because I have to buy those eggs,” is the way Jada Thompson, an associate professor in agricultural economics at the University of Arkansas, described the mindset.It’s also clear that some egg producers have been devastated by the culls. “I wouldn’t be surprised that some companies go out of business,” Rocio Crespo, a professor in poultry health and management at NC State University, told me. Smaller producers who have lost their entire flocks aren’t able to benefit from high prices right now.But the producers still able to sell eggs are experiencing a boom. Cal-Maine Foods, the largest egg producer in the country—and the only one publishing financial information, because it’s publicly traded—reported in January that net sales nearly doubled in a year, jumping up to $954.7 million in the quarter ending November 30, from $523.2 million at the same time the previous year.  And that was months ago, before prices went this high.Warren and her fellow lawmakers are skeptical for a reason: In December 2023, an Illinois jury found five major egg companies—Cal-Maine, United Egg Producers, United States Egg Marketers, and Rose Acre Farms—liable for millions in damages after engaging in price gouging, where the producers intentionally created the conditions of scarcity by killing hens early or exporting more eggs to other countries in order to drive up prices.A Food and Water Watch report released last Wednesday found that retail egg prices even in places without bird flu outbreaks more than doubled between January 2022 and January 2023. The Southeast region only reported its first case this past January, and raised more eggs in recent years than before the outbreak began, yet still saw the same rise in prices as the rest of the country.Even at the national level, the idea that bird flu has constrained supply, the report suggested, doesn’t quite fit: “From April to December 2023, national retail inventories of eggs exceeded the five-year average by as much as 12.8 percent. Nevertheless, average egg prices exceeded the five-year average in each month as well.” In 2023, for example, despite having no bird flu outbreaks, Cal-Maine’s egg prices soared by more than 700 percent, and the company awarded dividends to shareholders totaling $250 million—a 40-fold increase from 2022. (Cal-Maine did not respond to media inquiries by press time.)Still, other experts say, that’s hardly proof that something sketchy is going on. In order to know whether companies are engaging in anything underhanded, “you’re going to need a whole bunch of proprietary data, which I’m going to guess you don’t have—if you do, please send my way,” Thompson told me. Otherwise, “nobody will be able to tell you that answer,” she said. “I can’t tell you that there’s no additional margins being taken somewhere, but I can tell you that HPAI is having—probably a very large portion of this is going to be related to supply.” And “unless the government is setting the price, prices are going to be set by market forces,” she added.Scarcity is far and away the clearest reason for current price hikes, David Ortega, a food economist and professor at Michigan State University, told me. “When you have less supply of eggs and demand is relatively inelastic, then you can expect a pretty significant increase in the price.” He cautioned against making a “one-to-one” comparison, expecting egg prices to rise only by about 10 percent because that’s how far egg inventory has dropped. “That’s the crux of the question: why are prices 125% up if supplies are only down seven [percent], right?” Thompson said.But when inventory drops by any amount, bidding can go much higher. And because of decontamination needs and the fact that it takes egg-layers between four and five months to reach maturity, bird flu can take egg facilities offline for about six months. Chickens raised for meat, on the other hand, are usually slaughtered around eight weeks of age. That’s why there have been fewer shortages driving up chicken prices, Ortega said.But, he said, “the egg industry has some dominant players, and I think that plays a role here. If you’re an egg producer that hasn’t had an outbreak in one of your facilities, you’re not incurring costs—so you are benefiting from those higher egg prices.”Perhaps the bigger problem is that some companies may not be investing profits from the current crisis in the precautions that would slow bird flu’s spread and reduce egg-price instability in the future. Cal-Maine just paid out big dividends to shareholders this month. Yet those profits do not seem to be going back into efforts to flu-proof their operations, like building smaller facilities and hiring more dedicated workers who don’t go from chicken house to chicken house potentially spreading the virus—measures that would make outbreaks hurt a lot less. Instead, they seem to be expanding bigger facilities. Egg-laying facilities can house a million chickens or more, which can create the perfect conditions for bird flu to spread—and mutate. “When everything is good, everything goes great and perfect, but when there is a problem, it’s a disaster,” Crespo said.H5N1 actually started on poultry farms in both 1959 and 1996, and intensive food animal production drives outbreaks forward. Wild birds and other intermediary animals are the spark, but farms can be the tinder.“Obviously, the data for biosecurity is very broken,” Crespo said. Right now, we’re pretty good at diagnosing the virus and culling all chickens in order to stop the spread—but we haven’t yet figured out how to prevent outbreaks in the first place. Farmers know how to reduce some risks—keeping birds contained inside, rather than roaming outside, helps; so does washing equipment like trucks that go between farms. “But there are still some things we don’t understand fully of this virus… We don’t have the whole picture.”Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health, agreed. “I don’t think we have a very clear sense of what is driving the spread of this virus,” she said. Are rodents, including mice and rats, helping to spread bird flu when they get into the feed or facilities? Is the virus being spread by poultry workers? Right now, there are too many unanswered questions. And that matters when it comes to biocontainment, or measures to stop the virus’s spread, Nuzzo said: “If we’re going to be spending money, wouldn’t it be nice to know where we can best apply those resources to mitigate future costs?” In other words, she said, “how many billions are we going to keep throwing after this virus without trying to figure out a way to take this virus off the table as a public health and agricultural threat?”One option for safeguarding farms against future outbreaks would be to break them up—creating smaller operations that make outbreaks less devastating. Farms could also employ more workers and invest in more equipment. “Rather than have one supervisor, I need five supervisors; rather than have one tractor, I may need to buy five tractors… so the people and the machines and everything don’t just cross-contaminate each other.” That’s an expensive proposition that could eat into the margins of smaller producers—but for companies making the big bucks right now, it would be a worthwhile investment to keep eggs on our tables. Another option is vaccines. There are approved vaccines for use in poultry, and countries like China have used them for years. “I understand why they don’t want to use vaccines. I get it. It’s expensive. It’s going to be a hard issue for trade,” Nuzzo said, because eggs from vaccinated chickens usually can’t be exported. But at this point, the benefits might outweigh the downsides, she said.Vaccines—for poultry and for people—are “one of the critical areas that could help you be in a position to be prepared and to intervene in time before it goes from an epidemic outbreak to a pandemic,” said Christopher Heaney, associate professor of environmental health, epidemiology, and international health at the Johns Hopkins University. “Even at the highest levels of biosecurity, you’re still going to have a challenge managing vermin and rodents,” Heaney said. “The idea of biosecurity alone preventing this from evolving, and creating a barrier between external wild animal populations and the internal environment, is just a challenging one to be able to put all of our confidence and faith in.”This means that even if producers do it right, egg prices could stay high, because adding vaccines and producing eggs in smaller operations with more workers and equipment all costs money. “The solution is not going to give us a cheaper option for the eggs,” Crespo said. But she encouraged consumers to think of it a different way: “Why does the egg have to be so inexpensive when it is such a great source of protein?”These are pressing problems that will only grow in urgency as the outbreak does. “This virus is not going to go away. This will become a recurring hazard and a recurring challenge for consumers unless we figure out a way to sustainably deal with this virus,” Nuzzo said. “Otherwise, we’re going to continue to throw billions of dollars at this problem with no sustainable solution in sight.”

Bird flu is sweeping through egg-laying chickens in the United States at an unprecedented rate. So far in 2025, 30 million layers, as they’re known, have been culled, close to the 38 million killed throughout all of last year: Nearly 10 percent of the country’s annual number of egg-layers have been wiped out. But one of the big questions, as egg prices become a potent political football, is this: Are these shocking infection rates and cull tallies to blame for skyrocketing prices? Or is something else going on?Last month, Democratic lawmakers including Elizabeth Warren, James McGovern, and Cory Booker cast doubt on the idea that highly pathogenic avian influenza, known as HAPI, alone was to blame for soaring egg prices, writing in a letter to the Trump administration that “egg producers and grocery stores may leverage the current avian flu outbreak as an opportunity to further constrain supply or hike up egg prices to increase profits.” In the past few days, multiple outlets have reported that the U.S. Department of Justice is now opening an investigation into egg producers’ practices.Trump administration officials have, meanwhile, offered puzzling and sometimes contradictory insights. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, recently said that health agencies will not recommend poultry vaccines. (This recommendation would typically come through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, over which Kennedy has no jurisdiction.) “We’ve in fact said, at the USDA, that they should consider maybe the possibility of letting it run through the flock so that we can identify the birds and preserve the birds that are immune to it,” Kennedy said on Fox News recently. Brooke Rollins, USDA secretary, suggested that consumers concerned about egg prices could try their hand at backyard poultry farming. Few people seem to doubt that bird flu is playing some role in current prices. Food economists say we’re currently seeing a classic example of what happens when an inelastic product, or something that people typically buy no matter the price, becomes scarce and retailers begin bidding against each other to keep their shelves full. “I’m going to bid more than Aldi or Trader Joe’s is going to bid, because I have to buy those eggs,” is the way Jada Thompson, an associate professor in agricultural economics at the University of Arkansas, described the mindset.It’s also clear that some egg producers have been devastated by the culls. “I wouldn’t be surprised that some companies go out of business,” Rocio Crespo, a professor in poultry health and management at NC State University, told me. Smaller producers who have lost their entire flocks aren’t able to benefit from high prices right now.But the producers still able to sell eggs are experiencing a boom. Cal-Maine Foods, the largest egg producer in the country—and the only one publishing financial information, because it’s publicly traded—reported in January that net sales nearly doubled in a year, jumping up to $954.7 million in the quarter ending November 30, from $523.2 million at the same time the previous year.  And that was months ago, before prices went this high.Warren and her fellow lawmakers are skeptical for a reason: In December 2023, an Illinois jury found five major egg companies—Cal-Maine, United Egg Producers, United States Egg Marketers, and Rose Acre Farms—liable for millions in damages after engaging in price gouging, where the producers intentionally created the conditions of scarcity by killing hens early or exporting more eggs to other countries in order to drive up prices.A Food and Water Watch report released last Wednesday found that retail egg prices even in places without bird flu outbreaks more than doubled between January 2022 and January 2023. The Southeast region only reported its first case this past January, and raised more eggs in recent years than before the outbreak began, yet still saw the same rise in prices as the rest of the country.Even at the national level, the idea that bird flu has constrained supply, the report suggested, doesn’t quite fit: “From April to December 2023, national retail inventories of eggs exceeded the five-year average by as much as 12.8 percent. Nevertheless, average egg prices exceeded the five-year average in each month as well.” In 2023, for example, despite having no bird flu outbreaks, Cal-Maine’s egg prices soared by more than 700 percent, and the company awarded dividends to shareholders totaling $250 million—a 40-fold increase from 2022. (Cal-Maine did not respond to media inquiries by press time.)Still, other experts say, that’s hardly proof that something sketchy is going on. In order to know whether companies are engaging in anything underhanded, “you’re going to need a whole bunch of proprietary data, which I’m going to guess you don’t have—if you do, please send my way,” Thompson told me. Otherwise, “nobody will be able to tell you that answer,” she said. “I can’t tell you that there’s no additional margins being taken somewhere, but I can tell you that HPAI is having—probably a very large portion of this is going to be related to supply.” And “unless the government is setting the price, prices are going to be set by market forces,” she added.Scarcity is far and away the clearest reason for current price hikes, David Ortega, a food economist and professor at Michigan State University, told me. “When you have less supply of eggs and demand is relatively inelastic, then you can expect a pretty significant increase in the price.” He cautioned against making a “one-to-one” comparison, expecting egg prices to rise only by about 10 percent because that’s how far egg inventory has dropped. “That’s the crux of the question: why are prices 125% up if supplies are only down seven [percent], right?” Thompson said.But when inventory drops by any amount, bidding can go much higher. And because of decontamination needs and the fact that it takes egg-layers between four and five months to reach maturity, bird flu can take egg facilities offline for about six months. Chickens raised for meat, on the other hand, are usually slaughtered around eight weeks of age. That’s why there have been fewer shortages driving up chicken prices, Ortega said.But, he said, “the egg industry has some dominant players, and I think that plays a role here. If you’re an egg producer that hasn’t had an outbreak in one of your facilities, you’re not incurring costs—so you are benefiting from those higher egg prices.”Perhaps the bigger problem is that some companies may not be investing profits from the current crisis in the precautions that would slow bird flu’s spread and reduce egg-price instability in the future. Cal-Maine just paid out big dividends to shareholders this month. Yet those profits do not seem to be going back into efforts to flu-proof their operations, like building smaller facilities and hiring more dedicated workers who don’t go from chicken house to chicken house potentially spreading the virus—measures that would make outbreaks hurt a lot less. Instead, they seem to be expanding bigger facilities. Egg-laying facilities can house a million chickens or more, which can create the perfect conditions for bird flu to spread—and mutate. “When everything is good, everything goes great and perfect, but when there is a problem, it’s a disaster,” Crespo said.H5N1 actually started on poultry farms in both 1959 and 1996, and intensive food animal production drives outbreaks forward. Wild birds and other intermediary animals are the spark, but farms can be the tinder.“Obviously, the data for biosecurity is very broken,” Crespo said. Right now, we’re pretty good at diagnosing the virus and culling all chickens in order to stop the spread—but we haven’t yet figured out how to prevent outbreaks in the first place. Farmers know how to reduce some risks—keeping birds contained inside, rather than roaming outside, helps; so does washing equipment like trucks that go between farms. “But there are still some things we don’t understand fully of this virus… We don’t have the whole picture.”Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health, agreed. “I don’t think we have a very clear sense of what is driving the spread of this virus,” she said. Are rodents, including mice and rats, helping to spread bird flu when they get into the feed or facilities? Is the virus being spread by poultry workers? Right now, there are too many unanswered questions. And that matters when it comes to biocontainment, or measures to stop the virus’s spread, Nuzzo said: “If we’re going to be spending money, wouldn’t it be nice to know where we can best apply those resources to mitigate future costs?” In other words, she said, “how many billions are we going to keep throwing after this virus without trying to figure out a way to take this virus off the table as a public health and agricultural threat?”One option for safeguarding farms against future outbreaks would be to break them up—creating smaller operations that make outbreaks less devastating. Farms could also employ more workers and invest in more equipment. “Rather than have one supervisor, I need five supervisors; rather than have one tractor, I may need to buy five tractors… so the people and the machines and everything don’t just cross-contaminate each other.” That’s an expensive proposition that could eat into the margins of smaller producers—but for companies making the big bucks right now, it would be a worthwhile investment to keep eggs on our tables. Another option is vaccines. There are approved vaccines for use in poultry, and countries like China have used them for years. “I understand why they don’t want to use vaccines. I get it. It’s expensive. It’s going to be a hard issue for trade,” Nuzzo said, because eggs from vaccinated chickens usually can’t be exported. But at this point, the benefits might outweigh the downsides, she said.Vaccines—for poultry and for people—are “one of the critical areas that could help you be in a position to be prepared and to intervene in time before it goes from an epidemic outbreak to a pandemic,” said Christopher Heaney, associate professor of environmental health, epidemiology, and international health at the Johns Hopkins University. “Even at the highest levels of biosecurity, you’re still going to have a challenge managing vermin and rodents,” Heaney said. “The idea of biosecurity alone preventing this from evolving, and creating a barrier between external wild animal populations and the internal environment, is just a challenging one to be able to put all of our confidence and faith in.”This means that even if producers do it right, egg prices could stay high, because adding vaccines and producing eggs in smaller operations with more workers and equipment all costs money. “The solution is not going to give us a cheaper option for the eggs,” Crespo said. But she encouraged consumers to think of it a different way: “Why does the egg have to be so inexpensive when it is such a great source of protein?”These are pressing problems that will only grow in urgency as the outbreak does. “This virus is not going to go away. This will become a recurring hazard and a recurring challenge for consumers unless we figure out a way to sustainably deal with this virus,” Nuzzo said. “Otherwise, we’re going to continue to throw billions of dollars at this problem with no sustainable solution in sight.”

Bird flu is sweeping through egg-laying chickens in the United States at an unprecedented rate. So far in 2025, 30 million layers, as they’re known, have been culled, close to the 38 million killed throughout all of last year: Nearly 10 percent of the country’s annual number of egg-layers have been wiped out. But one of the big questions, as egg prices become a potent political football, is this: Are these shocking infection rates and cull tallies to blame for skyrocketing prices? Or is something else going on?

Last month, Democratic lawmakers including Elizabeth Warren, James McGovern, and Cory Booker cast doubt on the idea that highly pathogenic avian influenza, known as HAPI, alone was to blame for soaring egg prices, writing in a letter to the Trump administration that “egg producers and grocery stores may leverage the current avian flu outbreak as an opportunity to further constrain supply or hike up egg prices to increase profits.” In the past few days, multiple outlets have reported that the U.S. Department of Justice is now opening an investigation into egg producers’ practices.

Trump administration officials have, meanwhile, offered puzzling and sometimes contradictory insights. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, recently said that health agencies will not recommend poultry vaccines. (This recommendation would typically come through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, over which Kennedy has no jurisdiction.) “We’ve in fact said, at the USDA, that they should consider maybe the possibility of letting it run through the flock so that we can identify the birds and preserve the birds that are immune to it,” Kennedy said on Fox News recently. Brooke Rollins, USDA secretary, suggested that consumers concerned about egg prices could try their hand at backyard poultry farming. 

Few people seem to doubt that bird flu is playing some role in current prices. Food economists say we’re currently seeing a classic example of what happens when an inelastic product, or something that people typically buy no matter the price, becomes scarce and retailers begin bidding against each other to keep their shelves full. “I’m going to bid more than Aldi or Trader Joe’s is going to bid, because I have to buy those eggs,” is the way Jada Thompson, an associate professor in agricultural economics at the University of Arkansas, described the mindset.

It’s also clear that some egg producers have been devastated by the culls. “I wouldn’t be surprised that some companies go out of business,” Rocio Crespo, a professor in poultry health and management at NC State University, told me. Smaller producers who have lost their entire flocks aren’t able to benefit from high prices right now.

But the producers still able to sell eggs are experiencing a boom. Cal-Maine Foods, the largest egg producer in the country—and the only one publishing financial information, because it’s publicly traded—reported in January that net sales nearly doubled in a year, jumping up to $954.7 million in the quarter ending November 30, from $523.2 million at the same time the previous year.  And that was months ago, before prices went this high.

Warren and her fellow lawmakers are skeptical for a reason: In December 2023, an Illinois jury found five major egg companies—Cal-Maine, United Egg Producers, United States Egg Marketers, and Rose Acre Farms—liable for millions in damages after engaging in price gouging, where the producers intentionally created the conditions of scarcity by killing hens early or exporting more eggs to other countries in order to drive up prices.

A Food and Water Watch report released last Wednesday found that retail egg prices even in places without bird flu outbreaks more than doubled between January 2022 and January 2023. The Southeast region only reported its first case this past January, and raised more eggs in recent years than before the outbreak began, yet still saw the same rise in prices as the rest of the country.

Even at the national level, the idea that bird flu has constrained supply, the report suggested, doesn’t quite fit: “From April to December 2023, national retail inventories of eggs exceeded the five-year average by as much as 12.8 percent. Nevertheless, average egg prices exceeded the five-year average in each month as well.” In 2023, for example, despite having no bird flu outbreaks, Cal-Maine’s egg prices soared by more than 700 percent, and the company awarded dividends to shareholders totaling $250 million—a 40-fold increase from 2022. (Cal-Maine did not respond to media inquiries by press time.)

Still, other experts say, that’s hardly proof that something sketchy is going on. In order to know whether companies are engaging in anything underhanded, “you’re going to need a whole bunch of proprietary data, which I’m going to guess you don’t have—if you do, please send my way,” Thompson told me. Otherwise, “nobody will be able to tell you that answer,” she said. “I can’t tell you that there’s no additional margins being taken somewhere, but I can tell you that HPAI is having—probably a very large portion of this is going to be related to supply.” And “unless the government is setting the price, prices are going to be set by market forces,” she added.

Scarcity is far and away the clearest reason for current price hikes, David Ortega, a food economist and professor at Michigan State University, told me. “When you have less supply of eggs and demand is relatively inelastic, then you can expect a pretty significant increase in the price.” He cautioned against making a “one-to-one” comparison, expecting egg prices to rise only by about 10 percent because that’s how far egg inventory has dropped. “That’s the crux of the question: why are prices 125% up if supplies are only down seven [percent], right?” Thompson said.

But when inventory drops by any amount, bidding can go much higher. And because of decontamination needs and the fact that it takes egg-layers between four and five months to reach maturity, bird flu can take egg facilities offline for about six months. Chickens raised for meat, on the other hand, are usually slaughtered around eight weeks of age. That’s why there have been fewer shortages driving up chicken prices, Ortega said.

But, he said, “the egg industry has some dominant players, and I think that plays a role here. If you’re an egg producer that hasn’t had an outbreak in one of your facilities, you’re not incurring costs—so you are benefiting from those higher egg prices.”


Perhaps the bigger problem is that some companies may not be investing profits from the current crisis in the precautions that would slow bird flu’s spread and reduce egg-price instability in the future. Cal-Maine just paid out big dividends to shareholders this month. Yet those profits do not seem to be going back into efforts to flu-proof their operations, like building smaller facilities and hiring more dedicated workers who don’t go from chicken house to chicken house potentially spreading the virus—measures that would make outbreaks hurt a lot less. Instead, they seem to be expanding bigger facilities. Egg-laying facilities can house a million chickens or more, which can create the perfect conditions for bird flu to spread—and mutate. “When everything is good, everything goes great and perfect, but when there is a problem, it’s a disaster,” Crespo said.

H5N1 actually started on poultry farms in both 1959 and 1996, and intensive food animal production drives outbreaks forward. Wild birds and other intermediary animals are the spark, but farms can be the tinder.

“Obviously, the data for biosecurity is very broken,” Crespo said. Right now, we’re pretty good at diagnosing the virus and culling all chickens in order to stop the spread—but we haven’t yet figured out how to prevent outbreaks in the first place. Farmers know how to reduce some risks—keeping birds contained inside, rather than roaming outside, helps; so does washing equipment like trucks that go between farms. “But there are still some things we don’t understand fully of this virus… We don’t have the whole picture.”

Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health, agreed. “I don’t think we have a very clear sense of what is driving the spread of this virus,” she said. Are rodents, including mice and rats, helping to spread bird flu when they get into the feed or facilities? Is the virus being spread by poultry workers? Right now, there are too many unanswered questions. 

And that matters when it comes to biocontainment, or measures to stop the virus’s spread, Nuzzo said: “If we’re going to be spending money, wouldn’t it be nice to know where we can best apply those resources to mitigate future costs?” In other words, she said, “how many billions are we going to keep throwing after this virus without trying to figure out a way to take this virus off the table as a public health and agricultural threat?”

One option for safeguarding farms against future outbreaks would be to break them up—creating smaller operations that make outbreaks less devastating. Farms could also employ more workers and invest in more equipment. “Rather than have one supervisor, I need five supervisors; rather than have one tractor, I may need to buy five tractors… so the people and the machines and everything don’t just cross-contaminate each other.” That’s an expensive proposition that could eat into the margins of smaller producers—but for companies making the big bucks right now, it would be a worthwhile investment to keep eggs on our tables. 

Another option is vaccines. There are approved vaccines for use in poultry, and countries like China have used them for years. “I understand why they don’t want to use vaccines. I get it. It’s expensive. It’s going to be a hard issue for trade,” Nuzzo said, because eggs from vaccinated chickens usually can’t be exported. But at this point, the benefits might outweigh the downsides, she said.

Vaccines—for poultry and for people—are “one of the critical areas that could help you be in a position to be prepared and to intervene in time before it goes from an epidemic outbreak to a pandemic,” said Christopher Heaney, associate professor of environmental health, epidemiology, and international health at the Johns Hopkins University. “Even at the highest levels of biosecurity, you’re still going to have a challenge managing vermin and rodents,” Heaney said. “The idea of biosecurity alone preventing this from evolving, and creating a barrier between external wild animal populations and the internal environment, is just a challenging one to be able to put all of our confidence and faith in.”

This means that even if producers do it right, egg prices could stay high, because adding vaccines and producing eggs in smaller operations with more workers and equipment all costs money. “The solution is not going to give us a cheaper option for the eggs,” Crespo said. But she encouraged consumers to think of it a different way: “Why does the egg have to be so inexpensive when it is such a great source of protein?”

These are pressing problems that will only grow in urgency as the outbreak does. “This virus is not going to go away. This will become a recurring hazard and a recurring challenge for consumers unless we figure out a way to sustainably deal with this virus,” Nuzzo said. “Otherwise, we’re going to continue to throw billions of dollars at this problem with no sustainable solution in sight.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Chesapeake Bay’s oysters make a steady comeback

The Maryland mollusks have survived decades of overharvesting, disease and drought.

For the fifth year in a row, the oyster population in the Chesapeake Bay is doing well after decades of combating drought, disease, loss of habitat and overharvesting.The Maryland Department of Natural Resources said in March that its annual fall oyster survey showed that the “spatfall intensity index” — a measure of how well oysters reproduced and their potential population growth — again hit above a 40-year median.“We seem to be making some headway,” said Lynn Waller Fegley, director of fishing and boating services for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. “With the work we’ve done to help restore oysters, and combined with the fact that we’ve been gifted with some really favorable environmental conditions, we’ve seen the oyster population trend upward.”Oyster-processing companies, oystermen, conservation groups and local fish and wildlife departments in the region have spent years trying to boost the population of oysters, which serve an important role as “filter feeders,” sifting sediment and pollutants such as nitrogen out of the water.The cleaner water in turn spurs underwater grasses to grow, while oyster reefs create habitats for fish, crabs and dozens of other species. Adult oysters can filter up to two gallons of water per hour, making them the bay’s “most effective water filtration system,” according to experts at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for the health of the bay.Oysters thrive in brackish water — a mix of saltwater and freshwater. They attach and grow on hard surfaces such as rocks, piers or old shells. Too much rain lowers the salinity, while drought makes water too salty. Both situations can create conditions in which oysters can become vulnerable to disease or unable to reproduce as well.Before the 1880s, the oyster population was so healthy it could filter in a week a volume of water equal to that of the entire bay — about 19 trillion gallons — according to the bay foundation. But now it would take the vastly smaller oyster population more than a year to do the same amount.This fall, biologists in Maryland collected more than 300 oyster samples from the bay and tributaries, including the Potomac River, for their annual survey. The results were promising, experts said, given that 2023 was an unusual year for oysters because drought conditions raised the salinity in the bay.There are several other encouraging signs, experts said. The mortality rate of oysters has stabilized, their “biomass index,” which shows how oyster populations are doing over time, has been increasing for the past 14 years, and an analysis of their habitat showed continued improvements.“They’ve been hit by a pretty severe drought, then got pretty decimated by disease,” Fegley said. “They’ve been cycling back, and we’re now in a state of grace.”Another sign oysters are doing better is their “spat sets” — the process of the tiny larvae (spat) attaching to a hard surface so they can grow into mature oysters. A high number of spat equals successful reproduction. A low number means there are fewer young oysters that will grow into adults.Fegley said last year, the bay’s oysters had “epic, generational spat sets.”“Not only were there a lot of young oysters, which is a good sign of health, but they were distributed through the bay in a way that we had not seen in many years where they were farther up tributaries,” Fegley said. “We’ve had years where the conditions in the bay were just right — with a good balance of salinity levels, no disease and good reproduction.”The success of oysters is also due in part to Maryland and Virginia working over the past few years to build more oyster reefs along the bottom of the bay so oysters could grow successfully, according to Allison Colden, executive director of Maryland for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. In recent years, she said, more than 1,300 acres of oyster reefs have been replenished in both states.In the past decade, Virginia has also tried to boost its oyster population with aquaculture farms that raise oysters in cages and return their spat to natural waters. The commonwealth increased its number of oyster farms to more than 130 in 2018, up from 60 in 2013, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.Last season, Virginia harvested 700,000 bushels of oysters, one of the highest annual harvests since the late 1980s, according to Adam Kenyon, chief of the shellfish management division at the Virginia Marine Resources Commission.Those efforts, plus Mother Nature, have helped create the delicate combination oysters need to survive.“In the last five years, we’ve seen a rebound,” Colden said. “Reproduction has been higher than the long-term average, and we’re seeing more consistency in how they’re doing year-to-year, and that’s a positive sign.”For Jeff Harrison, a fifth-generation waterman who serves as president of the Talbot County Watermen Association, the changes have been like a roller coaster over the 47 years he has made a living off the bay. He’s seen diseases hit, oyster-harvesting seasons shortened, prices fluctuate and many other watermen leave the business because they couldn’t turn a profit.“I’ve seen some of the worst seasons in oystering,” he said. “We’d always have ups and downs. Now we’re seeing a steady up, and we’re hoping we have turned the corner.”

These communities are unaware they’ve lived near toxic gas for decades. Why has no action been taken?

Five facilities near schools and houses in LA County fumigate produce shipped from overseas with methyl bromide. But the air agency doesn’t plan to monitor the air or take any immediate steps to protect people from the gas, which can damage lungs and cause neurological effects.

In summary Five facilities near schools and houses in LA County fumigate produce shipped from overseas with methyl bromide. But the air agency doesn’t plan to monitor the air or take any immediate steps to protect people from the gas, which can damage lungs and cause neurological effects. In a quiet Compton neighborhood near the 710 freeway, children on a recent afternoon chased each other at Kelly Park after school. Parents watched their kids play, unaware of a potential threat to their health.  On the other side of the freeway, just blocks from the park and Kelly Elementary School, a fumigation company uses a highly toxic pesticide to spray fruits and vegetables.  The facility, Global Pest Management, has been emitting methyl bromide, which can cause lung damage and neurological health effects, into the air near the neighborhood for several decades.  Earlier this year, the South Coast Air Quality Management District asked the company — along with four other fumigation facilities in San Pedro and Long Beach — to provide data on their methyl bromide usage. But the air quality agency does not plan to install monitors in the communities that would tell residents exactly what is in their air, or hold community meetings to notify them of potential risks. Instead, the South Coast district has launched a preliminary screening of the five facilities to determine if a full assessment of health risks in the neighborhoods is necessary. But even if that analysis is conducted, the agency won’t require the companies to reduce emissions unless they reach concentrations three times higher than the amounts deemed a health risk under state guidelines, said Scott Epstein, the district’s planning and rules manager. Piedad Delgado, a mother picking up her daughter from the Compton school, said she “didn’t even know” that the hazardous chemical was being used nearby. When a CalMatters reporter told her about the fumigation plant, Delgado wondered if it was causing her daughter’s recent, mysterious bouts of headaches and nausea. “It’s concerning. We may be getting sick but we don’t know why,” she said. For about the past 30 years, the companies have sprayed methyl bromide on imported produce arriving at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to kill harmful pests. Adults and children are shown after school at Kelly Elementary School in Compton, which is near a facility that uses a highly toxic fumigant, methyl bromide. Photo by Joel Angel Juarez for CalMatters Methyl bromide, which was widely used to treat soil on farm fields, has been banned worldwide for most uses since 2005 under a United Nations treaty that protects the Earth’s ozone layer. Exemptions are granted for fumigation of produce shipped from overseas. While little to no residue remains on the food, the gas is vented into the air where it is sprayed. State health officials have classified methyl bromide as a reproductive toxicant, which means it can harm babies exposed in the womb. With acute exposure, high levels can cause headaches, dizziness, nausea and difficulty breathing, while chronic exposure over a year or longer could cause more serious neurological effects, such as learning and memory problems, according to the California Air Resources Board. “It’s concerning. We may be getting sick but we don’t know why.”Piedad Delgado, Compton Resident State and local air quality officials are responsible for enforcing laws and regulations that protect communities from toxic air contaminants such as methyl bromide, while the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner issues the permits to the fumigation companies. After CalMatters reported about the facilities last month, members of Congress representing the communities demanded “greater monitoring, transparency and oversight surrounding these fumigation facilities and their toxic emissions.” “We have serious concerns about the prevalent use of methyl bromide, a toxic pesticide, by container fumigation facilities in Los Angeles County,” U.S. Reps. Nanette Barragán, Maxine Waters and Robert Garcia wrote in an April 11 letter to state and local air regulators and county and federal agricultural officials.  “Several of these fumigation facilities are located close to homes, schools, parks, and other public spaces. Our communities deserve a greater understanding of the levels of toxic emissions from these facilities, the health risks from exposure to such emissions, and the oversight processes in place to ensure all protocols are maintained at these sites,” they wrote. “Our communities deserve a greater understanding of the levels of toxic emissions from these facilities, the health risks from exposure to such emissions, and the oversight processes in place.”U.S. Reps. Nanette Barragán, Maxine Waters and Robert Garcia Even though the San Pedro facility at the Port of Los Angeles and the Compton plant use the largest volumes of methyl bromide — a combined 52,000 pounds a year — the air in nearby communities has never been tested.  The two Long Beach facilities use much less, yet state tests in 2023 and 2024 detected potentially dangerous levels in a neighborhood near an elementary school. South Coast district officials said although certain levels of methyl bromide in the air could cause health effects, it doesn’t necessarily mean immediate action is necessary.  “We don’t want to go out and unnecessarily concern folks if there isn’t (a health concern), but we are actively investigating this right now,” said Sarah Rees, the South Coast district’s deputy executive office for planning, rule development and implementation.   Global Pest Management, which fumigates in Compton and Terminal Island, did not return calls from CalMatters. An employee at the facility declined to comment. A general manager at SPF Terminals in Long Beach also declined to comment.  Greg Augustine, owner of Harbor Fumigation in San Pedro, said his company has been permitted for more than 30 years and complies with all requirements. “To protect the health of our community, the air district establishes permit conditions and we comply with all of those permit conditions,” he said. “Those are vetted by the air district…and they’re all designed to protect the health of our community.”  “To protect the health of our community, the air district establishes permit conditions and we comply with all of those permit conditions.” Greg Augustine, owner of Harbor Fumigation in San Pedro Daniel McCarrel, an attorney representing AG-Fume Services, which fumigates at facilities in Long Beach and San Pedro, did not respond to questions but previously told CalMatters last month that the company is adhering to all of its permit conditions.  High levels found in Long Beach  Back in 2019, during regionwide testing, South Coast district officials detected methyl bromide in the air near the two West Long Beach facilities close to concentrations that could cause long-term health effects. The South Coast district took no action at the time — other than to publish a large study online of all toxic air contaminants throughout the four-county LA basin. Then, several years later, the state Air Resources Board found that the two facilities — SPF Terminals and AG-Fume Services — spewed high concentrations of methyl bromide at various times throughout the year. The state’s air monitor near Hudson Elementary School in West Long Beach — which is just about 1,000 feet from the two facilities — detected an average of 2.1 parts per billion in 2023 through part of 2024. Exposure to as little as 1 ppb for a year or more can cause serious nervous system effects as well as developmental effects on fetuses, according to state health guidelines. Spikes of methyl bromide were as high as 983 and 966 ppb in February and March of 2024. Short-term exposure to 1,000 ppb can cause acute health effects such as nausea, headaches and dizziness.  But state and district air-quality officials didn’t inform nearby residents about any of the monitoring data for longer than a year — not until three months ago, in a community meeting held in Long Beach.  First: Edvin Hernandez, right, waits to pick up his son at Kelly Elementary School in Compton, which is near a fumigation plant. Last: SPF Terminals in Long Beach uses methyl bromide. High levels of the gas were found near an elementary school in West Long Beach. Photos by Joel Angel Juarez and J.W. Hendricks for CalMatters Upon learning of the test results, the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner a few months ago added new permit conditions for SPF Terminals and AG-Fume Services, including shutting doors, installing taller smokestacks and prohibiting fumigation during school hours, according to permits obtained by CalMatters. But the county permits for the three San Pedro and Compton facilities, which use much larger volumes of methyl bromide, remain unchanged, with none of the protections added to the Long Beach permits. And officials still have not held any community meetings there. The agricultural commissioner’s office declined to comment on the facilities. A complex web of ‘hot spots’ rules for methyl bromide About 38% of the methyl bromide used in California for commodity fumigation is in LA County, according to Department of Pesticide Regulation data for 2022. After many Long Beach residents expressed concerns, the South Coast district assessed all nine facilities permitted to use the chemical in the region and determined that five could pose a risk to residents.  Now the agency is going through a complex process outlined under the state’s Air Toxics “Hot Spots” law, enacted in 1987. Usage data, weather patterns and proximity to neighborhoods will be used to calculate a “priority score” for each of the five facilities. If a facility’s score is high enough, then the company will be required to conduct a full health risk assessment to examine the dangers to the community. None of the scores have been released yet. Risk assessments under the air district’s rules are a complicated, multi-step process likely to take many months. Smokestacks are shown at a facility that fumigates imported produce at the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro. AG-Fume Services and Harbor Fumigation operate at this facility. Photo by Joel Angel Juarez for CalMatters And these health assessments may not trigger any changes at the facilities. It all depends on whether certain thresholds for hazards are crossed. The state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has set guidelines, called reference exposure levels, for concentrations of methyl bromide that could cause the long-term or short-term health effects, such as respiratory and neurological damage, nausea and fetal effects, based on human and animal studies. But South Coast district officials said action isn’t triggered if methyl bromide exceeds these reference levels. Instead, the district uses a state-created “hazard index” based on them. If a facility’s hazard index reaches one — which means concentrations outside the facility have reached the reference dose and could cause harm — the company must notify the public, under a South Coast district regulation. However, the facilities will only be required to take steps to reduce emissions if the hazard index reaches three — three times the reference level that indicates potential harm, according to that regulation. Expedited action is required under the rule if the index is five times higher.   “Just because it’s above the (reference level), it doesn’t mean it’s going to cause health impacts,” said Ian MacMillan, assistant deputy executive officer at the South Coast air district. He said the reference level indicates “there’s a possibility that there could be health impacts.”  The series of escalating thresholds is designed as a balancing act between regulating facilities and protecting the public, officials said. MacMillan also said methyl bromide emissions must be considered in the context of overall air quality in the region — the entire LA basin has an average hazard index of 5.5 when considering all sources of toxic air pollutants from industries and vehicles, he said. When told about the fumigation plants and lack of air testing and risk assessments, residents contacted by CalMatters were outraged. “There’s no interest from the government to protect our health,” said Edvin Hernandez, a father picking up his 9-year-old son from Kelly Elementary School in Compton. “We’re surviving by the hand of God.” The members of Congress — Barragán, Waters and Garcia — asked air regulators to install monitors near all Los Angeles County fumigation facilities, compile inspection records, conduct health assessments in the communities and provide all of the results on a public website.  “It is egregious that communities in California are still being impacted by this harmful and unnecessary chemical,” said Alison Hahm, a staff attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is working with community members. “In addition to stopping this ongoing public health threat in West Long Beach and Los Angeles, residents are demanding accountability and remedies for the harm endured.” The methyl bromide facilities in L.A. County are subjected to a different permitting process than elsewhere in California.  That’s because in 1996, the South Coast air district and the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner agreed to share responsibility for regulating fumigating facilities. The agricultural office is tasked with issuing permits and the air agency is in charge of setting emissions limits and enforcing them.   In the Bay Area, the local air district has a similar agreement with agricultural departments that originated in 1997. However, the district decided that agreement is out of date so it is now issuing permits, too. One facility in the Bay Area uses the pesticide, Impact Transportation of Oakland. In 2019, the air district assessed the health risks of that facility and modeled how the fumes spread.   In the San Joaquin Valley, new facilities or those changing their methyl bromide use are subject to a health risk evaluation before a permit is issued. Facilities permitted before the air district was established in 1992 are subject to a review like the one that the South Coast district is now launching in San Pedro and Compton. The Los Angeles Agriculture Commissioner’s office, when asked whether it conducts a risk assessment before issuing permits, declined to answer any questions. CalMatters filed a public records request seeking risk assessments, but they said they had no records matching the request.   South Coast air regulators said they and the commissioner are now considering if any changes to their agreement should be made.  Allowed to use up to a half-ton of methyl bromide a day  Fumigation of produce using methyl bromide occurs within an enclosed facility, and the produce is covered by a tarp when sprayed. The fumes are then released into the atmosphere through tall smokestacks, a process called aeration. CalMatters filed a public records request with the county agricultural office and received the five facilities’ permits for 2023 through 2025. The permits show that the two Long Beach companies are now required to take an array of new precautions to limit fumes emitted into communities that the three Compton and San Pedro families are not — even though the Long Beach ones use much smaller volumes of methyl bromide. The San Pedro and Compton plants are allowed to use up to 1,000 pounds of methyl bromide in a 24-hour period. In contrast, the Long Beach plants can use up to 200 pounds in 24 hours, and in Oakland, Impact Transportation’s permit allows only 108 pounds.  First: Pallets of produce are piled up at the outer berths at the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro. Last: A tarped area holds a tank that contains a hazardous gas, most likely methyl bromide. A fan and roof vents ventilated the area while garage doors were left open on April 8, 2025. AG-Fume Services and Harbor Fumigation operate at this location. Photos by Joel Angel Juarez for CalMatters The San Pedro and Compton facilities release fumes into the atmosphere during the daytime, except when they use an exhaust stack meeting certain height requirements, according to their permits. The two Long Beach facilities, SPF Terminals and AG Fume Services, have new, additional requirements this year: Fumigation can’t occur between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. when a school is within 1,000 feet. And by the end of this month, they must replace their smokestacks with taller ones that are at least 55 feet tall, which disperse the fumes better. All doors must be closed during fumigation and aeration and fans must be used in the aeration process.  ‘We don’t have a choice’ At a ballpark on a recent day in San Pedro, Eastview Little League players took the field.  When a 13-year-old boy on the Pirates team was up to bat, his mom, Amy Shannon, cheered him on.  “Let’s go D! Deep breath boy, you got it!” she shouted.  Then she paused. Maybe she shouldn’t be encouraging her son to take a deep breath, she said. Shannon had just learned from CalMatters about the fumigation facility across the street from the baseball field. Amy Shannon, left, and Roxanne Gasparo, right, attend their children’s Little League game at Bloch Field near the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro on April 8, 2025. Both women were unaware that a fumigation facility nearby has been using a toxic gas for about 30 years. Photo by Joel Angel Juarez for CalMatters At the facility where AG Fume and Harbor Fumigation operate, located at 2200 Miner Street, it was business as usual that day. A ship was docked on one side of the Los Angeles Port berth. On the other side, hundreds of stacks of fruits and vegetables were visible through several large garage doors.  Some of the stacks were covered with plastic. A tank containing a fumigant — labeled with a hazard sign depicting a skull — was hooked up outside. Yellow smokestacks protruded from the facility.  An AG-Fume Services truck was parked near one of the garage doors. Workers wearing yellow vests and sun-protective hats closed the garage doors, but left them slightly open at the bottom.  At the baseball field, Shannon watched the game with a friend, Roxanne Gasparo. Both women grew up in San Pedro. Gasparo said she wasn’t at all surprised to learn that a dangerous gas could be in their air.   “Because it’s a port town, unfortunately, we’re used to pollution. We have the port, obviously, and all the refineries next to us,” Gasparo said. “There’s really no way to get out of it unless you leave the city, and because most of the families here are blue collar families that rely on the unions, we kind of don’t have a choice,” she added. “We just deal with it and raise our kids the best we can.” More about air pollution in port communities ‘We should be in crisis mode’: Toxic fumigant could be seeping into these communities March 21, 2025March 26, 2025 Polluted communities hold their breath as companies struggle with California’s diesel truck ban December 10, 2024December 10, 2024

Costa Rica Ghost Net Cleanup Saves Marine Life in Puntarenas

For the Oceans Foundation successfully completed the first stage of its ghost net rescue campaign in Costa de Pájaros, Puntarenas, removing approximately 15 tons of abandoned fishing nets from the seabed, enough to nearly fill a 20-ton truck, according to social media reports and foundation statements. The initiative aims to eliminate these silent killers that […] The post Costa Rica Ghost Net Cleanup Saves Marine Life in Puntarenas appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

For the Oceans Foundation successfully completed the first stage of its ghost net rescue campaign in Costa de Pájaros, Puntarenas, removing approximately 15 tons of abandoned fishing nets from the seabed, enough to nearly fill a 20-ton truck, according to social media reports and foundation statements. The initiative aims to eliminate these silent killers that harm marine life and promote sustainable fishing practices in Costa Rica’s coastal communities, a critical step toward preserving ourcountry’s rich biodiversity. Ghost nets are abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear that continue to trap marine life, such as fish, sea turtles, dolphins, and sharks, while damaging coral reefs and seagrass beds. Globally, an estimated 640,000 tons of ghost gear pollute the oceans, contributing to 10% of oceanic litter, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. In Costa Rica, these nets threaten iconic species like the hawksbill turtle and disrupt artisanal fishing livelihoods, exacerbating ocean pollution and habitat loss. The cleanup effort united 20 artisanal fishing families, professional rescue divers, and more than 60 volunteers, showcasing community-driven conservation. The operation was led by Captain Gabriel Ramírez of UDIVE 506, with eight fishing boats navigating the Gulf of Nicoya’s challenging currents. Reportedly, organizations including the Parlamento Cívico Ambiental, ACEPESA, Coast Guard, Red Cross, IPSA, REX Cargo, and Cervecería y Bebidas San Roque provided logistical support, transportation, hydration, and assistance with sorting and processing the recovered nets. Marine Biology students from the National University (UNA) played a key role by preparing the nets for recycling, ensuring minimal environmental impact. “Each of us can contribute to the environment. This is not for me or for you—it’s for Costa Rica, for the planet, and for marine life,” said Jorge Serendero, Director of Fundación For the Oceans. This cleanup builds on Costa Rica’s leadership in marine conservation, with over 30% of its territorial waters protected as of 2021, a global benchmark. The foundation reported a tense moment when a diver became entangled in a drifting net due to strong currents. Thanks to the quick action of his colleagues, he was freed unharmed, underscoring the risks of such operations. This campaign highlights the power of collective action in protecting marine ecosystems, a priority for Costa Rica as it expands marine protected areas like Cocos Island. Fundación For the Oceans plans additional cleanups in 2025 to address ghost nets across Costa Rica’s Pacific coast. Interested individuals can contact For the Oceans Foundation at info@fortheoceansfoundation.org or +506 8875-9393 to volunteer, donate, or learn about upcoming initiatives to safeguard the oceans. The post Costa Rica Ghost Net Cleanup Saves Marine Life in Puntarenas appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Commercial salmon season is shut down — again. Will California’s iconic fish ever recover?

While it’s an unprecedented third year in a row for no commercially caught salmon, brief windows will be allowed for sportsfishing in California.

In summary While it’s an unprecedented third year in a row for no commercially caught salmon, brief windows will be allowed for sportsfishing in California. Facing the continued collapse of Chinook salmon, officials today shut down California’s commercial salmon fishing season for an unprecedented third year in a row.  Under the decision by an interstate fisheries agency, recreational salmon fishing will be allowed in California for only brief windows of time this spring. This will be the first year that any sportfishing of Chinook has been allowed since 2022. Today’s decision by the Pacific Fishery Management Council means that no salmon caught off California can be sold to retail consumers and restaurants for at least another year. In Oregon and Washington, commercial salmon fishing will remain open, although limited. “From a salmon standpoint, it’s an environmental disaster. For the fishing industry, it’s a human tragedy, and it’s also an economic disaster,” said Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Association, an industry organization that has lobbied for river restoration and improved hatchery programs.  The decline of California’s salmon follows decades of deteriorating conditions in the waterways where the fish spawn each year, including the Sacramento and Klamath rivers. California’s salmon are an ecological icon and a valued source of food for Native American tribes. The shutdown also has an economic toll: It has already put hundreds of commercial fishers and sportfishing boat operators out of work and affected thousands of people in communities and industries reliant on processing, selling and serving locally caught salmon.  California’s commercial fishery has never been closed for three years in a row before.  Some experts fear the conditions in California have been so poor for so long that Chinook may never rebound to fishable levels. Others remain hopeful for major recovery if the amounts of water diverted to farms and cities are reduced and wetlands kept dry by flood-control levees are restored.  This year’s recreational season includes several brief windows for fishing, including a weekend in June and another in July, or a quota of 7,000 fish.   Jared Davis, owner and operator of the Salty Lady in Sausalito, one of dozens of party boats that take paying customers fishing, thinks it’s likely that this quota will be met on the first open weekend for recreational fishing, scheduled for June 7-8.   “Obviously, the pressure is going to be intense, so everybody and their mother is going to be out on the water on those days,” he said. “When they hit that quota, it’s done.” One member of the fishery council, Corey Ridings, voted against the proposed regulations after saying she was concerned that the first weekend would overshoot the 7,000-fish quota. Davis said such a miniscule recreational season won’t help boat owners like him recover from past closures, though it will carry symbolic meaning. “It might give California anglers a glimmer of hope and keep them from selling all their rods and buying golf clubs,” he said.  “It continues to be devastating. Salmon has been the cornerstone of many of our ports for a long time.”Sarah Bates, commercial fisher based in San Francisco Sarah Bates, a commercial fisher based at San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf, said the ongoing closure has stripped many boat owners of most of their income.  “It continues to be devastating,” she said. “Salmon has been the cornerstone of many of our ports for a long time.” She said the shutdown also has trickle-down effects on a range of businesses that support the salmon fishery, such as fuel services, grocery stores and dockside ice machines. “We’re also seeing a sort of a third wave … the general seafood market for local products has tanked,” such as rockfish and halibut. She said that many buyers are turning to farmed and wild salmon delivered from other regions instead. Davis noted that federal emergency relief funds promised for the 2023 closure still have not arrived. “Nobody has seen a dime,” he said.  Fewer returning salmon Before the Gold Rush, several million Chinook spawned annually in the river systems of the Central Valley and the state’s northern coast. Through much of the 20th century, California’s salmon fishery formed the economic backbone of coastal fishing ports, with fishers using hook and line pulling in millions of pounds in good years.  But in 2024, just 99,274 fall-run Chinook — the most commercially viable of the Central Valley’s four subpopulations — returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries, substantially lower than the numbers in 2023. In 2022, fewer than 70,000 returned, one of the lowest estimates ever. About 40,000 returned to the San Joaquin River. Fewer than 30,000 Chinook reached their spawning grounds in the Klamath River system, where the Hoopa, Yurok and Karuk tribes rely on the fish in years of abundance.  The decline of California’s salmon stems from nearly two centuries of damage inflicted on the rivers where salmon spend the first and final stages of their lives. Gold mining, logging and dam construction devastated watersheds. Levees constrained rivers, turning them into relatively sterile channels of fast-moving water while converting floodplains and wetlands into irrigated farmland.  Today, many of these impacts persist, along with water diversions, reduced flows and elevated river temperatures that frequently spell death for fertilized eggs and juvenile fish. The future of California salmon is murky Peter Moyle, a UC Davis fish biologist and professor emeritus, said recovery of self-sustaining populations may be possible in some tributaries of the Sacramento River.  “There are some opportunities for at least keeping runs going in parts of the Central Valley, but getting naturally spawning fish back in large numbers, I just can’t see it happening,” he said. Jacob Katz, a biologist with the group California Trout, holds out hope for a future of flourishing Sacramento River Chinook. “We could have vibrant fall-run populations in a decade,” he said.  That will require major habitat restoration involving dam removals, reconstruction of levee systems to revive wetlands and floodplains, and reduced water diversions for agriculture — all measures fraught with cost, regulatory constraints, and controversy.  “There are some opportunities for at least keeping (salmon) runs going in parts of the Central Valley, but getting naturally spawning fish back in large numbers, I just can’t see it happening.”Peter moyle, uc davis fish biologist State officials, recognizing the risk of extinction, have promoted salmon recovery as a policy goal for years. In early 2024, the Newsom administration released its California Salmon Strategy for a Hotter, Drier Future, a 37-page catalogue of proposed actions to mitigate environmental impacts and restore flows and habitat, all in the face of a warming environment.  Artis of Golden State Salmon Association said the state’s salmon strategy includes some important items but leaves out equally critical ones, like protecting minimum required flows for fish — what Artis said are threatened by proposed water projects endorsed by the Newsom administration. “It fails to include some of the upcoming salmon-killing projects that the governor is pushing like Sites Reservoir and the Delta tunnel, and it ignores the fact that the Voluntary Agreements are designed to allow massive diversions of water,” he said. Experts agree that an important key to rebuilding salmon runs is increasing the frequency and duration of shallow flooding in riverside riparian areas, or even fallow rice paddies — a program Katz has helped develop through his career.  On such seasonal floodplains, a shallow layer of water can help trigger an explosion of photosynthesis and food production, ultimately providing nutrition for juvenile salmon as they migrate out of the river system each spring.  Through meetings with farmers, urban water agencies and government officials, Rene Henery, California science director with Trout Unlimited, has helped draft an ambitious salmon recovery plan dubbed “Reorienting to Recovery.” Featuring habitat restoration, carefully managed harvests and generously enhanced river flows — especially in dry years — this framework, Henery said, could rebuild diminished Central Valley Chinook runs to more than 1.6 million adult fish per year over a 20-year period.  He said adversaries — often farmers and environmentalists — must shift from traditional feuds over water to more collaborative programs of restoring productive watersheds while maintaining productive agriculture. As the recovery needle for Chinook moves in the wrong direction, Katz said deliberate action is urgent.  “We’re balanced on the edge of losing these populations,” he said. “We have to go big now. We have no other option.” more about salmon ‘No way, not possible’: California has a plan for new water rules. Will it save salmon from extinction? by Alastair Bland December 16, 2024December 16, 2024 A third straight year with no California salmon fishing?  Early fish counts suggest it could happen by Alastair Bland October 30, 2024October 30, 2024

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.