May 18, 2026
Bad Science, Big Jeopardy: Why We Must Stop the New NOAA Proposal to Increase Atlantic Shark Fishing
By: The Shark Stewards Team
There is a disturbing narrative unfolding in the Atlantic Ocean, and if we don’t act immediately, it could reverse decades of hard-won shark conservation progress.
The Trump administration, via NOAA Fisheries, has introduced a reckless proposal aimed at relaxing fishing regulations. If approved, these changes will drastically reduce protections for commercial and recreational shark fisheries across the northwestern Atlantic, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean. Specifically, the rules seek to dismantle management boundaries for the endangered blacknose shark, raise recreational bag limits (even allowing “up to three, or no limit” on certain trips for species like hammerheads), and alter minimum size requirements.
The administration’s justification is they claim that reducing the shark population will make things easier for commercial and recreational fishermen.
As our Director David McGuire recently noted in The Independent, “This is another example of the weakening regulations on behalf of commercial fishing interests in the absence of science.”
Sportsfishermen are even bypassing their own SHARKED Act in Congress. When a government agency tasked with protecting marine life prioritizes political shortcuts over peer-reviewed data, it isn’t just bad policy: it is completely unscientific. Here is exactly why the proposed rule fails the science test.
4 Reasons Why the NOAA Proposal is Bad Science
1. Anecdotes Are Being Substituted for Real Data
The catalyst for this proposal stems from fishermen claiming there is an “overabundance” of Atlantic sharks interfering with their catch. However, these claims lack any verified scientific data. There is an difference between fishermen seeing more sharks in a concentrated area and an actual increase in the overall shark population.
2. It Ignores Climate Change Dynamics
Why are fishermen seeing more sharks if populations aren’t booming? Science points directly to climate change, shifting prey patterns and population movements. Rising ocean temperatures and marine heatwaves are shifting where Atlantic sharks migrate, swim, and feed. Sharks are moving into new territories looking for cooler water and food, creating localized aggregations. Fishing proponents place this shift as overpopulation of sharks rather than more complex factors like climate-induced behavioral changes and fundamental ecological shifts.
3. It Blatantly Lacks Proper Stock Assessments
To manage a fishery sustainably, you must know how many individuals are in a population. Alarmingly, most of the shark species targeted by this new proposal do not have a formal, or up-to-date population assessment. For example, blacknose sharks have seen their East Coast populations reduced by more than half over the last 25 years, and they remain highly vulnerable to overfishing. Increasing quotas or removing boundaries without baseline stock assessments flies in the face of the precautionary principle of marine science.
4. The New Size Limits Defy Basic Biological Maturity
One of the most glaring scientific failures in the proposal involves the revised recreational minimum size limits. While a proposed increase for hammerheads ensures fishers catch older sharks, the limits for other species completely disregard biological reality.
- The proposal lists the minimum catch size for blue sharks, common threshers, and porbeagles at 54 inches.
- However, the average female size at maturity for these species is 75 inches, 85 inches, and 86 inches, respectively.
Allowing fishermen to keep sharks that are 54 inches means fishermen will be actively harvesting juveniles before they ever have a chance to reproduce. This threatens this species with localized extinction.
The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher
Sharks are apex predators. They keep our marine ecosystems balanced, oceans healthy, and coral reefs thriving. Global assessments already show that a staggering one-third of all sharks and rays are at risk of extinction. They are slow-growing, long-lived creatures that cannot reproduce fast enough to withstand increased commercial slaughter.
We cannot allow political maneuvering to strip away protections from vulnerable species .
TAKE ACTION NOW: Demand Science-Based Policies from NOAA!
The public comment window on this dangerous rule is closing rapidly. NOAA Fisheries is required by law to review feedback from citizens and scientists before executing a final rule later this year. We need you to speak up for the sharks who have no voice.
How You Can Help:
- Submit an Official Comment: Click the link below to go directly to the Federal Register. Tell NOAA that you demand a rejection of these revisions. Insist that no management changes or quota increases be made without comprehensive, peer-reviewed stock assessments and biologically accurate size limits based on female maturity.
- Spread the Word: Share this blog post and The Independent article with your friends, family, and dive communities.
- Support Our Work: Consider donating to Shark Stewards so we can continue fighting on the front lines of marine policy.
[👉CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT TO NOAA]
Time is running out. Let’s ensure science, not politics, governs our oceans.