Saving Seafood

Many in Thai fishing industry fail to see conditions as slavery: research

February 6, 2018 — NEW YORK — Thai fishing boat owners who trap workers on board ships and withhold wages often do not realize that is modern slavery, so authorities must ramp up their policing efforts, advocates say.

Research shows many fishing operators are oblivious that the grim conditions on board their ships amount to forced labor, according to a recent report.

Many operators know smuggling people across borders and forcing them to work at sea for long periods of time is wrong but see withholding documents or forcing them to pay off debts as acceptable, said the report by Issara Institute, a Bangkok-based anti-trafficking organization.

Thailand’s multibillion-dollar seafood sector has been the target of scrutiny in recent years following investigations that found slavery, trafficking and violence on fishing boats and in onshore processing facilities.

“Vessel owners exploit fishermen yet view themselves as benevolent patrons,” said the report, released last month, based on interviews with 75 Thai captains and large fishing boat owners.

The findings show a need for stronger efforts to improve the working conditions and bring the fishing industry in line with anti-trafficking laws, advocates said.

“It’s all going to come down to enforcement,” Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

The military government in Thailand has rolled out industry reforms since the European Union in 2015 threatened to ban its fish imports, but little has changed, Human Rights Watch said in a report also released last month.

Shawn MacDonald, chief executive of Verite, a charity fighting labor injustices, said the Issara findings provide insight useful for crafting incentives against forced labor.

Read the full story at Reuters

Another country has banned boiling live lobsters. Some scientists wonder why.

January 16, 2018 — Poached, grilled, or baked with brie.

Served on a roll, or in mac ‘n cheese.

Lobsters may be one of the most popular crustaceans in the culinary arts. But when it comes to killing them, there’s a long and unresolved debate about how to do it humanely, and whether that extra consideration is even necessary.

The Swiss Federal Council issued an order this week banning cooks in Switzerland from placing live lobsters into pots of boiling water — joining a few other jurisdictions that have protections for the decapod crustaceans. Switzerland’s new measure stipulates that beginning March 1, lobsters must be knocked out — either by electric shock or “mechanical destruction” of the brain — before boiling them, according to Swiss public broadcaster RTS.

The announcement reignited a long-running debate: Can lobsters even feel pain?

“They can sense their environment,” said Bob Bayer, executive director of the University of Maine’s Lobster Institute, “but they probably don’t have the ability to process pain.”

Boiling lobsters alive is already illegal in some places, including New Zealand and Reggio Emilia, a city in northern Italy, according to the animal rights group Viva.

A Swiss government spokeswoman said the law there was driven by the animal rights argument.

“There are more animal friendly methods than boiling alive, that can be applied when killing a lobster,” Eva van Beek of the Federal Office of Food Safety and Veterinary Affairs said in an email.

Read the full story at the Washington Post

 

North Korean workers prep seafood going to US stores, restaurants

October 5, 2017 — HUNCHUN, China — The workers wake up each morning on metal bunk beds in fluorescent-lit Chinese dormitories, North Koreans outsourced by their government to process seafood that ends up in American stores and homes.

Privacy is forbidden. They cannot leave their compounds without permission. They must take the few steps to the factories in pairs or groups, with North Korean minders ensuring no one strays. They have no access to telephones or email. And they are paid a fraction of their salaries, while the rest — as much as 70 percent — is taken by North Korea’s government.

This means Americans buying salmon for dinner at Walmart or ALDI may inadvertently have subsidized the North Korean government as it builds its nuclear weapons program, an AP investigation has found. Their purchases may also have supported what the United States calls “modern day slavery” — even if the jobs are highly coveted by North Koreans.

At a time when North Korea faces sanctions on many exports, the government is sending tens of thousands of workers worldwide, bringing in revenue estimated at anywhere from $200 million to $500 million a year. That could account for a sizable portion of North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs, which South Korea says have cost more than $1 billion.

While the presence of North Korean workers overseas has been documented, the AP investigation reveals for the first time that some products they make go to the United States, which is now a federal crime. AP also tracked the products made by North Korean workers to Canada, Germany and elsewhere in the European Union.

Besides seafood, AP found North Korean laborers making wood flooring and sewing garments in factories in Hunchun. Those industries also export to the U.S. from Hunchun, but AP did not track specific shipments except for seafood.

Read the full story at the Associated Press

Oceana claims four countries violated EU law by fishing illegally in African waters

September 14, 2017 — Environmental nonprofit Oceana is claiming vessels from the European Union’s distant-water fleet have been fishing unlawfully in the waters off the coasts of Equatorial Guinea and Gambia.

Using Automatic Identification System (AIS) data collected by satellite and terrestrial receivers tool Global Fishing Watch, Oceana said it tracked 19 vessels from Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain fishing unlawfully for more than 31,000 hours in African waters between April 2012 and August 2015.

The European Union has signed fisheries partnership agreements with several African countries, offering financial and technical support in exchange for fishing rights. However, its agreements with Gambia and Equatorial Guinea are “dormant,” signifying countries that signed fishing partnership agreements “without having a protocol into force, for structural or conjonctural reasons.” Under rules set by the European Commission, EU vessels are not allowed to fish in waters of countries with dormant agreements.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Electrofishing: Saviour of the sea or fracking of the oceans?

August 17, 2017 — The Netherlands is testing a new technique to fish – using electric currents. Electrofishing is controversial and is banned by the EU, but can be used on an experimental basis. Critics argue it is cruel because it breaks the backs of some larger cod. But advocates say it is less damaging for the environment than traditional beam trawling. James Clayton reports for BBC Newsnight.

Watch the video from BBC Newsnight on YouTube

Brexit Britain: The Island Nation’s Fishermen and the Battle With the EU

August 7, 2017 — NEWQUAY, England — Fisherman Phil Trebilcock is tired of being told there are not enough fish in the sea.

“On the east coast of Cornwall there are fish swimming up the beaches but they’re not allowed to catch them,” he said, hauling pots of spider crabs out of a choppy Celtic Sea recently. “They should take more advice from the fishermen, and less from the scientists.”

Trebilcock is bridling against European Union quotas that dictate how much fish British vessels can land — in some cases prompting fishermen to dump dead fish back into the water if they have caught more than they are allocated.

And that’s not all. The fisherman ticked off his grievances with the EU regulations: quotas, too much paperwork and too many foreign boats chasing fish in British waters.

So it is no surprise that last year Trebilcock joined 52 percent of the voting public to chose to leave the EU, or “Brexit.”

The country fishing industry accounts for less than 0.5 percent of Britain’s GDP but has nevertheless become a symbol of resistance to what many believe are onerous and damaging EU regulations. So as negotiations between the U.K. and EU ramp up in the coming months, one of the many sticking points will be around shared waters.

In spite of the iconic place that fishermen have within the Brexit camp, the industry is actually divided. While many of those who do the catching are cheering the move, a good number of those who process the catch are fretting over the upcoming divorce.

“We have more to lose from Brexit than to gain from it, definitely,” said Julian Harvey, a partner at W. Harvey and Sons, a shellfish wholesaler and processor in Cornwall on the southwest coast of England.

Read the full story at NBC News

EU Discard Ban Stimulates Innovation and Improved Cross-Sectoral Communication

July 7, 2017 — The following is a report written by Dr. Bill Karp, Affiliate Professor at University of Washington:

The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) governs fisheries management in the European Union and is, very roughly equivalent to the Magnuson-Stevens Act in the US. The CFP is updated (reformed) every ten years. Article 15 of the 2013 reform is entitled “Landing Obligation” and includes the following text:

  1. All catches of species which are subject to catch limits and, in the Mediterranean, also catches of species which are subject to minimum sizes as defined in Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vessels outside Union waters in waters not subject to third countries’ sovereignty or jurisdiction, in the fisheries and geographical areas listed below shall be brought and retained on board the fishing vessels, recorded, landed and counted against the quotas where applicable, except when used as live bait, in accordance with the following time-frames:

For further details (including exceptions) see http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1380&rid=1

This “Landing Obligation” or discard ban was enacted in response to public concerns regarding perceived wasteful practices. It is being implemented over several years, initially in the more industrialized, large scale fisheries of northern Europe. Many concerns about practicability, cost, and other aspects have been raised and hotly debated in Europe, but implementation is proceeding.

As expected, this change in public policy has directly impacted many aspects of fishing, handling, processing, and marketing. The EU has funded several projects designed to encourage cross-sectoral engagement to improve gear selectivity, share information on avoiding unwanted catch (spatial, areal, etc.), encourage advances in handling, stimulate marketing opportunities, etc. Among these initiatives is a project called “DiscardLess” which is a four-year, multi-million Euro project. Through this project, researchers and stakeholders from throughout Europe and elsewhere are working together to reduce discards in European fisheries. The DiscardLess Consortium includes 31 partners from 20 countries.

Participants include fishermen, gear technologists, economists, handling, processing and marketing experts, and marine scientists. Work packages within the project focus on selectivity, avoidance, optimal use, ecosystem considerations, and policy aspects. Work began more than two years ago, and some important results are already apparent. For example, the Atlas, and Selectivity Manual provide broad-based and comprehensive information, much of which will be useful to US fishermen. See http://www.discardless.eu/ to download these products and learn more about the DiscardLess project. For an excellent short video about DiscardLess, see https://player.vimeo.com/video/206395350

EU opens consultation on 2018 CFP, overfishing

July 7, 2017 — The EU has announced a consultation period on the way in which levels of fishing effort and quotas are set according to the new common fisheries policy (CFP), and on the basis of scientific advice.

The contributions received, as well as the outcome of the seminar on the state of the stocks and the economics of fishing fleets that will take place in September, will feed into the European Commission’s proposals on fishing opportunities for 2018.

The consultation will run July 6 to Sept 15, 2017.

The EU claimed in its consultation documents that “significant progress in implementing the 2013 CFP reform” has been made:

  • Meeting the maximum sustainable yield objective. According to the latest assessment from the scientific, technical and economic committee for fisheries, based on 2015 data, 39 of 66 stocks assessed in the North-East Atlantic were exploited within FMSY (equating to 59%, up from 52 % in the previous year).
  • Rebuilding stocks. Average stock biomass in the North-East Atlantic increased by 35% between 2003 and 2015.
  • Improving overall economic performance. The EU fleet registered record net profits of €770 million in 2014, a 50% increase over the 2013 figure of €500m.
  • Better balancing fishing capacity and fishing opportunities. In recent years, the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities across the entire EU fleet has improved.

“Despite this progress, further efforts are needed in particular to bring down the high levels of overfishing in the Mediterranean, to reduce the number of individual stocks exploited above FMSY in the North-East Atlantic and to implement the landing obligation.”

NGO ClientEarth took issue with what it said was an overly optimistic viewpoint.

“A report released today by the European Commission paints a misleadingly positive impression of progress towards sustainable fishing, by glossing over the fact that progress has slowed or reversed in recent years,” it said.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

UK to withdraw from 50-year international fisheries arrangement

July 5, 2017 — A convention that allows foreign countries access to fish waters surrounding the United Kingdom will be terminated within two years, the U.K. government has declared.

As part of the process to prepare the country for leaving the EU, the government will officially begin withdrawal from the London Fisheries Convention this week, confirmed Environment Secretary Michael Gove.

The convention, signed in 1964 before the United Kingdom joined the EU, allows vessels from five European countries – France, Belgium, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands – to fish within six and 12 nautical miles of the U.K. coastline. It sits alongside the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), which allows all European vessels access between 12 and 200 nautical miles of the country and sets quotas for how much fish each nation can catch.

Those members signed up to the convention will be notified this week, triggering a two-year withdrawal period.

“Leaving the London Fisheries Convention is an important moment as we take back control of our fishing policy. It means for the first time in more than 50 years we will be able to decide who can access our waters,” said Gove.

“This is an historic first step towards building a new domestic fishing policy as we leave the European Union – one which leads to a more competitive, profitable and sustainable industry for the whole of the U.K.”

As announced in the recent Queen’s Speech, the government will introduce a new Fisheries Bill to control access to U.K. waters and set fishing quotas. Starting this summer, there will be a period of engagement on the bill with the devolved administrations, fishermen, trade organizations, fish processors and the public to deliver a deal that works for country.

Barrie Deas, chief executive of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organizations (NFFO), welcomed the announcement that the London Fisheries Convention would be brought to a close, saying it was “an important part of establishing the U.K. as an independent coastal state with sovereignty over its own exclusive economic zone.”

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Seafood can’t be sacrificial lamb in Brexit negotiations

July 5, 2017 — Confirmation that creating a new fisheries bill will be one of the U.K. government’s immediate priorites as it looks to make a success of its departure from the E.U. has eased one of the seafood sector’s biggest fears regarding the Brexit negotiations that are now underway: that fisheries could be packaged into a broader multi-industry deal in pursuit of other, more lucrative agendas that might not serve its best interests.

On the eve of the fisheries bill announcement, which came in the recent Queen’s Speech – the event that traditionally opens parliament, with the monarchy listing the laws that the government hopes to get approved during the year ahead – delegates at the London seminar, “Priorities for U.K. fisheries policy – sustainability, trade, access and funding,” heard industry leaders and other key stakeholders warn about the dangerous ramifications of overlooking fisheries and the needs of the broader seafood supply chain while Brexit talks progressed.

Lord Robin Teversen, chair of the House of Lords’ E.U. select sub-committee on environment and energy, which also covers fisheries and farming, said a major concern is the sheer scale of policymaking now required from the government’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA), which is responsible for getting good post-Brexit policies in place for agriculture and the environment, as well as for fisheries. He also warned the rule-makers to expect an a ferocious fishing industry should they fail to deliver a satisfactory package.

“Although fisheries is seen as a marginal sector to macro-economists, with something like 0.7 percent of the GDP – my goodness, the industry can make itself felt. Politically, it’s a very sensitive area and one that I am sure will dominate more of the Brexit negotiations than perhaps the GDP [share] would suggest. Whichever government it is that’s in power when we come to Brexit, if a wrong decision is taken on fisheries, they will get to know about it; that’s how important and politically charged this area is,” Teversen said.

“The other thing about fisheries that makes a [deal] even more important is that it’s the one area of Brexit on day one – 29 March, 2019 – that could see actual physical conflict if it goes wrong. We shouldn’t underestimate that importance when it comes to making sure that an agreement is reached,” he said.

Read the full story at Seafood Source