Saving Seafood

How much U.S. Seafood is Imported?

June 4, 2019 — This week, the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation (NMSF) is convening Capitol Hill Ocean Week in Washington, D.C. Additionally, President Trump has declared the month of June “National Ocean Month” in recognition of the importance of the ocean to the economy, national security, and environment of the United States.

For the duration of Ocean Week, Saving Seafood will share materials related to the sustainable and economically vital U.S. commercial fishing and seafood industries, including information tied directly to events being organized as part of the NMSF conference.

Tuesday at 11:00 a.m. EDT, as part of Capitol Hill Ocean Week, there was a panel “Addressing the US Seafood Deficit.” The following article looks at a new study that concluded more of the seafood eaten in the U.S. is produced domestically than previously thought. It was published last week by Sustainable Fisheries UW:

The commonly quoted statistic that “90% of seafood consumed in the United States is imported” is out of date and should stop being cited. In this post, I explain the origins of the 90% myth, the scientific paper that produced the updated numbers, and the implications for U.S. trade and seafood markets.

Where did the 90% statistic come from and why is the new estimate more accurate?

A lot of seafood farmed or caught in the United States is sent overseas for processing, then sent back. Due to varying trade codes that get lost in the shuffle of globalization, these processed seafood products are often mistakenly recorded as ‘imported,’ despite being of U.S. origin.

For example, pollock, the fish used in McDonald’s Filet-o-fish sandwich, is caught throughout U.S. waters near Alaska. Once onboard, a significant portion is sent to China (the U.S.’s largest seafood trade partner) to be cleaned, gutted, and processed into filets. After processing in China, the fish is sent back to the U.S. and sold in restaurants and grocery stores. Pollock is not a Chinese fish, but the trade codes used when sending them back from China signify them as Chinese-origin and they are recorded as imported or foreign seafood.

Recording fish caught in the U.S. but processed in China has led to a significant overestimation of Americans’ so-called ‘seafood deficit’, or the ratio of foreign to domestic seafood consumption in the U.S.

Unfortunately, the misleading 90% deficit statistic has become commonplace, mostly due to coverage of Oceana’s seafood fraud campaign that stoked consumer anxiety about imported seafood. Distorted import data had been taken at face value for several years because no one had pieced together the conversion factors that account for processing and return export/import—until three scientists, Jessica Gephart, Halley Froehlich, and Trevor Branch, published their work in PNAS in May 2019.

Knowing the conversion factor for seafood products caught or farmed in the U.S. is the key to accurately estimating the amount of domestic seafood processed abroad. Froehlich describes a conversion factor as a number that can be used to back-calculate a processed seafood item to its pre-processed weight. Basically, when pollock are sent back to the U.S. after being processed in China, a conversion factor can be applied to estimate how much fish was originally sent and domestic seafood statistics can be corrected. When U.S. seafood is processed abroad but consumed in the U.S., it should be counted as domestic seafood consumed domestically.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

RAY HILBORN: Keep eating fish; it’s the best way to feed the world

June 3, 2019 — This week, the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation (NMSF) is convening Capitol Hill Ocean Week in Washington, D.C. Additionally, President Trump has declared the month of June “National Ocean Month” in recognition of the importance of the ocean to the economy, national security, and environment of the United States.

For the duration of Ocean Week, Saving Seafood will share materials related to the sustainable and economically vital U.S. commercial fishing and seafood industries, including information tied directly to events being organized as part of the NMSF conference.

To kick off the week, Saving Seafood is sharing the following article on the importance of eating fish to global food security and the environment. It was written by renowned fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn and published by the Oxford University Press Blog last week:

The famous ocean explorer, Sylvia Earle, has long advocated that people stop eating fish. Recently, George Monbiot made a similar plea in The Guardian – there’s only one way to save the life in our oceans, stop eating fish – which, incidentally, would condemn several million people to starvation.

In both cases, it’s facile reasoning. The oceans may suffer from many things, but fishing isn’t the biggest. Earle and Monbiot’s sweeping pronouncements lack any thought for the consequences of rejecting fish and substituting fish protein for what? Steak? That delicious sizzler on your plate carries the most appallingly large environmental costs regarding fresh water, grain production, land use, erosion, loss of topsoil, transportation, you name it.

Luckily for our planet, not everyone eats steak. You’re vegan, you say, and your conscience is clean. An admirable choice – so long as there aren’t too many of you. For the sake of argument and numbers, let us assume that we can substitute plant protein in the form of tofu, made from soybeans, for fish protein. Soybeans need decent land; in fact it would take 2.58 times the land area of England to produce enough tofu to substitute for no longer available fish. That extra amount of decent arable land just isn’t available – unless we can persuade Brazil, Ecuador and Columbia to cut down more of the Amazon rainforest. We would also add 1.71 times the amount of greenhouse gases that it takes to catch the fish.

And, again for the sake of argument, were we to substitute beef for fish, we would need 192.43 Englands to raise all that cattle and greenhouse gases would rocket to 42.4 times what they are from fishing.

But aren’t there alternatives that we can eat with a clean conscience? It depends. First, we must accept the inescapable truth that everyone has to eat. You and I and another few billion humans right down to the single cell organisms. The second inescapable truth arises from the first but is often ignored, is that there is no free lunch. The big variable in this business of eating is deciding the appropriate price to the environment.

Read the full opinion piece at the Oxford University Press (OUP) Blog

House Committee Hears from Stakeholders on Importance of a Healthy Ocean Economy

June 6, 2018 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:   

Today, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans staff held a roundtable with representatives from ocean-dependent communities to discuss opportunities for regulatory reform that will provide certainty for working waterfronts and promote vibrant and sustainable coastal economies. Chairman Bishop issued the following statement:

“Working waterfronts and our nation’s vast ocean resources are essential to coastal economies, generating billions of dollars each year. Today we heard from real people whose livelihoods depend on a healthy ocean economy and their message was clear. Without a rational regulatory framework, responsible economic growth and success is at risk. What we learned today will help Congress do its part and create regulatory certainty that will enable this important industries to create better opportunities for Americans.

“I applaud President Trump for declaring June National Ocean Month, and for underscoring the importance of lessening the regulatory burdens impacting our ocean industries and communities.”

Background:

President Donald Trump declared June 2018 National Ocean Month, emphasizing the importance of regulatory streamlining and supporting ocean industries. The roundtable provided a forum for people who make a living on the water to share their perspectives with the Committee.

Concerns and comments from representatives focused on issues surrounding the Antiquities Act, President Obama’s National Ocean Policy, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and more.

The Committee is working to advance several pieces of legislation to benefit coastal communities including, H.R. 5787, the Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2018 (Rep. Neal Dunn, R-Fla.).

Learn more about the House Committee on Natural Resources here.

 

Trump calls out US seafood trade imbalance

June 5, 2017 — U.S.  President Donald Trump’s declaration that June is National Ocean Month – and his stated desire to grow the country’s seafood exports – was praised by seafood industry groups.

“The fisheries resources of the United States are among the most valuable in the world. Growing global demand for seafood presents tremendous opportunities for expansion of our seafood exports, which can reduce our more than US 13 billion (EIR 11.6 billion) seafood trade deficit,” he said.

The American Shrimp Processors Association welcomed President Trump’s call-out of the domestic seafood industry, the organization’s executive director, C. David Veal, told SeafoodSource.

“The American Shrimp Processors Association welcomes any recognition from the Trump administration of the significant problems caused by the trade imbalances of imported seafood. The USD 4.5 billion (EUR 4 billion) trade deficit from shrimp alone has had devastating impacts on communities in the Gulf and South Atlantic regions for the last two decades,” he said. “Any effort to reduce the trade deficit is appreciated by those who make their livelihoods in the domestic shrimp industry and their associated communities.”

In his remarks commemorating the declaration, Trump also said that the country’s offshore areas are underutilized and often unexplored.

“We have yet to fully leverage new technologies and unleash the forces of economic innovation to more fully develop and explore our ocean economy,” he said.

Gavin Gibbons, vice president of communications for the National Fisheries Institute, said it was “good to see the White House taking notice of the seafood community and focusing on the importance of resource utilization.”

“Safe, sustainable expansion of underutilized areas may present an opportunity for expansion of things like aquaculture. We look forward to seeing any administration plan for such an effort,” Gibbons said.

The key to successful expansion of U.S. seafood production will be maintaining the rigorous sustainability oversight of NOAA, according to Gibbons.

“Initiatives that seek long-term growth solutions should continue to observe the tested, science-based system based on total allowable catch,” he said.

Read the full story at Seafood Source