Saving Seafood

YONATHAN ZOHAR & RUSSELL T. HILL: America has an opportunity in aquaculture, but Congress needs to clear regulatory path first

May 27, 2021 — The seafood industry is at crossroads in America. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the seafood supply chain distribution, causing severe financial setbacks to suppliers and distributors. And while many businesses are starting to rebound, the U.S. seafood industry remains at a significant disadvantage: It relies almost solely on international imports. In fact, 90% of seafood that Americans consume is imported, creating a trade deficit of over $17 billion annually. The U.S. is missing an opportunity to create a competitive seafood industry with new jobs and a boost to the economy at a time when it’s needed most.

As the country reopens after the pandemic, and restaurant dining continues to increase, seafood will play a vital role in feeding America. And, the worldwide demand for seafood will only continue to grow. In fact, the Economics of Aquaculture Policy and Regulation says 40 million tons of fish will be needed to meet demand by 2030. Plus, with the world population projected to reach 9 billion by 2050, according to the National Research Council, and per capita seafood consumption on the rise, America will need a diverse set of food sources to meet these needs.

This is where an American aquaculture industry can fill critical food, nutrition and economic needs. Aquaculture — the farming of finfish, shellfish and other marine life — is the fastest growing food production sector in the world and has been responsible for nearly all of the global seafood supply growth since the 1990s. With half of all seafood consumed today being farm raised, aquaculture presents a unique opportunity to build an American seafood future that can bring us through this challenging time and support a diverse workforce, enhance sustainable ecosystems and provide healthful, locally sourced protein for Americans.

As professors at the Institute of Marine and Environmental Technology in Baltimore, we see the major potential for environmentally compatible land-based aquaculture systems as well as the need to consider offshore aquaculture if the right regulatory framework can be put in place to minimize environmental impact. Research and monitoring are critical to establish and maintain high environmental standards.

Read the full opinion piece at The Baltimore Sun

Noise Pollution in Our Oceans: Can We Turn Down the Volume for Marine Life?

February 24, 2021 — Unlike light, noise is a long distance traveler and can go astonishing distances through the water.  In 1943, the sound fixing and ranging (SOFAR) channel, a horizontal layer of water in the ocean at which depth the speed of sound is at its minimum, was discovered. The SOFAR channel was capable of transmitting low-frequency, long-wavelength sound waves produced by an explosion near the Bahama Islands to receivers stationed near the coast of Africa. Sound waves in the narrow SOFAR channel that are traveling at minimum velocity can go as far as 15,000 miles or more.  Unfortunately for those that live in the ocean, this means their world has become loud – very loud.

On February 5, 2021, Duarte et al., published “Noise Pollution: The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean” in the journal Science. A soundscape is an acoustic environment and a wide variety of noises make up the soundscape under the world’s oceans. Weather conditions, like storms, wind or rain falling, and geological processes, such as earthquakes or undersea volcanoes, are geophony; the natural sounds that animals and organisms make, such as vocalizations, calls, trills, fins flapping, etc., are biophony. And then there are humans – the sounds we and our human activities contribute to the soundscape are called anthrophony.

One of the most widely recognized incidents representative of the impact of human sound on marine life is the March 2000 stranding of seventeen marine mammals (16 of them whales) in the Bahamas. The animals had beached themselves in and around the islands, some with bleeding ears; six of them were dead. After learning that this had occurred very shortly after US Navy destroyers were using sonar in training exercises nearby, government scientists launched an investigation. An interim report released in December 2001 concluded that the strandings were caused by several factors, but admitted the sonar pings likely dazed the mammals, causing confusion and disorientation.

Read the full story at The National Law Review

Exclusive: Q&A with Ray Hilborn regarding conflict of interest accusations

July 16, 2016 — In response to accusations of conflicts of interest made against him by Greenpeace, renowned global fisheries expert Ray Hilborn compiled documents defending his work from leading academic journals in which he published his research, as well as from an official at the University of Washington who helped lead an official review of his work at the university (The documents can be found at the bottom of this story). Hilborn also answered questions posed by SeafoodSource regarding Greenpeace’s claims via email.

SeafoodSource: Do you feel like you’ve adequately disclosed your funding sources and any potential conflicts of interest in your publications and public statements?

Hilborn: As UW, PNAS and Science concluded, I complied with the regulations required by the University and journals. I will now be much more explicit in the future since this has been raised and Science has changed its policies since 2009.

SeafoodSource: Can you explain how industry co-funding of research contributes to better fisheries management?

Hilborn: It would take pages to document all the ways that I know of that industry co-funding has contributed to management. I chaired a National Research Council report on this subject – National Research Council. 2003, Cooperative research in the National Marine Fisheries Service. National Research Council Press, Washington D.C.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource.com