Saving Seafood

Mislabeling Food in Peru Stirs Overfishing Worries

December 27, 2018 — In Peru, ceviche is not just the national dish but also a way of life.

The country may be best known for its Inca heritage but it is also a fishing superpower while its acclaimed culinary renaissance is arguably a greater source of local pride than Machu Picchu.

Even high in the Andes, residents are accustomed to lunching on the marinated seafood salad made with fresh fish trucked straight up from the Pacific Coast.

But what may shock Peruvians is learning that due to mislabeling they are unwittingly consuming endangered shark species. According to Juan Carlos Riveros, science director for the Peruvian arm of the international marine conservation nonprofit Oceana, 8 in 10 customers here fall for the misleading practice.

A recent DNA study by nonprofits Oceana and ProDelphinius found that 43 percent of the 450 samples taken from fish in Peruvian restaurants, supermarkets and fishing terminals were mislabeled. The reason for that is simple, conservationists say; the number of fish in Peru’s heavily exploited waters is dwindling. Sometimes inadvertent and sometimes deliberate, mislabeling a catch is always ecologically damaging given the dramatic and unsustainable fall in shark populations around the world.

Read the full story at U.S. News

Why the battle to fix Europe’s fisheries policy isn’t over yet

December 20, 2018 — Overfishing in EU waters, and the wasteful practice of discarding edible fish at sea, should come to an end from next year, as reforms to the common fisheries policy (CFP) are implemented after seven years of wrangling.

But disputes among member states over rights to dwindling fish stocks mean that key aspects of the plans to improve management of European fisheries are floundering.

From January, the landing obligation should mean that all fish netted are brought to shore instead of thrown away if they exceed a vessel’s quota. By 2020, all stocks should be subject to quotas based on scientific judgments of the maximum sustainable yield, not annual horse-trading among politicians.

However, as fisheries ministers met in Brussels for quota negotiations on Wednesday, it was clear these long-promised reforms would not be implemented in the way campaigners had hoped. Also, there were signs that the UK would face more difficult negotiations after Brexit, as shared waters make up most of the productive seas fished by UK fleets.

The European commission is struggling to insist on the discard ban, against the wishes of some member states. A spokesman said: “The commission has put forward concrete solutions to advance on sustainable fishing and to ease the implementation of the landing obligation, but we cannot do it without the support of the member states.”

Read the full story at The Guardian

NGO finds EU countries could catch 56% more fish if ministers stop Atlantic overfishing

December 19, 2018 — Research undertaken by the NGO Oceana shows Denmark, France and the UK would ultimately register the highest increases in catch volume if EU ministers follow scientific advice when they meet to set the new 2019 quotas on Dec. 18.

The EU could increase the volume of fish landings from the North-Eastern Atlantic and the North Sea by 56%, up to more than 5 million metric tons, according to a study by Oceana.

The organization found that the recovery would take less than ten years, and that Denmark, France, the UK, Netherlands and Spain would benefit the most if scientific advice was followed. Ministers are under pressure in the approach to 2020, whereby under the common fisheries policy, all total allowable catches must be set sustainably.

Lasse Gustavsson, executive director of Oceana Europe, implored EU ministers to think of the longer-term benefits over short-term gains.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Lawsuit filed over Trump plans for offshore drilling tests

December 12, 2018 — Environmental groups sued the Trump administration Tuesday over offshore drilling tests, launching a legal fight against a proposal that has drawn bipartisan opposition along the Atlantic Coast.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Charleston, South Carolina, claims the National Marine Fisheries Service violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued five permits for the use of seismic air guns.

“This action is unlawful and we’re going to stop it,” Diane Hoskins, campaign director at OCEANA, said in a news release. “The Trump administration’s rash decision to harm marine mammals hundreds of thousands of times in the hope of finding oil and gas is shortsighted and dangerous.”

The coalition includes OCEANA, the Southern Environmental Law Center, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, Center for Biological Diversity, Surfrider Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife, One Hundred Miles and the Sierra Club, as well as the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League and the North Carolina Coastal Federation.

The blasts are conducted in preparation for potential offshore drilling, which the administration has proposed to expand from the Atlantic to the Arctic and Pacific oceans. The five-year plan would open 90 percent of the nation’s offshore reserves to private development.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at ABC News

Mislabeled seafood in the U.S.

December 7, 2018 — The 2018 Oceana Canada study was only the most recent of a series of similar studies published by Oceana (see my earlier piece here). In 2016, Oceana released a report that summarized and mapped seafood fraud from, “more than 200 published studies covering 55 different countries, on every continent except Antarctica, in order to reveal the global scope of seafood fraud.” Oceana found relevant studies by searching Google Scholar and Google News with relevant search terms. Further, legal cases involving seafood fraud in the United States were collected in NOAA Law Enforcement or Department of Justice press releases and archives. The final collection was displayed on this map.

In this post, I will attempt to contextualize Oceana’s findings in the US specifically. I aim to challenge the report title that this map study “reveal[ed] the global scale of seafood swapping”, and instead suggest that it provided an unrepresentative view of mislabeling in the context of actual seafood consumption trends in the U.S.

The vast majority of the studies collected by Oceana (>75%) were from Europe or the US and, “the bulk of the studies [were] conducted after 2005.” Globally, Oceana reported the weighted average mislabeling rate was 19%, but in the U.S., it was 28%. The most commonly mislabeled species in the US studies referenced were snapper, grouper, and salmon. Across all studies referenced (US and abroad) Oceana reported mislabeling in “all 200+ studies reviewed except one.”

Pins were placed on the world map to indicate the location of each mislabeling study collected for this report. The pins were color coded to indicate the extent of mislabeling, and to indicate if the study was an Oceana study or a study from another source like news media or peer reviewed literature. Dark red indicated studies showing mislabeling rates from 75%-100%; lighter red indicated mislabeling rates from 50%-75%; dark pink indicated rates from 25%-50%; light pink indicated rates from 0%-25%; a white pin with black pinstripes indicated a study featuring “other examples of fraud”; and a blue Oceana logo pin indicated an Oceana study.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

Virginia conservationists blast approval of seismic testing for oil, gas in Atlantic

December 4, 2018 — Virginia conservationists are blasting the Trump administration’s decision to reverse course and approve seismic air gun surveys along the Atlantic coast to search for buried oil and gas reserves.

The groups cite widespread public opposition to seismic blasting and offshore drilling, as well as the harm posed to marine life and coastal economies that rely on healthy waters and wetlands.

“This action flies in the face of massive opposition to offshore drilling and exploration from over 90 percent of coastal municipalities in the proposed blast zone,” said Diane Hoskins, campaign director at the D.C.-based advocacy group Oceana. “President (Donald) Trump is essentially giving these companies permission to harass, harm and possibly even kill marine life.”

“Offshore drilling in our region would pose far too many risks to the health of coastal waters and the Chesapeake Bay, fishing, aquaculture, tourism and all jobs that depend on clean water,” said Lisa Feldt, vice president for environmental protection and restoration at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. “We need to run away from offshore drilling, not move towards it.”

Read the full story at the Daily Press

MSC gives Gulf of Mexico menhaden fishery six more months to deliver report

November 29, 2018 — The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) has granted independent auditor SAI Global an extra six months — until June 6 — to finish its final report on whether to grant certification to the menhaden fishery in the US’ Gulf of Mexico.

The report was due Dec. 6, in a little more than a week. However, in requesting more time, SAI Global had noted unforeseen delays that included “a new benchmark stock assessment”, “additional consultation”, “substantial stakeholder submittals” and the “development and revision of the client action plan”, reveals MSC’s letter approving the delay, sent Monday to lead auditor Ivan Mateo.

If the new June 6 deadline is not met, the MSC warns, the application must be withdrawn.

The note about receiving a “substantial” number of stakeholder comments is interesting as several groups, including the Gulf Restoration Network (GRN) and Recirculating Farms Coalition (RFC), have let their opposition to MSC certification of the Gulf menhaden fishery be known. The fishery currently maintains no limits on its harvest of menhaden, which is a forage fish relied upon heavily by numerous other fish and bird species.

“Notably, the MSC label has become a well-known marker for fisheries that strive for sustainability,” said Marianne Cufone, RFC’s executive director, and Cynthia Sartou, GRN’s executive director, in a jointly signed letter sent earlier to the accrediting organization. “To certify gulf menhaden, with its lack of transparency and information, would most certainly tarnish MSC’s reputation and weaken public confidence in the label.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Canadian gov’t to put $80m into rebuilding stocks

November 26, 2018 — Canada’s finance minister Bill Moreau has announced an investment of CAD 107.4 million ($81.3m) over five years for the rebuilding and assessment of fish stocks across the country.

In response to this announcement, Oceana Canada’s executive director, Josh Laughren, said:

“This is great news for Canada’s fisheries and a critical investment that will help address one of the most urgent challenges in managing Canada’s oceans: the need to rebuild depleted fisheries and rebuild abundance.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

The Irony of Oceana’s Seafood Fraud Campaign

November 16, 2018 — Seafood fraud/mislabeled seafood is a permanent topic in the sustainable fisheries space. Since 2015, news sources such as The Atlantic, the Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, and the Economist have published stories on the topic of seafood fraud. Nearly every ocean conservation NGO has commented or contributed to the discourse, but Oceana has led the conversation. Oceana has an entire campaign aimed at exposing and reducing seafood fraud globally. Since 2011, they have published sixteen reports on seafood fraud—most recently, a report from Oceana Canada.

There are important differences between seafood fraud and fraud in other food systems. Language barriers, multiple acceptable market names, the sheer quantity of seafood species compared to other animal proteins, and the simple fact that wild capture adds a slew of complications compared to controlled terrestrial farming, should set a different expectation level for seafood labeling standards. There are so many chances for mistakes or miscommunication to happen—far more than any other food supply chain. But the seafood fraud discourse (largely led by Oceana) often excludes these realities and instead points fingers at fishermen, restaurateurs, and retailers for duping their customers.

In this post, I take a look at Oceana Canada’s methodology for determining “fraud” in its most recent report. I consider the results of Oceana’s report through the lens of the seafood and restaurant industries and attempt to illustrate the difference between legitimate fraud and unintentional mislabeling.

Oceana’s methodology & general results

Oceana defines Seafood Fraud as, “the practice of misleading consumers about their seafood in order to increase profits.” This is an important distinction from the term “mislabeled” because it assigns an intent to deceive. Fraud is on purpose, whereas mislabeling could be an accident. Most reports on this subject today infer that the seafood industry is actively deceiving consumers on a broad scale, across the most commonly consumed species, both domestically and internationally.

Oceana’s methodology for conducting its seafood fraud reports is suspect. In this post, I focus on the most recent Canadian study, but my criticisms apply to all seafood fraud reports that use the same methods. Generally, Oceana collects seafood samples, DNA tests them, then matches the DNA results to outdated government guidelines. The samples they collect are purposefully not representative of seafood consumption habits. In Oceana Canada’s 2018 report, 382 seafood samples from 177 restaurants and retailers across the country were tested. The aim was to focus on cod, halibut, snapper, tuna, salmon and sole because these species historically, “have the highest rates of species substitution.” The specific species sampled were chosen because of past studies on seafood mislabeling, i.e. they were not randomly sampled. DNA testing then determined if these samples met the minimum labelling requirements as defined by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), an equivalent of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

This nonrandom sampling is consistent with previous seafood fraud studies from Oceana. A key parallel across Oceana’s seafood fraud investigations is that “targeted fish of interest” are the focus. Oceana Canada encouraged participants to aim for species that are often marked in other fraud studies, meaning the sample in these studies is not indicative of national seafood consumption rates on average, but instead represents very specific species that have proven to present high rates of mislabeling in previous research.

Of the 382 seafood samples tested in Canada, 168 (44%) were found to be fraudulent, meaning the names of the species did not align with the acceptable market names determined by CFIA standards.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

Report card on Canada’s fish stocks suggests action required to reverse decline

November 16, 2018 — Atlantic herring is a hearty source of protein for people and marine mammals alike, but like a startling number of Canada’s fish stocks the plan to rebuild the depleted herring population is currently one big question mark.

That’s a conclusion reached by advocacy group Oceana Canada, which published its second annual fisheries audit Tuesday — a report card assessing the health of Canada’s fish stocks.

The report found Canada has a lot of work to do to reverse the term decline of its fish stocks, and it needs to pick up the pace.

Oceana’s science director Robert Rangeley said he hopes the audit is a “wake-up call” for better fisheries management.

“My biggest fear is one of complacency,” said Rangeley. “We’re still hovering around one-third of our fish stocks (that) are healthy, which is very poor performance for the 194 stocks that are so important for coastal communities.”

Only 34 per cent of Canada’s fish stocks are considered healthy. Twenty-nine per cent are in a critical or cautious zone, and perhaps most alarmingly, 37 per cent of stocks don’t have sufficient data to assign a health status.

Some, like Pacific herring in Haida Gwaii, slipped into the critical red zone this year.

The numbers are indicative of the slow policy implementation that plagues management of Canada’s fisheries, Rangeley said. The Oceana team expected to see more stocks move from the uncertain zone into one of the other categories this year, but in fact, the needle barely moved

Read the full story at CTV News