Saving Seafood

To help stop illegal fishing, ban practice of transshipment on high seas, researchers say

May 2, 2017 — New research concludes that a total ban on the practice of transshipment on the high seas is necessary to help stop illegal fishing and reduce the human trafficking and labor rights abuses that often accompany unlawful fishing activities.

“Transshipping enables fishing vessels to remain at sea for extended periods of time,” Washington D.C.-based oceans conservancy NGO Oceana explains. “Fishing vessels and refrigerated cargo vessels rendezvous at sea in order to transfer seafood, fuel or supplies. While this transshipping practice can be legal in many cases, it also can facilitate the laundering of illegally caught fish, especially on the high seas and in waters surrounding developing and small island nations with insufficient resources to police their waters.”

As detailed in a report released last month, Oceana found that close to 40 percent of suspected instances of transshipping occur on the high seas — areas outside of any national jurisdiction, which make up about two-thirds of Earth’s oceans. Russia’s Sea of Okhotsk, the high-seas regions of the Barents Sea, the national waters of Guinea-Bissau, and just outside the national waters of Argentina and Peru are reportedly the world’s chief transshipping hotspots.

Oceana’s report was based on an analysis of data collected by West Virginia-based environmental monitoring NGO SkyTruth and Global Fishing Watch, a partnership between Google, Oceana, and SkyTruth, which documented more than 5,000 “likely” cases of illegal transshipment and over 86,000 “potential” cases between 2012 and 2016.

In a paper published in the journal Marine Policy last month, a team of researchers make the case that a global ban on the practice of transshipment on the high seas is necessary in order to curb illegal fishing and human rights abuses in the global fishing industry.

“This practice often occurs on the high seas and beyond the reach of any nation’s jurisdiction, allowing ships fishing illegally to evade most monitoring and enforcement measures, offload their cargo, and resume fishing without returning to port,” Jennifer Jacquet, an assistant professor in the Department of Environmental Studies at New York University (NYU) and a co-author of the paper, said in a statement.

Read the full story at Mongabay.com

Scientists tested seafood at six D.C. restaurants. It didn’t always match the menu.

April 25, 2017 — When you order ahi tuna tartare at a D.C. restaurant, can you be sure that’s what you’re getting? A new study from George Washington University found that some restaurants are serving similar, but not the exact, species of fish advertised on local menus.

A group of scientists led by Keith Crandall of the university’s Milken Institute School of Public Health tested 12 dishes at six seafood chains with locations in Washington to see if the fish or crustacean DNA matched what it was called on the menu. They found that one-third of the samples were incorrectly labeled.

But these weren’t cases in which tilapia was being sold as snapper. In most of the mislabeled samples, the DNA matched a closely related species and wasn’t an egregious substitution.

The study discovered “pretty mild substitutions,” Crandall said. “We didn’t see anything that looked like some kind of comprehensive fraud, to swap out an expensive piece of seafood for something much less expensive.”

Still, there were a few restaurants whose results might raise an eyebrow. At Bobby Van’s steakhouse, a dish advertised as a rock shrimp tempura was a DNA match with whiteleg shrimp, which is typically a much cheaper, farmed shrimp.

The testing was performed in 2015, and Bobby Van’s doesn’t have a rock shrimp tempura on the current menu. Jonathan Langle, the chain’s head of operations for Washington, said he doesn’t recall it being on the menu, and that it may have been a special.

Read the full story at the Washington Post

Environmentalists Can’t Help Defend Fishing Rules

April 20, 2017 — Three environmental groups cannot join the U.S. government to defend against a challenge to an Obama administration rule requiring seafood companies to report the origin of the fish they sell, a federal judge ruled.

The National Resources Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity and Oceana asked the court on March 7 to join the government in defending a suit from a group of fishing companies challenging the seafood traceability rule, which requires companies to disclose on a government form the vessel or collection point of origin for their fish.

The companies say the rule will make seafood more expensive. The environmentalists say it is critical to protecting fish populations from illegal fishing. The environmentalists made specific arguments in support of the rule, telling U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta that reversal would affect their daily lives.

Rachel Golden Kroner, in a declaration supporting Oceana, said that if the companies invalidate the seafood traceability rule she would be at greater risk of buying illegally fished seafood, preventing her from making “sustainable seafood choices.”

Todd Steiner, with the Center for Biological Diversity, said that without the rule he would have a harder time studying at-risk populations.

But on Monday Mehta shot down their chance to make their case in court, saying the groups had not shown that overturning the rule would harm them enough to give them standing in the case.

Read the full story at the Courthouse News Service

Fisheries Managers Cast Doubt on Sardine Survey Methods

April 13, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Fishing for Pacific sardines in California has been banned for the third consecutive year.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council voted Monday afternoon in Sacramento to close the fishery through June 30, 2018, because the population limit of 150,000 metric tons wasn’t met.

Researchers estimate that only about 87,000 metric tons of the oil-rich fish are now swimming around off the coast.

The decision blocks commercial fishers in San Pedro, Long Beach and elsewhere across the West Coast from anything other than small numbers of incidental takes. While sardines don’t command the high price of California shellfish, their plentiful numbers and popularity make them one of the state’s most-caught finfish.

But fishery managers say there’s reason to believe sardines are much more plentiful than studies have found.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Southwest Fisheries Science Center Deputy Director Dale Sweetnam said the acoustic-trawl method that researchers use to estimate the number of sardines is flawed.

The count is done from a large NOAA ship that surveys the entire West Coast by sampling schools of fish, and then bounces sound waves off of them to create a diagram that estimates the size.

But the ship is too large to go into harbors or coastal areas where sardines like to congregate.

“There are questions about the acoustic detector being on the bottom of the ship — how much of the schools in the upper water columns are missed by the acoustics,” Sweetnam said. “Also, the large NOAA ship can’t go in shallow waters, but most of the sardine fishery is very close to shore.”

The fisheries service will soon employ a California Department of Fish and Wildlife plane, along with drones, to survey coastal areas for sardines.

“It will take some time because we’re going to have to determine a scientific sampling scheme,” Sweetnam said. “We’re starting this collaborative work with the fishing industry to extend our sampling grid-lines to shore.”

However, environmental activists cheered the decision to close the sardine fishery for a third season.

Oceana, a worldwide conservation advocacy organization, blames the sardine population decline on overfishing.

“Over the last four years we’ve witnessed starved California sea lion pups washing up on beaches and brown pelicans failing to produce chicks because moms are unable to find enough forage fish,” said Oceana campaign manager Ben Enticknap.

“Meanwhile, sardine fishing rates spiked right as the population was crashing. Clearly, the current sardine management plan is not working as intended and steps must be taken to fix it.”

Industry representatives, however, argue that fishers are reliable environmental stewards and that they are just as eager as environmental activists to protect the long-term survival of marine species.

California fishers were able to replace sardine takes with increased numbers of squid in recent years. This year, promising anchovy stocks and other fish may keep the industry solvent.

California Wetfish Producers Association Executive Director Diane Pleschner-Steele said fishermen are frustrated.

“Fishermen are just ready to pull their hair out because there’s so many sardines and we can’t target them,” Pleschner-Steele said. “I’m relieved that the Southwest Fisheries Science Center acknowledges problems with the current stock assessment and has promised to work with the fishermen to develop a cooperative research plan to survey the near-shore area that is now missed. Unfortunately, this does not help us this year.”

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

D.B. Pleschner: Study: No correlation between forage fish, predator populations

April 10, 2017 — On April 9-10, the Pacific Fishery Management Council is meeting in Sacramento to deliberate on anchovy management and decide on 2017 harvest limits for sardine, two prominent west coast forage fish.

Extreme environmental groups like Oceana and Pew have plastered social media with allegations that the anchovy population has crashed, sardines are being overfished and fisheries should be curtailed, despite ample evidence to the contrary.

Beyond multiple lines of recent evidence that both sardines and anchovy populations are increasing in the ocean, a new study published this week in the journal Fisheries Research finds that the abundance of these and other forage fish species is driven primarily by environmental cycles with little impact from fishing, and well-managed fisheries have a negligible impact on predators — such as larger fish, sea lions and seabirds.

This finding flies directly in the face of previous assumptions prominent in a 2012 study commissioned by the Lenfest Ocean Program, funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, heirs of Sun Oil Company. The Lenfest study concluded that forage fish are twice as valuable when left in the water to be eaten by predators and recommended slashing forage fishery catch rates by 50 to 80 percent.

However, in the new study, a team of seven internationally respected fisheries scientists, led by Prof. Ray Hilborn, Ph.D., of the University of Washington, discovered no correlation between predator populations and forage fish abundance. The new research also found multiple omissions in the methodology of the Lenfest study. For instance, it — and other previous studies — used ecosystem models that ignored the natural variability of forage fish, which often fluctuate greatly in abundance from year-to-year.

Read the full opinion piece at the Santa Cruz Sentinel

You May Soon Be Able to Track Your Seafood in Real Time to Fight Fish Fraud

March 29, 2017 — Fishermen and chefs are working together to curb rampant fraud in the seafood industry by allowing people to track a fish from the moment it’s caught until it lands at a restaurant or market.

Dock to Dish, an organization that fights seafood fraud by connecting chefs with fisheries in their local communities, is building a tracking system in an effort to solve the common problem of mislabeled seafood. A global test of more than 25,000 samples of seafood found that 1 in 5 was mislabeled as the wrong type of fish, according to a 2016 report from ocean conservation advocacy group Oceana, meaning people often purchase and eat seafood that is not what they presume it to be.

“People want to know. They’re demanding to know where food is coming from,” Dock to Dish co-founder Sean Barrett said.

The organization has raised more than $69,000 of its $75,000 Kickstarter goal to build a tracking system called Dock to Dish 2.0. In addition to supplying local restaurants with the catch of the day, Dock to Dish aims to present a digitized “end to end program that can answer every single question a consumer might have,” Barrett said.

The program would enable restaurant guests to see where their dinners come from through an online dashboard that displays newly caught fish in barcoded bags, which can be tracked as they travel to eateries. Customers would also be able to chat with fishermen before heading out to eat.

Read the full story at Time 

Sardine fishing could be banned for 3rd year in a row

March 27, 2017 — The once-thriving sardine population — made famous in John Steinbeck’s novel “Cannery Row” — has taken a nosedive along the West Coast, where regulators are considering a ban on reeling in the tiny bait fish for a third year in a row.

Sardine numbers have plummeted 95 percent since 2006, according to estimates released Friday by the National Marine Fisheries Service. The perilously low numbers give regulators little choice but to again close fishing starting July 1 from Mexico to the Canadian border.

“If the initial estimate for this year remains in place, the fishery will be closed for the third straight year,” said Kerry Griffin, the staff officer for the Pacific Fishery Management Council, which makes policy along the coasts of California, Oregon and Washington. “We all want a healthy ecosystem, sustainable fisheries and healthy coastal communities that depend on fishing opportunities.”

Fishery biologists blamed the collapse on natural fluctuations — which recent sediment studies show have been common throughout history — and changing ocean conditions. Conservationists, however, believe overfishing made a bad situation worse.

“There would have been a decline anyway, but we made the decline worse by continuing to fish,” said Geoffrey Shester, senior scientist for Oceana, an international advocacy group that has been fighting to lower the annual sardine take and implement stricter regulations. “Scientists in the agency warned about a collapse, but the managers of the fishery didn’t pay attention to that and, in fact, took a much higher percentage of the existing stock.”

Read the full story at the San Francisco Chronicle

EU still vulnerable to illegal fish imports

March 17, 2017 — Disparities and weaknesses in import controls in key member states of the European Union mean illegally caught fish can still slip through the net and into EU supply chains, according to an analysis published today by the Environmental Justice Foundation, Oceana, The Pew Charitable Trusts and WWF.

The analysis provides a comprehensive evaluation of countries’ progress in implementing import controls under the EU Regulation to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, which came into force in 2010. This is the first published analysis of data reported by member states to the European Commission for the most recent two-year reporting period, 2014 to 2015. It reveals significant problems with the way a number of EU member states are executing controls of fish consignments. For example, authorities in some major importing countries still fail to apply robust checks even where consignments come from countries that have been warned by the EU for having inadequate measures in place to prevent and deter illegal fishing. In some cases, the procedures implemented by EU countries appear insufficient to comply with the minimum control obligations laid down in EU legislation.

The study calls for more harmonised and rigorous procedures, as well as the digitisation of catch certificate information within the EU by the end of 2017, to ensure unscrupulous operators do not attempt to move their catch through ports where weaker controls are in place. Imports entering the EU in shipping containers are identified as particularly challenging for enforcement authorities, with procedures for these not harmonised to a sufficiently rigorous standard to date.

The import controls are a cornerstone of the European Union’s 2010 Regulation to combat IUU fishing, which is seen as a world-leading piece of legislation in the global fight against illegal fishing. The analysis reinforces the findings of a recent case study published by the four NGOs revealing that the fraudulent use of paper catch certificates and lack of an EU-wide system for cross-checking import documents means illegal catch is still getting through.

Read the full story at The Fish Site

Poll: 75% of UK Residents Say Brexit Will Not Stop Overfishing

March 8, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — A poll carried out by YouGov for Oceana has revealed that 65% of the public are either “not confident” (46%) or “don’t know” (19%) when asked if they think the UK government will be better at stopping overfishing in the UK post-Brexit, compared to the existing guidance from the EU. Overfishing, or fishing too much, is one of the most critical issues facing our oceans. The fate of UK fisheries was a key feature of the Brexit debate with leading Brexit campaigners Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage frequently citing it as an example of EU mismanagement, even though the UK has always played an active role in setting catch limits.

“Brexit is an opportunity for the UK to revitalise its fishing industry, stabilise threatened ecosystems and create thousands of new jobs but this will only happen if overfishing is stopped. The UK government must fulfil the promises of the Brexit campaign that vowed British fisheries can thrive without EU guidance. This will only happen if overfishing is stopped,” explains Lasse Gustavsson, Executive Director, Oceana in Europe.

Interestingly, although 46% of respondents are not confident Brexit will be a positive influence on stopping overfishing, this figure rises to 60% in Scotland. The Scottish fishing industry contributes up to two thirds of the total fish caught in the UK and the country voted heavily to remain in the EU in last year’s referendum.

The poll also revealed a shocking lack of public knowledge about overfishing in Europe. A recent report commissioned by Oceana revealed that 64% of European fish stocks are currently overfished. However when asked, 83% of Brits either underestimated (31%) or said they didn’t know (52%) this figure.

Overfishing, or fishing too much, is reducing year after year the amount of fish available in the water and threatening marine ecosystems and fishers’ livelihoods. If overfishing was stopped and fish resources were managed sustainably, European fisheries could increase catches by almost 60% more fish in less than 10 years or 5 million tonnes. For this reason, Oceana has created a campaign that aims to mobilize European citizens in the fight against overfishing: #StopOverfishing.

All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 7,203 adults from Italy, UK, Germany, Spain and Denmark, of which, of which 2085 were from the UK. Fieldwork was undertaken between 3rd – 6th February 2017. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative on a country-by-country basis and are representative of all adults (aged 18+) in the Denmark, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK.

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Environmental Group Warns Of ‘Trans-Shipping’ Dangers In Pacific

February 27, 2017 — An environmental group dedicated to ocean conservation is warning Pacific nations to be alert to the dangers of what’s called trans-shipping, which it says can be used to mask illegal fishing activity.

Trans-shipping means fishing boats can stay at sea for an extended period of time, in some cases more than a year, by transferring their stock to another boat and receiving fuel and supplies.

The US-based group, Oceana, said that practice could often involve the laundering of fish, human rights abuses, and labour violations.

Its senior campaign director, Beth Lowell, said trans-shipping was a huge problem around the world and it was also likely to be happening in the Pacific due to its large tuna fisheries.

Read the full story at Pacific Islands Report