Oceana Archives - Page 26 of 29

Oceana going overboard on fish fraud, according to seafood industry group

September 9, 2016 — The National Fisheries Institute (NFI) is calling into question both the findings and motives of the latest fish fraud study by Oceana, a global environmental group. The action marks a break between the two groups since they previously were largely in sync with one another over the worldwide problem of fish fraud, which is where lesser-value species are marketed as higher-value ones.

NFI claims that by finding 20 percent of all seafood mislabeled globally, Oceana’s latest report is both overstating the problem and unnecessarily calling for an expanded regulatory bureaucracy when enforcement of existing laws is all that is needed.

NFI, a trade association representing the seafood industry with a core mission of sustainability, charges that the environmental group has turned to “misleading hyperbole.”

“Mislabeling is fraud and fraud is illegal, period,” reads the NFI statement released on its website. “That’s why NFI members are all required to be members of the Better Seafood Board, the only seafood industry-led economic integrity effort. Our members are at the forefront of getting rid of fish fraud.”

Oceana’s study is misleading because it looked too heavily at commonly mislabeled species, the group asserts.

“Oceana’s focus on the most often mislabeled species distorts its findings by design. It is a common technique that ironically perpetuates a fraud on the readers of these reports,” the NFI statement adds.

Read the full story at Food Safety News

JOHN SACKTON: Oceana Uses ‘Study’ on Seafood Fraud to Push for More Traceability Regulation

September 8, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Oceana has released a new ‘study’ claiming that 20% of global seafood trade is mislabeled.

The study was not a scientific sampling, but instead an analysis of Oceana’s sampling of high-risk species in various countries such as escolar, pangasius, and hake. They also had a high proportion of snapper and grouper samples, species where literally dozens of genetically distinct species are legally sold under one name.

However, the implication to consumers is that they should suspect that their McDonald’s pollock fillet could potentially be mislabeled. It is not.

The seafood industry and the supply chain have focused increasingly on traceability in the past few years.

NFI says “mislabeling is fraud and fraud is illegal, period. We emphasize that NFI members are required to be members of the Better Seafood Board, the only seafood industry-led economic integrity effort. And NFI Member Companies are at the forefront of eliminating fish fraud.”

NFI suggests that Oceana would be far more effective lobbying for stronger enforcement of existing laws.

The report was released prior to an upcoming Our Oceans conference in Washington, and also to pressure the Presidential Task Force on Combating IUU Fishing and Seafood Fraud to issue stronger recommendations.

The task force has proposed to require traceability for 13 species deemed to be at risk of IUU fishing and fraudulent labeling. However, the requirements would only be for imports, and not apply to commerce within the US.

Oceana wants species scientific name traceability to extend to all seafood, period. They hold up the EU traceability requirements for imports as a model, and say that this has helped reduce seafood fraud in Europe. Yet at the same time they document numerous examples of mislabeling in the UK, Italy, Belgium and Germany and other EU countries (see map).

The fact is that importers still have little control over how restaurants menu their items. Oceana admits this in a backhand fashion, saying in the report that the fraud numbers for Massachusetts are low due to the fact that most samples were from retail, and that retail stores generally label their products correctly.

Oceana is the NGO that ‘owns’ seafood mislabeling, relying on their mislabeling reports to get media attention. Other NGO’s have other brands. The competition among NGOs for media attention, donations, members, and activists can warp their approach to simple problems. So for Oceana, DNA testing and labeling is the path to improved seafood sustainability.

Oceana recognizes that stronger fishery management and enforcement globally would eliminate overfishing and IUU fishing, but can’t make that case because it is indistinguishable from what is also being recommended by the global seafood industry, governments, the FAO, and all others with a stake in long-term seafood sustainability.

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

Seafood fraud: A fishy business that’s on the rise

September 7, 2016 — Americans are increasingly concerned about where and how their food is grown and harvested. Yet many may not be aware that one type of food carries a high rate of fraud: seafood.

One in five of more than 25,000 seafood samples tested in studies across the globe have been found to be mislabeled, according to a report from the ocean conservation group Oceana. In most cases, the mislabeling involved a cheaper fish passed off as a more expensive type, which means consumers are overpaying in stores and restaurants.

The problem of mislabeling is serious on a number of fronts, Oceana said. Aside from the loss to consumers’ wallets, mislabeling can lead to serious health problems. Almost six in 10 of the mislabeled samples were fish that posed species-specific health risks to consumers, including toxins and environmental chemicals such as mercury.

“Safe food choices absolutely depend on accurate fish labeling that says what fish it was and where it was caught,” said Kimberly Warner, one of the authors of the report and senior scientist at Oceana. While some perpetrators go to jail or are fined, “there are plenty that don’t get caught,” she added.

Read the full story at CBS News

Fish Fraud: Something Fishy Is Happening With the Labeling of Seafood

August 24, 2016 — These days, choosing fish isn’t easy, whether you’re buying it at the grocery store or ordering it at a restaurant. You want to select seafood that’s fresh, reasonably priced, high in omega-3 fatty acids and low in mercury. After all, fish is one of the healthiest foods on the planet – it’s a lean source of protein that’s good for your heart and mind, experts note – which is why the updated U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Dietary Guidelines encourage Americans to eat fish or seafood at least twice a week. It’s a tricky balancing act, though, because at the same time, consumers are frequently warned about the potential risks of contaminants like mercury, which tends to build up especially in large predatory fish.

Here’s a shopping shocker that makes the issue even more complicated: You may not be getting the fish you’re paying for at retail outlets or in restaurants. In an investigation from 2010 to 2012, Oceana, an international organization dedicated to ocean conservation, examined more than 1,200 fish samples from 64 restaurants, sushi venues and stores in 21 states throughout the U.S. and found that mislabeling occurred in 59 percent of the 46 fish types that were tested; in particular, less desirable, less expensive or more readily available fish were often swapped for grouper, cod and snapper. Holy mackerel!

Among the most common examples of fish fraud the Oceana study found: Tilapia is frequently substituted for red snapper; pangasius (Asian catfish) is being sold as Alaskan or Pacific cod or grouper; Antarctic toothfish is being swapped for sea bass; farmed Atlantic salmon is standing in for wild, king and sockeye salmon; and escolar is being sold as white tuna, according to the report. In South Florida, king mackerel – a fish that’s on the Food and Drug Administration’s “do not eat” list for sensitive groups such as women of reproductive age and young children because it’s high in mercury – was being sold as grouper, and in New York City, tilefish – which is also on the “do not eat” list for sensitive people – was being sold as halibut and red snapper.

“It’s all based on economics,” notes Roger Clemens, a professor of pharmacology and pharmaceutical sciences at the University of Southern California and past president of the Institute of Food Technologists. “Many of the fish that are substituted are less expensive, so the restaurant or retailer profits from the deception.”

Read the full story at the US News & World Report

New online trawler tracking tool aims to help end overfishing

August 19, 2016 — Anyone with internet access and a passion for seafood will soon be able to track commercial fishing trawlers all over the world, with a new tool that its developers hope will help end the overfishing that has decimated the world’s fish stocks.

Millions of people depend on fish to survive, and fish will be vital to feeding the world’s growing population that is predicted to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, the United Nations says.

But overfishing has diminished fish stocks, and illicit fishing is threatening people’s access to food in many poor countries, according to the United Nations.

“We currently have around 450 million people globally who get their primary source of food from the ocean. This is 450 million meals a day under threat,” said Lasse Gustavsson, executive director of Oceana in Europe on Wednesday.

“To solve the overfishing problem, including illegal fishing, we want to create transparency in the oceans,” Gustavsson told the Thomson Reuters Foundation from Madrid.

Read the full story at The Guardian

Is That Real Tuna in Your Sushi? Now, a Way to Track That Fish

August 18, 2016 — “Most people don’t think data management is sexy,” says Jared Auerbach, owner of Red’s Best, a seafood distributor in Boston. Most don’t associate it with fishing, either. But Mr. Auerbach and a few other seafood entrepreneurs are using technology to lift the curtain on the murky details surrounding where and how fish are caught in American waters.

Beyond Maine lobster, Maryland crabs and Gulf shrimp, fish has been largely ignored by foodies obsessing over the provenance of their meals, even though seafood travels a complex path. Until recently, diners weren’t asking many questions about where it came from, which meant restaurants and retailers didn’t feel a need to provide the information.

Much of what’s sold has been seen as “just a packaged, nondescript fish fillet with no skin,” says Beth Lowell, who works in the seafood-fraud prevention department at Oceana, an international ocean conservation advocacy group. “Seafood has been behind the curve on both traceability and transparency.”

What’s worse is that many people have no idea what they’re eating even when they think they do. In a recent Oceana investigation of seafood fraud, the organization bought fish sold at restaurants, seafood markets, sushi places and grocery stores, and ran DNA tests. It discovered that 33 percent of the fish was mislabeled per federal guidelines. Fish labeled snapper and tuna were the least likely to be what their purveyors claimed they were.

Several years ago, Red’s Best developed software to track the fish it procures from small local fishermen along the shores of New England. Sea to Table, a family business founded in the mid-1990s with headquarters in Brooklyn that supplies chefs and universities, has also developed its own seafood-tracking software to let customers follow the path of their purchases. Wood’s Fisheries, in Port St. Joe, Fla., specializes in sustainably harvested shrimp and uses software called Trace Register.

And starting this fall, the public will be able to glimpse the international fishing industry’s practices through a partnership of Oceana, Google and SkyTruth, a nonprofit group that uses aerial and satellite images to study changes in the landscape. The initiative, called Global Fishing Watch, uses satellite data to analyze fishing boat practices — including larger trends and information on individual vessels.

Sea to Table hopes to sell fish directly to home chefs starting this year, too.

But local seafood can cost more than many Americans are accustomed to paying, which partly accounts for the rampant seafood fraud in this country.

“U.S. fisheries are very well managed and are actually growing nicely,” said Michael Dimin, the founder of Sea to Table. “But the U.S. consumer’s been trained to buy cheap food, and imported seafood is really cheap because of I.U.U. fishing.” I.U.U. stands for illegal, unreported and unregulated. The result is unsustainably fished, cheap seafood flooding American fish markets and grocery chains.

“To us, the secret is traceability,” Mr. Dimin said. “If you can shine a light on where it came from, you can make informed decisions.”

Read the full story at the New York Times

NILS STOLPE: Pew/Oceana’s latest exercise in crepe hanging

August 17, 2016 — Hard as it is to imagine, Pew/Oceana’s latest “the sky is falling” attempt at mobilizing the forces of righteousness to avoid the end of the world’s oceans via rampant overfishing took some startling liberties in crafting their latest call to arms (i.e. make a donation to Oceana). In their attempt to convince potential donors that oceanic doom and gloom had already arrived, the people at Pew/Oceana tried to conflate “overfished” and “fully fished” fish stocks, illogically putting them in the same category, allowing their use of the alarmingly seeming (to the average unsophisticated reader) 89.5% figure. Get out the checkbooks, folks!) But, with a nod to Paul Harvey, how about the rest of the story?

From the FAO report (http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5555e.pdf) on Pg. 5, “fully fished stocks accounted for 58.1 percent (of the world’s capture fisheries)and underfished stocks 10.5 percent.” In other words, just under 70% of the world’s fish stocks aren’t overfished and just over 30% are. But that’s nowhere nearly as dismal-sounding as Pew/Oceana’s almost 90% either being overfished or not underfished – though it’s certainly the way that any group that isn’t crisis-oriented would present the data.

Consider the FAO figures in a different context. Obviously there are three classes of drivers; drivers who drive below the speed limit, drivers who drive at the speed limit and drivers who drive over the speed limit. Let’s assume that 10.5% of drivers are in the first group, 58.1% are in the second and 31.4% are in the third. And then let’s assume that you wanted to make it appear as if speeding was as much of a problem as possible. Would you write that just under 70% of drivers drove at or below the speed limit or that almost 90% of drivers drove at or above the speed limit? Both are correct, but in the first case the focus is on drivers who are operating their vehicles lawfully and in the second the focus has been shifted to drivers who are speeding.

Is there any difference between the machinations that the people at Pew/Oceana are using to argue that the world’s fisheries are in really bad shape due to fishing/overfishing and having some other group writing that 89.5% of automobile accidents involve drivers having collisions with other vehicles or drivers talking on cell phones.

Read the full story from FishNet USA

Google and Oceana Partner to Track Fishing Vessels

August 17, 2016 — Anyone with internet access and a passion for seafood will soon be able to track commercial fishing trawlers all over the world, with a new tool that its developers hope will help end the overfishing that has decimated the world’s fish stocks.

Millions of people depend on fish to survive, and fish will be vital to feeding the world’s growing population that is predicted to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, the United Nations says.

But overfishing has diminished fish stocks, and illicit fishing is threatening people’s access to food in many poor countries, according to the United Nations.

“To solve the overfishing problem, including illegal fishing, we want to create transparency in the oceans,” Gustavsson told the Thomson Reuters Foundation from Madrid.

Read the full story at Maritime Executive

Shark finning law goes into effect

July 1, 2016 — Beginning Friday, the sale, purchase or possession with intent to sell shark fins in Texas will be a criminal offense that could result in jail time and a fine.

State Rep. Eddie Lucio III’s second attempt to strengthen the prohibition of the federally outlawed practice of shark finning was signed into law last year, making Texas the 10th state to target a black market trade that the Save our Seas Foundation estimates kills 73 million sharks annually. The conservation organization Oceana estimates that half of the shark-fin trade in the U.S. is funneled through Texas.

Finning is the wasteful practice of catching a shark, cutting off its fins, then discarding the dying fish. Officials say this is done mostly by profiteers taking advantage of a thriving Asian and domestic demand for shark-fin soup. Arguments heard when the bill was debated in Austin last year suggested the shark fin market in Texas has grown 240 percent since 2010, according to the Texas Legislature Online website.

Shark finning is illegal in many parts of the world, including the U.S. since 2000. But enforcement can be difficult. Curbing the practice demands a strenuous international effort, said special agent John O’Malley, with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Corpus Christi.

Read the full story at the Corpus Christie Caller Times

Canada’s fish stocks poorly tracked — report

June 30, 2016 — As the federal government prepares to make major decisions about whether or not to expand access to clam and shrimp stocks in Atlantic Canada, a group of marine researchers are urging better tracking and more accountability for one of the country’s most valuable resources.

The Canadian chapter of international ocean conservation organization Oceana recently completed the most comprehensive public study ever conducted on the state of Canada’s fish stocks. But, according to Halifax-based marine biologist and report co-author Susanna Fuller, it wasn’t easy.

“It should not be that hard to find management decisions, whether or not something has a management plan, and the state of a stock, and it is hard right now,” she said.

Compiling the report often came down to calling individual scientists to get the data required, Fuller said, and some data wasn’t available at all — they were only able to get information on 125 of the 165 stocks they looked at.

“It’s shocking that in Canada you can’t find anywhere a list of all the fisheries in Canada that is publicly available” she said.

“When you compare that to the U.S., all that information is online. You can find it, it’s easy, and there’s an obligation in the U.S. that they actually have to report to Congress on how the fish stocks are doing.”

Read the full story at the Herald News