Saving Seafood

COVID-19 accelerating negative trends for pangasius sector

May 28, 2020 — The coronavirus has delivered a large blow to Vietnam’s pangasius sector, which was already hurting before the pandemic.

Vietnam has not recorded any COVID-19 deaths through the crisis, and the entire country has only seen around 300 cases of the disease due to the extensive preventative measures it took beginning in January. But while most of social and economic activities in Vietnam have been brought back to a “new normal” since late April, disruptions in foreign markets, tangled supply chains, and suppressed demand have hurt its seafood export sector, upon which the country’s pangasius traders depend heavily.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

US tilapia demand falls

January 15, 2019 — Americans’ consumption of tilapia has fallen in recent years, while demand from Russia has surged, according to a new report.

While the United States is still the largest importer of tilapia, imports slid an estimated 10 KT in 2017, according to a Fact.MR report.

The U.S. trends mimic the global tilapia market, which declined 6 percent in the first two quarters of 2017, thanks to weakening consumer demand, Fact.MR found.

Consumers globally are buying other specialty fish and are more interested in pangasius, analysts said.

“A special palate for pangasius has been witnessed among seafood consumers worldwide,” Fact.MR said in the report. “The U.S. and China continue to remain the largest consumers of pangasius. Following the increasing domestic demand and lower prices of pangasius, Chinese tilapia farmers are adopting farming of other fish varieties including pangasius.”

Meanwhile, the Russian Federation imported 4 KT more tilapia in 2017 versus 2016.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

“Whitefish wars” driving Vietnam’s pangasius away from EU, US

February 7, 2018 — The rapid growth of Vietnam’s pangasius shipments has met with several markets barriers in the European Union and United States, where the fish is being gradually pushed away.

With similarity in texture and taste to other whitefish such as cod, sole, haddock, and pollock, but with much lower prices, pangasius from the Southeast Asia nation has quickly become a competitive alternative in the U.S. and E.U., Nguyen Tien Thong, an assistant professor of applied economics and marketing research at the University of Southern Denmark, told SeafoodSource.

But Thong, also a research associate with analytics firm Syntesa, with a specialty in price formation and consumer preference for seafood, said pangasius’ growth in the U.S. and E.U. markets has been actively thwarted by market barriers erected by both the industry’s competitors and erroneous reporting by mass media.

Vietnam’s pangasius exports were worth USD 1.78 billion (EUR 1.43 billion) last year, up 4.3 percent from 2016. But the export value to the U.S. and E.U. fell 11 percent and 22.3 percent, respectively, recently released data from Vietnam Association of Seafood Producers and Exporters (VASEP) revealed.

Three “wars” against pangasius

European and Vietnamese seafood experts have collectively created a new term for the campaigns surrounding pangasius, calling them the ”whitefish wars.”

The most recent round of this war broke out in early 2017, when a television segment on Spain’s Cuatro channel claimed pangasius farming was polluting the Mekong Delta. Two weeks later, French retail giant Carrefour decided to suspend sales of Vietnamese pangasius in all its stores in Belgium, France, and Spain. Carrefour attributed its decision to “the doubts that persist about the adverse impacts that pangasius farms have on the environment.”

The Aquaculture Stewardship Council responded to Carrefour’s move with a statement insisting the facts did not support Carrefour’s pangasius decision, and VASEP said repeatedly that the Cuatro report provided distorted information. Seeking to help combat the growing ”PR crisis,” 20 of Vietnam’s leading pangasius exporters joined together to create a market development fund in June 2017. But the rebuttals appeared largely ineffective at halting the negative impact on pangasius sales.

However, Thong argues that the “whitefish war” began as early as 2000, and started in the United States. In that year, about 90 percent of the catfish imported by the U.S. was from Vietnam. Feeling threatened, U.S. catfish growers and wholesalers started a campaign to curtail imports of Vietnamese pangasius into the country.

For years, pangasius faced high anti-dumping duties imposed by the U.S government, and a push for increased inspections. After a protracted political debate, in August 2017, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) began inspecting all imported pangasius. Only a few months after the decision, only two of 14 Vietnamese pangasius exporters are still shipping pangasius to the U.S., according to VASEP.

In the E.U., backlash against pangasius started in late 2010, when the World Wildlife Fund placed the fish on the “red list,” effectively branding it a no-buy for environmentally conscientious consumers, Thong said. The attempt, which Thong termed as the second “war,” was made after the fish became a significant substitute fish to other whitefish raised in many European countries.

A few years later, WWF reversed course on pangasius, giving its backing to all Vietnamese-produced pangasius awarded Aquaculture Stewardship Council certification.

Further controversy was ignited in 2011 when Member of the European Parliament Struan Stevenson, senior vice president of the European Parliament’s Fisheries Committee, attacked the pangasius’ environmental, social, and safety credentials during an address to the European Parliament.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

 

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.

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

Pangasius water content causes uproar

November 30, 2015 — It seems as though the Vietnamese government’s decision at the end of last year to delay implementation of the regulation to limit glazing and humidity (added water) levels on pangasius exports could hit sales to the EU hard.

In mid-November, a leading Dutch newspaper Telegraaf picked up on a television program shown in the Netherlands in which it was claimed that pangasius fillets imported from Vietnam on sale in Dutch supermarkets were found to contain up to 30 percent water.

Comments from 140 consumers who had purchased pangasius reacting to the article ranged from “nothing you would eat” to something that cannot be politely translated into English.

As reported in SeafoodSource on 6 January, pangasius exporters had objected to the regulation, Decree No. 36, which was due to come into force on 1 January, saying it would cost them business.

Decree 36 would have restricted glazing on frozen pangasius fillets, to no more than 10 percent and humidity to 83 percent of the product weight. As a result of their petition, the introduction of the regulation was postponed for a year.

While the exporters agreed that these restrictions would help to increase the quality and image of Vietnam’s pangasius abroad, they said they wanted more time to measure the impact on their customers. They were adding water to the fish in order to meet their customers’ requirements for prices below the then quoted USD 3.40 (EUR 3.18) per kilogram.

Read the full story at Seafood Source