Saving Seafood

Pro-seafood scientists push to knock mercury warnings out of US Dietary Guidelines

September 23, 2019 — More than a dozen seafood-loving scientists are working to make the message contained in the US’ next update of its “Dietary Guidelines for Americans” even stronger when it comes to encouraging consumption by pregnant mothers and young children.

Their lengthy research paper, which cites some 40 studies that paint a very positive picture of seafood, is expected to be published within weeks in a peer-reviewed journal. Immediately after, the group plans to share its meta-study with the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, another 20 academics that make recommendations to the US departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services (USDA and HHS), about what should go into the document that has the most influence when it comes establishing nutrition policy in the country.

The hope: USDA and HHS altogether strike the current document’s mercury warnings and also the suggestion that seafood consumption be limited to 12 ounces per week from the language.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Mexico becomes top US trade partner one year into China conflict

August 8, 2019 — It’s been one year, so how’s that trade war with China working out for the nation’s seafood industry?

As with farmers, there’s not much winning and ongoing tweeted skirmishes have global fish markets skittish.

The quick take is the 25 percent retaliatory tariff imposed by China on U.S. imports last July caused a 36 percent drop in U.S. seafood sales, valued at $340 million, according to an in-depth analysis of Chinese customs data by Undercurrent News.

“Chinese imports of US seafood fell from $1.3 billion in the 12 months prior to tariffs (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018), to $969 million in the 12 months after (July 1, 2018-June 30, 2019), underlining the heavy impact of weaker demand for U.S. seafood subject to tariffs, while poor catch of U.S. wild-caught seafood was also to blame,” the News wrote.

Read the full story at the Alaska Journal of Commerce

Groups praise updated US government seafood guidance

July 9, 2019 — U.S. seafood groups are lauding an updated government guidance that encourages pregnant and breastfeeding women and children to eat more seafood.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is updating its 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, released in 2017, which recommends that Americans eat at least eight ounces of seafood per week, based on a 2,000-calorie diet. While FDA did not increase the amount of seafood adults should eat, it is emphasizing the nutritional benefits – particularly to pregnant and breastfeeding women as well as children – of eating at least eight ounces of seafood weekly.

The agency also aims to help consumers who should limit their exposure to mercury choose from the many types of fish that are lower in mercury – “including ones commonly found in grocery stores, such as salmon, shrimp, pollock, canned light tuna, tilapia, catfish and cod,” the FDA said in a press release.

However, “it is important to note that women who might become pregnant, or who are pregnant or breastfeeding – along with young children – should avoid the few types of commercial fish with the highest levels of mercury listed on the chart,” FDA said.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

RAY HILBORN: Keep eating fish; it’s the best way to feed the world

June 3, 2019 — This week, the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation (NMSF) is convening Capitol Hill Ocean Week in Washington, D.C. Additionally, President Trump has declared the month of June “National Ocean Month” in recognition of the importance of the ocean to the economy, national security, and environment of the United States.

For the duration of Ocean Week, Saving Seafood will share materials related to the sustainable and economically vital U.S. commercial fishing and seafood industries, including information tied directly to events being organized as part of the NMSF conference.

To kick off the week, Saving Seafood is sharing the following article on the importance of eating fish to global food security and the environment. It was written by renowned fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn and published by the Oxford University Press Blog last week:

The famous ocean explorer, Sylvia Earle, has long advocated that people stop eating fish. Recently, George Monbiot made a similar plea in The Guardian – there’s only one way to save the life in our oceans, stop eating fish – which, incidentally, would condemn several million people to starvation.

In both cases, it’s facile reasoning. The oceans may suffer from many things, but fishing isn’t the biggest. Earle and Monbiot’s sweeping pronouncements lack any thought for the consequences of rejecting fish and substituting fish protein for what? Steak? That delicious sizzler on your plate carries the most appallingly large environmental costs regarding fresh water, grain production, land use, erosion, loss of topsoil, transportation, you name it.

Luckily for our planet, not everyone eats steak. You’re vegan, you say, and your conscience is clean. An admirable choice – so long as there aren’t too many of you. For the sake of argument and numbers, let us assume that we can substitute plant protein in the form of tofu, made from soybeans, for fish protein. Soybeans need decent land; in fact it would take 2.58 times the land area of England to produce enough tofu to substitute for no longer available fish. That extra amount of decent arable land just isn’t available – unless we can persuade Brazil, Ecuador and Columbia to cut down more of the Amazon rainforest. We would also add 1.71 times the amount of greenhouse gases that it takes to catch the fish.

And, again for the sake of argument, were we to substitute beef for fish, we would need 192.43 Englands to raise all that cattle and greenhouse gases would rocket to 42.4 times what they are from fishing.

But aren’t there alternatives that we can eat with a clean conscience? It depends. First, we must accept the inescapable truth that everyone has to eat. You and I and another few billion humans right down to the single cell organisms. The second inescapable truth arises from the first but is often ignored, is that there is no free lunch. The big variable in this business of eating is deciding the appropriate price to the environment.

Read the full opinion piece at the Oxford University Press (OUP) Blog

5 Innovations In Aquaculture Worth Catching On To Now

May 30, 2019 — Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing forms of food production in the world and the fastest growing sector in the livestock industry. In a $140 billion market, startups in seafood and aquaculture technology raised $193 million in 2016, which marked a 271% increase from the two years prior combined. The latest group of innovations in agtech could very well come from the water, as something we could call “aquatech.”

Yet there are many areas in this industry that are in dire need of innovation. Today, I will focus on my top 5: disease prevention, vaccine delivery, fish meal replacement, sustainability solutions (including closed-loop farming) and supply chain management.

Tremendous opportunity exists right now for those interested in investing in the solutions to these issues. Let’s take a look at the five key areas mentioned, and how several forward-thinking companies are meeting them head on.

Disease prevention is a critical aspect of aquaculture. Changing ocean temperatures and water quality make animals and plants more stressed and susceptible to disease, yet innovation is lacking in prevention compared to land-based agriculture. Terrestrial food animal farmers can easily deploy dozens of vaccines and preventive solutions, while aquaculture has less choice and significant delivery challenges (more on this below). Vaccines are still administered by hand, and there simply aren’t good preventive measures for many infestations.

Read the full story at Forbes

To create sustainable seafood industries, the United States needs a better accounting of imports and exports

May 28, 2019 — Global seafood trade nearly doubled in recent decades, fueled by decreasing transportation costs, advances in preservation and processing technologies, and open trade policies and is now among the most highly traded commodities. The United States is currently the world’s top seafood importer and among the top five exporters. It is often quoted that 90% of seafood consumed in the United States is imported, implying only 10% is of domestic origin. Over the past decade, this statistic has been widely shared and highlighted with more than 60 news articles quoting it annually since 2014, and it is increasingly used to support proposed policy changes. In recent years, the former US Secretary of State, current US Secretary of Commerce, and members of Congress have all cited the number to call for new policy measures addressing seafood sustainability and dependence on foreign seafood.

However, we argue that far more than 10%, likely 35–38%, of seafood consumed in the United States is of domestic origin. Precise estimates are difficult because of complex supply chains: for instance, some seafood caught in the United States is exported for processing and imported again under a different trade code for consumption in the United States. Such globalized supply chains are commonplace with many products relying on numerous foreign inputs and crossing international borders multiple times. For example, beef production between the United States and Mexico can involve multiple exchanges of calves, adults, and final products. These counterintuitive patterns are created by low tariffs and transportation costs that allow producers to optimize for favorable interest rates and low production costs across supply chains, keeping prices low for US consumers of beef, seafood, and countless other products.

Unfortunately, a dark cloud looms over seafood trade as tariffs recently imposed by the United States and retaliatory tariffs imposed by China and other countries hit US seafood exporters and importers, resulting in higher seafood prices for US consumers. Accounting for the realities of globalized supply chains is not only needed for better statistics that support evidence-based policy but is also key to supporting the US seafood industry, achieving sustainable production, and meeting consumer demand.

Read the full story from the National Academy of Sciences at Medium

US and UK urge parents to feed more seafood to children

May 28, 2019 — “How can we engender enthusiasm in children for eating seafood?” asked Karen Galloway – owner of KAGC Limited, a company specialized in strategic development and consumer insights, and a former employee at Seafish – in her Drummond Lecture at the Shellfish Association of Great Britain this week. “Many studies have shown that children who eat seafood regularly have increased IQ and a better quality of sleep, yet parents in the U.K. are failing to take these messages onboard.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) also happened to release a report this week identifying that children in the U.S. are not eating enough seafood and recommending that urgent action be taken to address this.

“It’s down to us as parents to influence our children, but don’t forget that children also influence parents, so we need to listen to them, and if they want to try seafood then let them, even if you don’t personally like it,” said Galloway.

She suggested keeping seafood comfortable, giving it some crunch, focusing on favorite flavors, putting it between bread, even taking it outdoors.

Advertising has a major influence on our lives and our food choices and Galloway pointed out that a “Kids Against Plastic” campaign has a massive reach, particularly because schools have taken the messaging onboard. However, advertising can also go wrong, and she warned that using cute characters to encourage kids into seafood could have the opposite effect.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

US kids aren’t eating enough seafood, study says; here’s how to add more

May 21, 2019 — The humble tuna sandwich, once a lunchbox staple, is making less frequent appearances in school cafeterias across the nation. American children are eating relatively little fish and shellfish in comparison to meat, according to a new report from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The report, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics, explores both the health benefits and the risks associated with eating what once swam in the sea while informing parents of the safest, most sustainable choices for their children.

Read the full story at CNN

Rabobank: Global seafood trade now worth USD 153 billion

May 7, 2019 — Seafood is one of the world’s most important food commodities and the trade continues to grow in line with rising demand and supply, but the dynamics of that trade are likely to change in the coming years, according to a new seafood trade map and report compiled by Rabobank International.

With an estimated traded value of USD 153 billion (EUR 136.5 billion) in 2017, increasing by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4 percent in the five-year period 2012-2017, the global seafood trade has been led by value growth rather than increased volumes. As Rabobank’s “World Seafood Map 2019” finds, the largest trade flow in value terms is still from Norway to the E.U., mainly consisting of salmon and some whitefish. This is followed by trade flows of salmon and crustaceans from Canada, and flows of whitefish and crustaceans from China to the U.S. market.

Rabobank Analyst Behyhan de Jong, who compiled the map, told SeafoodSource that in 2013, the average price of salmon in Norway was NOK 40 (USD 4.60, EUR 4.11) per kilogram, but this had increased by 50 percent to a level of NOK 60 (USD 6.91, EUR 6.16) in 2018. Meanwhile, the supply growth of shrimp has led to decreased prices, however, increased exports, “particularly from India and Ecuador,” have driven an increased crustacean trade globally, added de Jong.

Underpinned by the importance of localized production and the rising global demand for products, Rabobank expects seafood to maintain its standing as one of the most traded food commodities. Processing and re-exports are also important contributors to the traded volumes.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Replacing fish-based aquaculture feed with plant-based increases environmental impacts

April 24, 2019 — The sustainability of farmed seafood is directly tied to how efficiently the animals turn their feed into flesh, aka food for people. Farms that use more feed to grow the same amount of food are more impactful than others. But what also matters is the kind of feed given to cultured species. Typically, fish and shrimp are fed fishmeal, a kind of feed made from ground-up fish. Fishmeal can be made from the excess trimmings of fish processing, but there are several wild-caught fisheries that only serve to be reduced into fishmeal for aquaculture, e.g. Peruvian anchoveta. However, with a growing market for farmed seafood, fishmeal is in high demand.

This has raised fishmeal prices worldwide; so some shrimp farms, most of which are in developing countries, have begun to substitute fishmeal with plant-based feeds. A recent paper in Sustainability, Malcorps et al. 2019, set out to measure the environmental and social impact of substituting fishmeal for plant-based feed in farmed shrimp. Currently, shrimp feeds are 20-30% fishmeal, depending on the shrimp species being farmed—what would the environmental impact be if those percentages dropped?

Malcorps et al. 2019 built a computer model to assess the changes in land, freshwater, and fertilizer use caused by substituting a portion of fishmeal shrimp feed with plant-based feed. The model found that substituting fishmeal with plant-based feed led to a dramatic increase in terrestrial resource demand for the 5 crops commonly used for substitution (wheat, soybeans, rapeseed, pea, and corn). A maximum plant-based substitution in shrimp feed would lead to a 63% increase in freshwater use, 81% increase in land use, and an 83% increase in phosphorus (fertilizer) relative to the current levels in those 5 crops.

Further, and more concerning, is the notion that increased demand on those 5 crops would raise prices and seriously impact poor families that rely on them for food.

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW