Saving Seafood

Small-scale fisheries threatened—shared management, communication key to success

August 7, 2018 –Intertidal ecosystems and the small-scale fisheries they support are an important part of coastal economies, environments, and cultures. Globally, fisheries such as the soft-shell clams (Mya arenaria), face multiple stresses related to climate change, invasive species and unsustainable land use.

In a paper published in Ocean and Coastal Management, University of Maine researchers and colleagues show how co-management approaches—based on shared responsibility for resource management among individuals and institutions—can build resilience to socio-environmental change by strengthening the use of science in decision making and promoting adaptive capacities such as learning and leadership.

“We see an urgent need to find ways to wade into the complicated and sometimes messy work of co-management as a space for bringing differences together in productive, creative and equitable ways,” says lead author Bridie McGreavy, assistant professor in the Department of Communication and Journalism and faculty member in the Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions.

Co-management’s commitment to shared responsibility points to the important role of communication, and requires that people share information, learn from each other, and collaborate.

“The communication aspect of shellfish management is critical to its success,” McGreavy adds. “Our paper demonstrates how taking an engaged approach to research—creating in-depth partnerships to design research that can be used for decision making—can help strengthen co-management.”

In addition to environmental threats, these also face complex social issues, many of which are related to poverty and limited access to educational opportunities. However, small-scale fishing communities in Maine and around the world are also rising to meet these challenges.

Read the full story at PHYS.org

Major US food companies form sustainability alliance

July 18, 2018 — Unilever United States, Danone North America, Nestle USA, and Mars Incorporated have joined together to create the Sustainable Food Policy Alliance (SFPA), a new advocacy group that aims to benefit fishing communities and the environment.

The SFPA seeks to advance policies that are beneficial for the environment, while accounting for the specific business imperatives of its supply chains, including fishing communities, farmers, ranchers, and other producers.

The formation of the new organization was announced by Danone North America CEO Mariano Lozano; Mars Wrigley Confectionery Americas President Tracey Massey; Nestlé USA Chairman and CEO Steve Presley; and Amanda Sourry, president of Unilever North America.

“As an Alliance, we commit first and foremost to leading by example. Each member company has independently proven a willingness to advocate for the long-term interests of the people who farm and supply our raw materials, and people who make and consume our products,” they said.

The manufacturers said they have already been aggressive in sourcing sustainable seafood and are at the forefront of human rights issues, including forced labor in the seafood industry.

Nestlé, which purchased around 134,000 tons of seafood in 2017, formed an Action Plan in 2015 to tackle Thai forced labor practices, which it called “unacceptable.”

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Rep. Rob Bishop Statement on President Trump’s Executive Order on Ocean Policy

June 20, 2018 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah), today issued the following statement in reaction to President Trump’s executive order promoting a healthy ocean economy and engagement with marine, science, and technology industries. The action reverses the previous administration’s overreach of the nation’s ocean policy.

“Today’s announcement of President Trump repealing and replacing the bureaucratic, overreaching policy created under the previous administration puts our country’s ocean policy back on the right track. Over the past 10 years, the Committee has held dozens of hearings on heavy-handed Obama-era policies and the negative impacts they have caused on both the nation’s oceans and agricultural industries. Earlier this month, the Committee heard from Americans whose livelihoods depend on a healthy ocean economy and the prior administration’s ocean policy was one of their main challenges. President Trump’s action will help the health of our oceans and ensure local communities impacted by ocean policy have a seat at the table.”

Visit the House Committee on Natural Resources’ website here

New Ray Hilborn study investigates environmental impact of aquaculture

June 13, 2018 — A new study from fisheries expert Ray Hilborn compares the environmental impact of various forms of animal husbandry.

The study, which appeared in “Frontiers in Ecology and The Environment,” is an all-encompassing look on how animal protein production affects the environment.

“From the consumers’ standpoint, choice matters. If you’re an environmentalist, what you eat makes a difference,” Hilborn said. “We found there are obvious good choices and really obvious bad choices.”

Hilborn, a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, has been working on the study for almost a decade. The study investigates the impacts of animal-rearing including energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, fertilizer and other excess nutrient exposure to the environment, and emissions of substances that can cause acid rain.

The study found industrial beef and catfish farming to be among the most environmentally costly meat and seafood production methods. On the other hand, farmed mollusks and small wild-caught fish pose the least amount of environmental impact.

Because constant water circulation is needed to raise species like shrimp, tilapia, and catfish, livestock production generally uses less energy than aquaculture. But at the same time, beef production results in emissions of large amounts of methane. As a result, both catfish aquaculture and beef production contributes 20 times more greenhouse gases than farmed mollusks or farmed salmon and chicken.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Survey finds Americans put premium on Alaska seafood

June 13, 2018 — New research has found that nearly 40 percent of Americans would pay more for Alaska seafood. With the Alaska salmon selling season now underway, that’s music to the ears of retailers and restaurants looking to grow their profit margins.

The consumer survey was completed by the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) and research firm Technomic. The online survey, completed in January 2018, registered the opinions of 4,000 American seafood consumers over the age of 18.

The survey found that 39 percent agree that they would pay more for Alaska seafood. For those willing to pay more, 71 percent said they would be willing to pay at least 10 percent more, while 51 percent said they would pay at least a five percent premium. The top reasons respondents said they support Alaska seafood is that it is a “pure source of healthy proteins,” followed by the fact that the industry supports American jobs, is sustainable, and is made up of family fishermen.

“We continue to feature the Alaska sustainability story through images of fishing in Alaska. It is clear through the research that American jobs [are] an important piece of the sustainability [and] quality story of Alaska seafood,” Victoria Parr, domestic marketing director for ASMI, told SeafoodSource.

The survey also found that restaurants serving Alaska seafood benefit from increased consumer loyalty. The survey found that 54 percent of patrons will return in the near future to the restaurants that serve Alaska seafood, and 48 percent will recommend the establishment to their family and friends.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Report: UK buyers fail to support coastal communities amid ‘sustainability’ concerns

June 13, 2018 — The lack of sufficient work on monitoring and certifying UK fish and seafood supply chain’s sustainability forces the country’s buyers to go overseas for species that could be sourced locally, according to Sustainable Fish Cities.

The report, also published in the Independent, claims UK fishers are losing out on markets worth an estimated £62 million because companies are buying-in sustainable fish from overseas, said Sustainable Fish Cities, pointing out that UK species not considered sustainable include some scallops, nephrops, seabass and halibut.

UK fish buyers are importing more sustainable varieties of fish traditionally caught in British waters from the US, Turkey, Greenland and South America rather than risk selling fish that is unsustainably caught from UK waters, Sustainable Fish Cities claimed.

“What a travesty that our fishers are losing out on so much business. Caterers in the UK want to buy UK fish and support our coastal communities but for some species they have no choice but to import from across the world to ensure that what they buy is sustainable,” said Ruth Westcott, co-ordinator of Sustainable Fish Cities.

“The government simply hasn’t invested enough in research, data collection, and monitoring of fishing vessels. Even if boats are operating sustainably, if there isn’t a good enough understanding of the fish stocks and impact on the environment the fishery can’t achieve sustainability certification or be considered ok to eat according to the Marine Conservation Society.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

A closer look at the environmental costs of food

June 13, 2018 — The relationship between food and environment is one of the most important conservation issues in the anthropocene. Currently, agriculture uses 38% of the world’s land and accounts for over 90% of freshwater use. Farming and food production has been, and continues to be, the largest driver of habitat and biodiversity loss on the planet.

But, not all foods have the same environmental cost. Comparing and quantifying environmental impacts of different foods is important to guide agricultural policy and empower consumer choice. A paper published today is the most comprehensive comparison of the environmental impacts of meat and fish production—its findings can better inform personal food choices and, hopefully, will help decision-makers devise better food policies that account for environmental cost. Lead author of the study, Ray Hilborn said, “I think this is one of the most important things I’ve ever done…Policymakers need to be able to say, ‘There are certain food production types we need to encourage, and others we should discourage.’”

The paper used 148 different life-cycle assessment papers (also know as “cradle-to-grave” analysis) to look at environmental impacts associated with every aspect of animal protein as food. Researchers quantified 4 different kinds of major environmental impacts caused by food production: (1) electricity/energy use; (2) greenhouse gas emissions; (3) potential for nutrient runoff—this causes most of the world’s water quality issues; (4) potential to cause air pollution.

By standardizing environmental impacts per 40g/protein produced researchers were able to compare different kinds of animal proteins. Basically, the paper answers the question: what are the environmental costs of producing a hamburger patty’s worth of protein from different animal sources?

Read the full story at Sustainable Fisheries UW

Scallops, oysters, mollusks better for environment than other proteins, study finds

June 11, 2018 — When it comes to the environmental impact of multiple animal protein sources, small wild-caught fish and farmed mollusks, such as scallops, oysters and mussels, are stars, says a study to be published Monday in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

The study, led by Ray Hilborn, a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, is based on nearly a decade of analysis in which the researchers reportedly reviewed hundreds of published life-cycle assessments for various types of animal protein production and chose 148 to focus on, according to a summary.

The researchers used four metrics to compare the protein sources, including: energy use; greenhouse gas emissions; the potential to contribute excess nutrients to the environment; and the potential to emit substances that contribute to acid rain. They compared environmental impacts across food types by using a standard amount of 40 grams of protein — roughly the size of an average hamburger patty, and the daily recommended protein serving.

“I think this is one of the most important things I’ve ever done,” Hiborn said. “Policymakers need to be able to say, ‘There are certain food production types we need to encourage, and others we should discourage.'”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Hundreds of seafood stakeholders heading to Spain to tackle top sustainability issues

June 11, 2018 — Barcelona, Spain will play host to more than 100 speakers and even more attendees from across the sustainable seafood movement for this year’s SeaWeb Seafood Summit, occurring from 18 to 21 June at the Hotel Arts.

Over the course of up to five days, summit speakers and registered attendees – including global representatives from the seafood industry, the conservation community, retail/foodservice, academia, government and the media – will convene to learn, network, and problem solve, said Diversified Communications, which produces the summit in partnership with SeaWeb.

“This year, we’ve expanded interactive formats across more sessions,” said Brenna Hensley, event director for Diversified Communications. “This forum vastly benefits from wide participation and input from diverse stakeholders.”

The educational sessions planned for the summit are formatted as “engagement-driven panels or workshops,” explained Diversified, and aim to unpack and troubleshoot challenging and emerging issues within the seafood sustainability oceanscape.

The event will feature several plenary and panel discussions, including the opening session set to take place on Tuesday, 19 June at 11:15 a.m.: “Is Spain Really as Important as the Global Seafood Sustainability Movement Believes?” During this kickoff plenary, “panelists will examine the key factors that explain and drive the success of the global seafood sustainability movement through the lens of global consumer appetite for mature (whitefish, small shrimps, salmon, cold water crabs) and non-mature (octopus and squid) markets,” Diversified said in a press release.

Such discussions will continue to heat up on Wednesday, 20 June, when the plenary “Building Socially Responsible Seafood Supply Chains Through Worker Voice,” is scheduled to take place. The session will involve a “dynamic, multi-stakeholder “ perspective on the concept of worker voice, covering why worker voice is important and how to incorporate it into seafood supply chains.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Seafood sustainability is focus of industry meeting

June 8, 2018 — Restaurateurs from New England and Aquaculturalists from as far west as California exchanged their stories and theories on how to build sustainability with the seafood industry at the Harborside Campus on Johnson and Wales on Wednesday.

Then Anna Malek Mercer, the executive director of the Commercial Fisheries Research Foundation, stepped to the front of the room with a much simpler solution.

“American seafood is sustainable seafood,” Malek Mercer said. “This is American wild harvest. This is also American grown. Really bringing that message to the forefront I think is something that is really easy to communicate.”

Having earned a doctorate in Fisheries Oceanography from the University of Rhode Island’s Graduate School of Oceanography, Malek Mercer pointed to the fact that the commercial finishing industry faces more government regulations — that promote sustainability — than the pharmaceutical industry. Overall, the fishing industry faces 13,218 regulations, seventh most in the United States, and just behind air traffic, which has 13,307.

Malek Mercer said the regulations have led to 98 percent increase in fish stock sustainability index since 1976 and 39 stocks have been rebuilt from low levels since 2000.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard Times