Saving Seafood

U.S. consumers sue Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea, StarKist over ‘dolphin-safe’ tuna claims

May 14, 2019 — U.S. consumers sued Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea and StarKist, accusing the country’s three major packaged-tuna brands of deceiving them into thinking their tuna is caught only through “dolphin-safe” fishing practices.

The proposed class actions filed on Monday said the defendants employ fishing techniques that kill or harm dolphins, and do not always use safer, costlier pole-and-line and other methods used by such rivals as Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s.

The consumers said this makes the defendants’ dolphin-safe labels false and misleading, violating the laws of several U.S. states including California, Florida, New Jersey and New York.

They also said StarKist violated federal racketeering law through its alleged dealings with foreign fishing companies.

Concern about dolphin safety “makes tuna fish consumers no different from Hindus attributing zero value to beef products, or vegans attributing zero value to animal products, or vegetarians attributing zero value to meat, fish, and poultry,” the complaints said.

StarKist said it does not discuss pending litigation, but would not buy tuna “caught in association with dolphins.” It also condemned “indiscriminate fishing methods” that trap dolphins along with the intended catch.

Read the full story at Reuters

An international airplane feud could crimp one of Alaska’s most lucrative fisheries

May 3, 2019 — A new twist in a decade-long trade war over airplanes could crimp one of Alaska’s most lucrative fisheries: The European Union is threatening new import taxes on Alaska pollock.

The tariffs stem from a feud over government support for the American company Boeing and European company Airbus. Earlier this year, the World Trade Organization issued separate rulings that said both companies have received illegal subsidies.

In response, both the U.S. and EU last month proposed tariffs on billions of dollars worth of the other’s exports.

The potential effects underscore the global nature of the market for Alaska fish products, of which Europe and Asia are big consumers.

The proposed EU tariffs on pollock would hit the largest market for fillets of the Bering Sea whitefish. European processors turn blocks of frozen pollock into fish sticks and fish pies; more than $250 million in exports go to Europe each year, or a little less than 20% of the $1.4 billion value of the total annual pollock catch.

Read the full story at KTOO

Europe’s USD 20 billion tariff countermeasure proposal puts US seafood in the firing line

April 18, 2019 — A public consultation on a preliminary list of products from the United States on which the European Union may take countermeasures, in the context of the ongoing Boeing dispute at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), has been published by the European Commission (EC).

The proposed tariffs are in response to the long-running dispute over subsidies paid by the United States to airplane-maker Boeing and by Europe to Airbus.

A range of U.S. exports into the E.U. are covered by Brussels’ list – from aircrafts to chemicals and agri-foods. In total, these goods are estimated at around USD 20 billion (EUR 17.7 billion).

In terms of seafood, the many products currently listed for additional import duties if they are originating in the United States include frozen Atlantic, Danube, and Pacific salmon, frozen albacore and yellowfin tuna, frozen cod and Alaska pollock, frozen and live lobster, frozen coldwater shrimp, scallops, and squid.

In a statement, E.U. Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said that European companies must be able to compete on fair and equal terms.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

China faces big decision on WTO reform deal

March 28, 2019 — The pressure is on this month as negotiators seek to find common ground and to advance the cause of a World Trade Organization agreement on fishery subsidies by the end of the year.

The WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo has said subsidies by member states for fuel have contributed to overfishing, and illegal and unregulated fishing. He called it “one of the important issues of our time.”

An estimated USD 20 billion (EUR 17.8 billion) is paid out annually to subsidize the cost of fuel that allows vessels to operate thousands of miles from home. The bulk of the subsidies are paid out by a handful of nations, and around 85 percent of the figure goes to large-scale industrial fleets, rather than smaller near-shore artisanal fisheries.

The pressure was ramped up in 2015 when all United Nations member states agreed Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 to eliminate or prohibit harmful fishery subsidies by 2020. The goal was a priority for developing countries depending on the sea for protein.

There are some reasons for optimism – the WTO director general told a WTO plenary in February that progress had been made in the negotiations among the technocrats. But he said now is time for high-level political commitment to get the deal done.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

As pressure from WTO mounts, China faces decision on fishing subsidies

January 25, 2019 — Negotiations amongst World Trade Organization member nations over the elimination of fisheries subsidies have intensified, according to a WTO announcement made at the tail end of 2018. WTO member states face a mandate of achieving an agreement by the end of 2019, in time to announce the agreement at the 2020 Ministerial Conference in Kazakhstan.

One of the linchpins of any deal will be China, the world’s biggest fishing country by volume. Thus far, China has shown a willingness to negotiate, even making concessions to limit the country’s international fishing fleet to its 2016 level and to reduce fuel subsidies for its trawlers by 40 percent on 2015 levels.

But China’s cut to trawler subsidies only applies only to those vessels engaged in fishing within China’s own waters – not abroad. And broadly, China’s general alignment with the agreement stands in stark contrast to its continued efforts to build giant processing and distribution hubs for its distant-water catches.

Chinese Vice Minister for Agriculture Qu Dong Yu, who was in Argentina for the last WTO Ministerial Conference in 2017, appears to be straddling both sides of the issue. While he negotiated the concessions on fishery subsidies (though a larger agreement was not reached due to objections from India and China over the scale and timing of subsidy cuts), he also appears to support China’s distant-water fishing efforts. While he was in Argentina, he showed support for the industry by touring vessels owned by Shanghai Fisheries Group, Dalian Hua Feng and the well-known fishing and seafood distribution conglomerate Zhejiang Da Yang Shi Jia (Ocean Family). The vessels included red shrimp catch-processors and squid liners.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Data noose tightening on “handful” of nations responsible for overfishing

January 24, 2019 — Tony Long is the CEO of Global Fishing Watch, a freely accessible and near real-time digital map of the global ocean aimed at exposing illegal fishing. With Japan, Peru, and Indonesia all recently agreeing to share data with Global Fishing Watch as part of an effort to combat illegal fishing, Long is now pushing for more countries to contribute data. Additionally, Long’s office is working with governments and NGOs to make the Global Fishing Watch map more complete and allow the tracking of vessels guilty of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. 

SeafoodSource: How important are the ongoing World Trade Organization negotiations on eliminating fishing and fuel subsidies in the fight against IUU fishing?

Long: Cutting or eliminating fuel subsidies are an important fisheries management measure because … fuel subsidies are part of the overcapacity equation – especially for distance fleets and also high-seas fishing. People following the negotiations closely tell me that there are disagreements within the WTO as to whether this is the case. It is vital that this matter can be resolved during the negotiations.

SeafoodSource: You point to a “handful of wealthy countries” as being culpable in IUU fishing. Is this a corporate or a government problem?

Long: It’s both, but ultimately, governments are the ones that allow IUU fishing practices in their fleets to continue. There are many factors beyond harmful subsidies, including weak penalties, poor enforcement and licensing flags of convenience that allow IUU fishing to occur. That said, individual corporations also have huge responsibility. In particular, they can help drive out practices such as bonded labor and slavery at sea, they can demand cleared provenance to their catch by demanding complete and proper tracking of vessels, catch documentation and open licensing as part of their contract with the supply chain. The recent green card given to Thailand is a good example of government, corporations, and NGOs working together to improve a dire situation.

SeafoodSource: According to an article in Science Advances, “On the high seas, 97 percent of all such fishing effort detectable by AIS is conducted by vessels flagged to higher-income nations. Dominance of this high-seas industrial fishing effort at the level of flag nation was highly uneven. The vast majority (86 percent) of this effort can be attributed to only five higher-income countries/entities, in rank order high to low: China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Spain.” Have rich countries also been willing to work with you and to share information?

Long: We have a [memorandum of understanding] signed with Japan to improve research and understanding of IUU fishing in the North Pacific and share data. We have staff in Korea and Taiwan to take forward the benefits of transparency. [And] we are in the very early stages of working with a coalition of European Union-based NGOs to look at the E.U. fleet and coastal states where [those vessels] fish. We are engaging with NGOs and foundations interested in China in order to identify a strategy on working with China.

Read the full Seafood Source

Ongoing China-U.S. Trade War Likely to Bring Changes to Global Seafood Industry

November 20, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Chinese seafood exports to America have grown this year, despite the trade war. However, the trade war with the U.S. could have global impacts, writer Amy Zhong reports from China.

Chinese seafood exports to the U.S. were US $3.22 billion during 2017, while the exports have risen by 5.75 percent to reach US $2.161 billion within the first eight months of this year compared with the same period last year. But things are starting to shift. The U.S. used to be the largest market for Chinese tilapia, but not any more.

Against this backdrop, a seafood processing seminar was hosted in Dalian in October and participants gathered to talk about issues like global seafood trading and brand building.

China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 created great opportunities for its aquatic processing industry but it has begun to shift attention to the domestic market with the recession of foreign markets, trade conflicts and increasingly great domestic demand. Thus, the Dalian seminar was of great importance in areas such as opportunities and threats the aquatic industry encounters in domestic and foreign markets.

The country used to rely on foreign buyers in its seafood sales from 1981 to 2005, Cui He, the president for China Aquatic Products Processing and Marketing Alliance, was quoted as saying in a recent FishFirst article. Its export ballooned from 2005 to 2013, while its imports also grew between 2013 and 2017. The country’s seafood trading volume exceeded 10 million tons in 2017, which makes it a market larger than any other in the world, according to the story. That means an increasing number of aquatic suppliers have placed more importance on this market with great potential thanks to its steady export opportunities and rapid import increase. Countries like Norway, Canada and Australia have said in the past that China is the main target in their seafood promotions.

Japan, the U.S. and Europe are the three main buyers of China’s seafood, according to the country’s statistics, while other important buyers include South Korea and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Japan ranks first among all of China’s seafood buyers while the U.S. also is significant, buying a lot of China’s white shrimp and tilapia.

Although there seems to be no drastic change to the global seafood market at present, China has played a role of great importance in the processing industry. The trade war does take a toll on some export-oriented seafood companies in Dalian and Qingdao, but it also pushes them to upgrade their systems. In short, more seafood trading stimulates the development of China’s seafood processing sector.

China’s statistics have shown a reduction in China’s reliance on U.S. seafood buyers since 2014. The U.S. anti-dumping policies on shrimp and catfish have influenced China’s processors since the mid-2000s. Lately, the two countries have become competitors in sourcing such seafood as Ecuador’s white shrimp after 2014, with Ecuador selling more white shrimp to China recently. China also has purchased more basa from Vietnam than the U.S. as well.

Recently, the U.S. has removed cod, pink salmon and pollock from its import list that are subject to higher tariffs. Cod has been delivered to China for further processing before being re-exported to Europe, the article said. At the same time, tariffs are having less effect on China’s seafood purchases from the U.S. than its sales to the U.S. Tilapia sales have hurt the most: The U.S. was once the largest buyer, but due to the trade war, it is now looking to other countries for substitutes.

SeafoodNews reporter Amy Zhong also writes that Chinese trade journals say that the U.S.-China trade war could also change the global seafood industry. Seafood businesses worldwide are uncertain whether China can maintain its status as the seafood processing center, since some companies have been forced to relocate to other regions, like Africa. However, China has begun developing business in more countries included in its One Belt, One Road initiative, which in turn has encouraged China to upgrade its seafood industry.

Wang Zhanlu, the director for WTO Division of Agricultural Trade Promotion Center, was quoted as saying countries usually control the agricultural trade more strictly with higher tariffs, but China is comparatively open and is second only to the U.S. in terms of its agricultural imports. In 2017, seafood ranks first in the country’s agricultural exports and accounts for 27 percent of the country’s agricultural export total. Meanwhile, seafood imports account for about 17 percent of its imports.

Zhong writes that according to seafood trade expert Leng Chuanhui, Japan consumes about 8.4 million tons of seafood every year, while it produces around 4.7 million tons on its own. Most of Japan’s seafood are wild harvests, while some are raised in fresh- or saltwater aquaculture. The country buys about 3.7 million tons of seafood from other countries, while its main export markets are Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland, while 14.2 percent of its seafood import is from China.

Professor Qin from Guangdong Ocean University was quoted as saying that oysters have also become more popular in China. Global production was only 5.32 million tons worldwide in 2017, while the trading volume was about 70,000 tons. But China’s production rose by 4.7 percent in 2017 compared with that of 2016 to reach 4.87 million tons. Its oyster market value grew by 25 percent to reach 25.4 billion yuan (~$3.7 billion USD) that year. Most of the Fujian, Guangdong and Shandong oysters are currently destined for barbecues, but likely will be more finely processed in the future.

This story originally appeared on Seafood News, it is republished here with permission.

 

Government subsidies serving to prop up destructive high-seas fishing: study

June 8, 2018 — Much of the fishing that takes place in international waters would be unprofitable without the billions of dollars in subsidies pumped in by governments to sustain the ecologically destructive industry, a recent study has found.

International waters, or the high seas, are not governed by any one international body or agency, and account for nearly two-thirds of the ocean’s surface. There is currently no comprehensive management structure in place to protect the marine life that relies on them.

Researchers poring over information for fishing in these zones in 2014, the most recent year for which complete datasets are available, concluded that 54 percent of high-seas fishing would be in the red if not for governments covering some of the industry’s costs.

In their study published June 6 in the journal Science Advances, the researchers noted that labor exploitation and underreported catches could also explain how some operators could afford to keep fishing in the high seas, where species like tuna are often overfished, and migratory sharks — 44 percent of which are threatened species — are often killed as bycatch.

“While our analysis is for a single year, the slight increase in high seas catch and revenue, coupled with the high and constant price of fuel between 2010-2014, suggest that our estimate of profits is likely to be representative of, or slightly higher than, the average state during the first half of this decade,” the researchers wrote.

Read the full story at Mongabay News

Dan Webster Champions Sustainable Shark and Fisheries Trade Act

March 21, 2018 — U.S. Rep. Dan Webster, R-Fla., is leading three other members of the Florida delegation in wanting the U.S. Commerce Department to increase regulation on the international shark trade.

Last week, Webster, who is the vice chairman on the U.S. House Water Power and Oceans Subcommittee, unveiled the “Sustainable Shark and Fisheries Trade Act” which modifies the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act. The proposal has support from both sides of the aisle with three members of the Florida delegation–Republican U.S. Reps. Gus Bilirakis and Bill Posey and Democrat U.S. Rep. Darren Soto–cosponsoring the proposal.

Webster’s office noted “the bill preserves U.S. commercial fishing jobs, a key component of our state and nation’s economy” and, taking a page from the World Trade Organization’s process for certifying importing shrimp, would have the U.S. Secretary of Commerce establish a three year certifying process for nations exporting shark products to the U.S.

Read the full story at Sunshine State News

 

Domestic and global fishing issues take center stage

December 15, 2017 — The House Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday advanced out of committee revisions to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (H.R. 200 (115)) governing marine fishing and management in federal waters. The law is intended to prevent overfishing, but several conservation groups and Democrats are critical of the way it was written. Only three out of 12 amendments to the bill passed, and the bill moved out of committee on a party-line vote, your host reports.

What lawmakers said: Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who voted against it, called it a plan to “deregulate our oceans and fish everywhere until there’s nothing left.” He added: “Like most of the bills advanced by the leadership of this committee, this bill is extreme and has no future in the Senate.” Many environmental groups also issued strongly worded statements condemning the bill.

GOP leaders, for their part, took issue with the idea that it was being rushed. “The idea we are jamming this through without ample opportunity is false,” said Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who noted that he had been working on this legislation for the past five years. “I recognize this bill is not perfect yet.”

What about fishing criminals? After it was clear it wouldn’t pass, Grijalva pulled back his amendment to address repeat offenders in the fisheries industry — such as Carlos “the Codfather” Rafael who last month started serving a federal prison sentence for violating federal fishing regulations. Although Young did not support this specific amendment, he and other committee members said they would work with Grijalva to revisit the issue.

Read the full story at Politico