tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22704110859458926022024-03-12T16:08:26.042-07:00How sustainable are eco-certified fisheries?A blog devoted to eco-certification of wild marine capture fisheries. Are these fisheries truly sustainable? Does eco-certification keep up with the latest stock assessment results? Does the public have an adequate opportunity to contest the eco-certification decisions?Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-35111321056426148492014-01-15T10:25:00.000-08:002014-01-15T15:21:58.396-08:00The Last PostThis Blog has been going for a couple of years now and it would be nice to think it has achieved something - at least some sober second thought and discussion regarding the certification of fisheries as "sustainable" even when the evidence isn't really there to support that designation.<br />
<br />
Inevitably the Blog has focussed on the actions and activities of the Marine Stewardship Council. Over the period of this Blog MSC has grown in scope and influence and there has been a corresponding increase in the number of fisheries gaining MSC certification. There has also been an increase in the number of controversial certifications.<br />
<br />
Environmental groups have challenged many of these controversial certifications on scientific grounds but MSC has generally been dismissive of any criticism.<br />
<br />
To succeed MSC has to pander to some degree to the interests of the fishing industry and large corporations. How much they do so is up to them. How much value we place on MSC sustainability certification is up to us.<br />
<br />
Fishyfellow signing off....Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-38318752219603332672013-12-20T05:28:00.001-08:002013-12-20T05:33:53.112-08:00MSC – Controlling the medium controlling the message?<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Although technically a non-profit, the Marine Stewardship
Council is a for-profit organization – the profit being used to expand the scope
and influence of the Council.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A new area of expansion is the creation of an online
fisheries science research library.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.msc.org/newsroom/news/msc-launches-fisheries-science-research-library">http://www.msc.org/newsroom/news/msc-launches-fisheries-science-research-library</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The “library” is essentially a new eJournal called “MSC
Science Series”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It will be published
biannually and the first volume is now online. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.msc.org/business-support/science-series/volume-01-1">http://www.msc.org/business-support/science-series/volume-01-1</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The MSC Science Series provides a medium for publishing the
results of MSC funded research related to the MSC standard for sustainable
fisheries and marine ecosystems.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
review and editorial panels comprise mainly MSC staffers and insiders.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fisheries and marine ecosystem sciences are already well
served by a number of online scientific journals, both those with a
long-standing tradition in paper form and a number of recently added eJournals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These journals pride themselves on having independent and
objective peer review processes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is
questionable whether there is a real need for a new eJournal, particularly one
in which the review and editorial process is tightly controlled by the hosting
organization.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Informed criticism of the MSC process has come mainly from
fisheries scientists and ecologists who have questioned the data, methods and
results of some MSC sustainability determinations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A number of these have been published in independent
peer reviewed journals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In contrast,
there have been few papers in support of the MSC approach written by scientists
who are completely independent of the MSC process. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rather than working on establishing the scientific
legitimacy of its data, methods and results through the existing independent
peer reviewed literature, the MSC is hoping to further its cause by creating a
quasi-scientific medium in which the message will be closely controlled and favourable to the MSC.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In some ways this is similar to another MSC institution, the
quasi-legal Objections Procedure in which “Independent Adjudicators” hired by
MSC to adjudicate on objections to MSC sustainability determinations invariably decide in favor of the MSC and against the objectors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ironically, the objectors are typically groups and
associations of scientists and environmentalists citing information published
in the peer reviewed scientific literature!<o:p></o:p></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>388</o:Words>
<o:Characters>2214</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Fishy</o:Company>
<o:Lines>18</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>5</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2597</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-83940931087966145862013-12-06T13:02:00.000-08:002013-12-06T13:07:24.400-08:00 Newfoundland Grand Bank shrimp still sustainable?<div class="MsoNormal">
Is the shrimp fishery on the Grand Bank of Newfoundland
being sustainable managed?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
MSC thinks so.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It has
been MSC Certified Sustainable for a number of years and products are entitled
to carry the MSC approved blue sustainable fish logo as an incentive for
environmentally aware consumers to buy the product at premium prices.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, since 2009 NAFO (North Atlantic Fisheries
Organization) fisheries managers have set TACs higher than those recommended by
NAFO scientists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In addition, Denmark in
respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland, unhappy with their share of the
TAC, set their own additional quota in several years, a unilateral action
allowed under NAFO rules.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The latest incident is the 2013 decision for the 2014
TAC.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Advice from NAFO scientists was
that the stock had declined to a very low level termed the “limit
reference point” where any further fishing would be in danger of causing
serious and irreversible harm, and that there should therefore be no fishing in
2014.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
NAFO managers again ignored the scientific advice and set
the TAC for 2014 at 4,300 tons with the major portion allocated to Canada.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In contrast, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
in the US recently heeded similar scientific advice from US scientists and has shut down the
shrimp fishery in the Gulf of Maine for 2014.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>215</o:Words>
<o:Characters>1227</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Fishy</o:Company>
<o:Lines>10</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>2</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>1440</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Conclusion – MSC subscribes to the notion that management of
a "sustainable" fishery does not have to be science-based to retain certification?<o:p></o:p></div>
Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-37089881328795950272013-10-08T02:52:00.000-07:002013-10-08T02:55:40.195-07:00Fisheries Ministers lost their authority to MSC in a coup de'etat in 2008?Dr. Doug Butterworth, a retired academic and fisheries consultant from a South African university, recently made the claim at an international marine conference that fisheries ministers around the world lost their authority in a coup de'etat in 2008 when the MSC succeeded in persuading major European supermarkets to only purchase MSC certified products. This claim was made during a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_Q6jvffqnc">key-note address at the September 2013 ICES (International Council for Exploration of the Sea) Annual Science Conference in Reykjavík</a> (min 41:38 onwards).<br />
<br />
Butterworth says that prior to this the MSC was in the doldrums but in 2008 there was a quiet revolution in which fisheries ministers did not even realize that they had surrendered their authority on national fisheries policy to the MSC. Butterworth states that this resulted in an explosion in applications for MSC certification.<br />
<br />
Butterworth argues that although MSC is only dealing with 10% of the World's fisheries, the process is so burdensome that it is draining scientific expertise in stock assessments to produce MSC reviews of variable consistency. Butterworth claims that the MSC review process is inferior to processes such as the review that takes place in ICES in providing scientific advice on the management of European fish stocks.<br />
<br />
This view adds to the debate recently rekindled in Alaska over salmon certification - should MSC be second-guessing national and international processes already in place to provide scientific assessments, review and advice on meeting sustainability criteria? If ICES scientists provide advice to managers on how to manage a European fishery in a sustainable manner and managers follow this advice, what added value does MSC really have?Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-90993754715158125092013-09-26T18:19:00.003-07:002013-09-26T18:19:57.168-07:00Silly WWF for not knowing that trawling is actually good for the environment!The World Wildlife Fund has attempted to carve out an ENGO niche for itself that is to the right of most other ENGOs. It likes to show that it can work as partners with industry, governments, RFMOs (regional fisheries management organizations) like NAFO, and with organizations like the Marine Stewardship Council to achieve sustainable fisheries and less damaging fishing practices. <br />
<br />
However the partnership between MSC and the WWF hit a bump last week when MSC demanded that a video supporting MSC but critical of trawling be pulled from public view following outrage from the fishing industry (many MSC certified fisheries are trawler fisheries). WWF dutifully complied. See, trawling is actually a good way to catch fish, not bad! Silly WWF for not knowing this! If they want to hang with the MSC they better smarten up their act!<br />
<br />
WWF states: "While our intention was to support fisheries that have made the commitment to MSC and sustainability, we want to be responsive to our industry partners and their concerns. As such, we have removed the video from public sources."<br />
<br />
Thanks to wonders of the internet, the video is still available here for your viewing pleasure:<br />
<a href="http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/tv-commercials/wwf-we-dont-farm-like-this-17984155/">http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/tv-commercials/wwf-we-dont-farm-like-this-17984155/</a><br />
<br />
Read more here:<br />
<a href="http://www.marketingmag.ca/news/marketer-news/wwf-pulls-we-dont-farm-like-this-amid-industry-complaints-89379">http://www.marketingmag.ca/news/marketer-news/wwf-pulls-we-dont-farm-like-this-amid-industry-complaints-89379</a><br />
<br />Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-18492197661831294682013-09-19T06:03:00.004-07:002013-09-19T06:04:33.982-07:00MSC upsets fisheries by backing WWF video<span style="background-color: white; color: #373737; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">The Association of Sustainable Fisheries (ASF) has addressed a letter of protest to MSC chief executive Rupert Howes, over a video portraying commercial fishing practices as damaging to the environment.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #373737; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #373737; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">This includes practices used by many MSC Certified fisheries!!!</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">Read more here:</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">http://www.undercurrentnews.com/2013/09/18/msc-upsets-fisheries-by-backing-wwf-video/#.UjrzA2TF2Ff</span></span><br />
<span style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span></span>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-86372924160550489312013-09-19T05:28:00.001-07:002013-09-19T05:30:03.748-07:00US gives the boot to MSC?<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
Legislation introduced by Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska on Sept. 18 would prohibit federal agencies from using certification schemes when considering or labeling any domestic seafood catch as sustainable.</div>
<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
"It is bad federal policy to allow third party certifiers, including foreign non-governmental organizations, to decide what seafood is allowed to be sold in national parks, or procured by federal agencies, Murkowski said.</div>
<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
Not too long ago, wild Alaska salmon served as the flagship species for the London-based Marine Stewardship Council, she said. "Now MSC is disparaging the "sustainability of Alaska salmon. MCS and NGOs like them have political agendas, lack transparency, and use their certification schemes to inappropriately influence federal and state fisheries management."</div>
<div style="background-color: #f3f2ee; border: none; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; padding: 0px; position: relative;">
<br /></div>
<span style="background-color: #f3f2ee; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px;">- See more at: http://www.thecordovatimes.com/article/1338legislation-addresses-seafood-sustainability#sthash.sdNMKVzx.dpuf</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #f3f2ee; font-family: Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 15px;"><br /></span>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-67607185537136599342013-04-24T02:00:00.000-07:002013-04-24T14:48:20.301-07:00Bluewashing and lollipops – MSC sustainable fisheries certification under pressureThere have been two recent provocative contributions to the
growing discussion of the Marine Stewardship Council sustainable fisheries certification scheme. The first is a well-researched three-part
investigation by Daniel Zwerdling and Margot Williams of NPR <a href="http://www.npr.org/series/171717418/the-meaning-of-sustainable-labeled-seafood">aired on MorningEdition and All Things Considered</a> in February 2013.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Zwerdling and Williams highlight several shortcomings of MSC
sustainability certification, including the conditional certification of fisheries
that are not sustainable but which may become sustainable if identified
shortcomings are addressed. MSC
considers that conditional certification provides an incentive to improve. However, as Susanna Fuller, co-director of
marine programs at Canada's Ecology Action Centre in Halifax told Zwerdling and Williams, that’s
like telling a child, "You've been really bad, but I'll give you a
lollipop, and then I want you to show me how much better you can be…It just
doesn't work, right? You've already got the lollipop." <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rupert Howes, the MSC's London-based CEO, defends the
lollipop approach and says that there is <a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.ca/2012/11/overfished-and-overfishing-is-new.html">evidence that conditional certification works</a>. He points out that
if MSC were in the business of only giving lollipops to perfectly behaved
fisheries they wouldn’t hand out many lollipops! <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even if Howes is right about the lollipop effect, the
“certified sustainable seafood” label is misleading to consumers. The MSC blue logo does not necessarily mean
that a product comes from a sustainable fishery. Instead it may come from a fishery, such as
the <a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.ca/search?q=Canadian+swordfish">Canadian Atlantic long-line Sword fish fishery</a>, which catches two sharks
which are discarded, a significant proportion dead, for each swordfish
landed. Or it may come from a depleted
stock such as <a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.ca/search?q=South+African+hake">offshore South African Hake</a> which, if recovering at all, has a
long way to go before the fishery can be considered sustainable. Or it may come from the <a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.ca/search?q=Ross+Sea+Toothfish">Ross Sea Toothfish fishery</a>, a fish stock about which not enough is even known to determine what a
sustainable catch would be. These
fisheries do not meet widely accepted sustainability conditions, but products
from these fisheries display the <a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.ca/2012/03/da-fishy-code-interpreting-msc-eco.html">MSC blue “certified sustainable seafood” sealof approval.</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second contribution to MSC shortcomings is <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320713000049">a paperpublished in the current edition of the scientific journal BiologicalConservation by Claire Christian</a> of the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition,
and colleagues. They reviewed the 19
formal objections to MSC certifications made over the last 15 years in the
course of certifying more than 170 fisheries.
These objections are costly to file and are subject to a complicated quasi-legal
MSC process which has rejected all but one objection. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Claire Christian and colleagues conclude from their study
that the MSC principles for sustainable fishing are too lenient and
discretionary, and allow for overly generous interpretation by third party
certifiers (private for-profit consulting companies) and MSC hired
adjudicators. Contrary to MSC claims,
MSC-certified fisheries are not all sustainable and certified fisheries are not
necessarily improving (the hoped-for lollipop effect). Even further, they note that genetic
detection studies show that not all products with the MSC logo actually come
from MSC certified fisheries. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Consequently they conclude that the MSC label may be misleading both
consumers and conservation funders. They
consider that if MSC does not overcome these problems their blue certified
sustainable seafood logo will be characterized as nothing more than
“bluewashing”.<o:p></o:p></div>
Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-25734999521217493532012-11-15T13:25:00.000-08:002012-12-13T03:31:52.270-08:00Overfished and overfishing are the new sustainable?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a multi-authored article (22 authors) <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0043765">published online </a>in
the open access journal PLOS in August 2012, the claim is made that fisheries
certified by the Marine Stewardship council are in better shape than those that
are not as well as those that failed the MSC confidential pre-assessment process.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Two initial observations: (i) About half of the authors are
directly or indirectly associated with MSC.
(ii) Data on those stocks that failed pre-assessment are not available
for scrutiny because of a confidentiality agreement.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are currently 132 MSC certified fisheries, yet the
authors of the paper only examine the state of 74 of these (56%). The required data were not available for the
other 58 stocks. This constitutes a potentially biased sample of certified
stocks. It seems likely that those
stocks without adequate data could be in worse shape, or at best their status
is more uncertain.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of 74 stocks examined only 32 (43%) had a stock assessment adequate
for determining whether overfishing was taking place (fishing mortality or
exploitation rate higher than that which would result in maximum sustainable
yield or MSY) or whether the stock was overfished (below 50% of the biomass
that generates MSY).
It is of considerable concern that fisheries are certified as
sustainable on stocks for which such basic information regarding sustainability is
lacking.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition to the 32 stocks, the authors were able to fit a
Schaefer surplus production model to the data, or to combine a Schaefer surplus
production model with the existing stock assessment model to estimate MSY
related information for 13 additional stocks. The methods used to
fit the model have <a href="http://wormlab.biology.dal.ca/ramweb/papers-total/Worm%20et%20al.%202009_Science.pdf">previously been published</a>. However, for a number of reasons it is
unlikely that their approach would garner support through a peer review
process on individual stock assessments; otherwise it would surely already be in use in these assessments.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of the 32+13=45 stocks for which overfishing and overfished
status could be determined, 8 MSC certified stocks are currently subject to
overfishing while 4 certified stocks are overfished. One could thus conclude that the MSC
certification definition of sustainable fisheries includes overfishing and overfished stocks.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of the 4 overfished MSC certified stocks, only one has had
its certification suspended. The authors
point out that the other three are above their respective biomass limit reference
point, and therefore above the level where serious and possibly irreversible harm
to the stock productivity is considered to occur. It is arguable whether merely having the
stock above the biomass level where serious and potentially irreversible harm occurs is sufficient grounds to consider
a fishery sustainable. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of the MSC certified stocks where overfishing is taking
place, 4 are above the biomass that gives MSY which the authors consider to be
less of a concern than overfishing on the other 4 certified stocks which have a biomass below the
MSY level. One of these stocks of
concern is the South African Deep Water Hake, “poster-child” for a recent <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bw5tsy05uM8">MSC-produce dvideo</a>. North Sea Saithe continues to be
certified by MSC even though it is overfished and overfishing is continuing.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although the authors find that MSC certified
fisheries are healthier than those that are not certified or that failed
confidential MSC pre-assessment for certification, they also note that this
divergence was largely established before MSC certification commenced in 1999. It is therefore not a consequence of certification.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The main criticism of MSC certification by environmental
groups and informed members of the general public is that it sets the
sustainability bar too low in some cases.
Stocks on which fisheries are certified as sustainable should be near or
above the MSY biomass and should be exploited below the MSY exploitation rate. They should not include fisheries in which the stock is currently overfished, or where overfishing is taking place, even if it is anticipated that overfishing will cease at some point so that the stock will recover to the MSY level in the future.<br />
<br />
Consumer confidence in the MSC brand will be diminished if fisheries are certified in cases where the stock is overfished or overfishing is occurring , or where
there are insufficient data to reliably make such a determination.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-62957575647040541212012-05-24T19:12:00.000-07:002012-05-25T03:32:36.621-07:00What is a sustainable fishery?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">It seems
that nobody has the answer. At least not
an answer that is widely supported by environmentalists, fisheries managers,
fisheries scientists, third party certifiers and the fishing industry.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">A clear, succinct
and widely adopted definition of a sustainable fishery would provide a
benchmark against which individual fisheries could be compared. It would cut down on the wiggle room jargon
of “conditionally sustainable”, “on the road to being sustainable” and “more
sustainable than it was”. Simply put, a
fishery would be deemed currently either “sustainable” or “not sustainable”
based on a few carefully chosen and measurable conditions.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Currently
MSC requires <a href="http://www.msc.org/documents/quality-and-consistency-in-assessments/Guide%20to%20P-Cs-SC-PIs.pdf/at_download/file">23 criteria to be addressed</a> under three principles in order to
determine whether or not a fishery is sustainable. Each of these criteria has one or more
sub-criteria, each with an associated performance indicator that has to be
scored and added together to determine a pass or fail. It is a complex system which allows depleted
fisheries, data poor fisheries and fisheries with collateral environmental
damage to be certified conditionally sustainable provided a plan is proposed to
ameliorate these flaws. This leaves the
public confused and environmental groups shaking their heads. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Unfortunately
scientific experts do not agree on a definition of a sustainable fishery. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In the “Comments”
section of the Washing Post related to the article “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/some-question-whether-sustainable-seafood-delivers-on-its-promise/2012/04/22/gIQAauyZaT_story.html">Some question whether sustainable seafood delivers on its promise</a>” (by Juliet Eilperin, Published:
April 22 2012), </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Ray Hilborn
of the University of Washington draws the distinction between sustainability as
a state of a stock, and sustainability as a process. He believes that “sustainability
is clearly the result of a process, stocks can be overfished, by anyone's
definition, and still be sustainable if the management system responds to
changes in abundance and reduces fishing pressure allowing stocks to rebuild”.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">The notion,
that a fishery on a stock in a depleted <u>state</u> can be considered “sustainable”
provided there is a management <u>process</u> in place to reduce fishing pressure
and allow the stock to rebuild in the future, is highly controversial.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In contrast,
many would argue that a sustainable fishery is one in which overfishing is not
taking place and the stock is not overfished at the <u>present time</u>. In other words the “process” should have <u>already</u>
led to the stock being rebuilt before the fishery on that stock can be termed “sustainable”.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Translated
into fisheries science jargon, a sustainable fishery is one in which fishing
mortality is on average below Fmsy (no overfishing) and spawning biomass is on
average above Bmsy (not overfished) at the present time. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Here Fmsy is the fishing mortality that gives maximum sustainable yield on average and Bmsy is the average spawning stock biomass that results from fishing at Fmsy. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Secondary
but important considerations include a societally acceptable low level of
collateral damage through ecosystem alteration, bycatch impacts and habitat destruction. </span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-582198799036818232012-05-06T18:21:00.000-07:002012-05-06T18:37:45.631-07:00Is sustainable seafood really sustainable?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
A recently published paper in the journal Marine Policy by
German scientists Rainer Froese and Alexander Proelss has attracted the
attention of the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/some-question-whether-sustainable-seafood-delivers-on-its-promise/2012/04/22/gIQAauyZaT_story.html?hpid=z3">Washington Post</a> and other media. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The paper takes issue with sustainability certifications of
marine fisheries by the Marine Stewardship Council and the Friends of the
Sea.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
They examined the most recent estimates of current biomass, (B)
biomass at maximum sustainable yield (Bmsy), current fishing mortality (F) and
fishing mortality at MSY (Fmsy) from national or international fisheries bodies
and published papers for 71 MSC certified stocks for which they could find such
information.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For 11% of these stocks the information was insufficient to
make a judgement about stock status or exploitation levels. 31% of the stocks with sufficient information
were overfished and were currently subject to overfishing.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
They define “overfished” as those stocks where B is less than Bmsy and "overfishing" as taking place when F exceeds Fmsy<bmsy "overfishing"="" and="" as="" f=""><bmsy and="" as="" f="" “overfishing”="">. They allow some latitude in
that if the ratio B/Bmsy is greater than 0.9 or F/Fmsy is less than1.1 it is not included in the
percentage total of overfished and overfishing.<o:p></o:p></bmsy></bmsy></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
National fisheries agencies and international fisheries
organizations tend to be somewhat coy regarding their specific definition of
sustainability with respect to marine fisheries.<br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The US, under the Magnuson–Stevens Act, is an
exception in this regard although the criteria may vary somewhat on a stock by
stock basis. Commonly the US definition of
“overfishing” is the same as that adopted by Froese and Proelss (F>Fmsy) but
the US tends to be more tolerant with regard to the definition of overfished, commonly
requiring the stock to be above 50% of
Bmsy or 50% of maximum spawner potential (spawner per recruit).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Under Principle 1 of their standard, MSC ideally requires
that fisheries are managed so that they fluctuate around Bmsy or higher
although stocks can still be certified under this criterion if they are above
50%Bmsy. Of course there are many MSC loopholes
around this that allow fisheries to be certified even where there are no
reliable estimates of where the stock is relative to these levels. Fmsy does not factor directly into the MSC
certification standard, so that it is feasible that fisheries in which
overfishing is taking place, such that the stock will be depleted over time, can
still be certified as sustainable.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While Froese and Proelss may raise the bar a little too
high, stocks that are consistently below Bmsy or are being fished consistently above
Fmsy should not be given sustainable fishery labels. Also, data poor fisheries cannot be assumed
to be sustainably managed based on vague and subjective notions. The fact that overfished stocks subject to
overfishing, as well as data-poor stocks, are being certified as “sustainable”
brings into question current standards.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
National fishery agencies and international organizations would serve us well by developing clear globally accepted and simply applied standards for what constitutes a sustainable fishery. Fisheries that are shown to meet such standards through scientific peer review of assessment of stock status would not be in need of further sustainability accreditation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span></span>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-74450257204582065292012-03-14T19:16:00.000-07:002012-03-14T19:35:55.352-07:00Da Fishy Code – Interpreting the MSC eco-label<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what does the MSC eco-label tell you? Not a lot it turns out. You have to do a lot of digging. My example is a package of MSC certified “Wild Albacore Tuna
Portions” purchased from a national grocery chain in Canada (Sobeys/Loblaws). </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Nk_Xr6qstoA/T2FQSxCSfgI/AAAAAAAAADw/O9prZ2zVzH8/s1600/Albacore1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Nk_Xr6qstoA/T2FQSxCSfgI/AAAAAAAAADw/O9prZ2zVzH8/s320/Albacore1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RsscJs_Yz04/T2FQUhJnKxI/AAAAAAAAAD4/hY2Kdne4X7U/s1600/Albacore2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RsscJs_Yz04/T2FQUhJnKxI/AAAAAAAAAD4/hY2Kdne4X7U/s320/Albacore2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The front of the package has the blue MSC
logo and provides information that the content is “Certified sustainable and
responsibly caught seafood”. The back of
the package also displays the MSC logo and has a little more information: “This product comes from a fishery that has
been independently certified to the Marine Stewardship Council’s standard for a
well-managed and sustainable fishery. <a href="http://www.msc.org/">www.msc.org</a>”
Under the MSC logo there is also a number, SF-C-1245.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A Google for MSC SF-C-1245 gives a several relevant hits, none
of which are for the MSC website. The highest
ranking hits are all for <a href="http://www.fishchoice.com/">fishchoice.com</a> which tells us that this is the
MSC Certificate Code. Including these key words together with the code still gives no MSC related hits.
If MSC has a website linking information on certified fisheries to certificate
codes, I could not find it using Google.
The MSC website does however assure us that the blue logo means that buyers
can have confidence that the fish we are buying can be traced back to a fishery
that meets the MSC environmental standard for sustainable fishing. It’s all about trusting the brand!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://fishchoice.com/">FishChoice.com</a> is a free resource connecting businesses that
buy and/or sell sustainable seafood. Using
the MSC certificate as the link to the product, FishChoice tells us that the
package contains steaks of <i>Thunnus
alalunga</i>, wild caught off British Columbia Canada. It also notes that its partner organizations
Seafood Watch, SeaChoice, Blue Ocean Institute, FishWise and Ocean Wise, as
well as MSC, all give it the “green thumbs up” as a best choice in terms of sustainable
seafood. Fishchoice states that it adds
to its directory only seafood products that meet the minimum sustainability threshold
of its partner organizations. It anticipates
that seafood buyers will search FishChoice for environmentally preferable
seafood products and then contact suppliers to make their purchases.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Next steps would be to research the BC albacore fishery
certification on the MSC website. MSC
tells us that the unit of certification is the “Canadian Highly Migratory
Species Foundation (CHMSF) British Columbia albacore tuna North Pacific”, that
it is caught by troll and jig by about 198 vessels and was certified by MSC in
March 2010. Perusing the consultant’s
assessment of the fishery on the MSC website, one can note that there is little
or no bycatch and any ETP (endangered, threatened, protected) species can
easily be returned to the sea unharmed because of the use of barbless hooks. That’s good.<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One can also note that a number of conditions have been
placed on the fishery regarding things that need to be fixed within the current
certification period to ensure ongoing certification. Prominent among these is the need to determine
the appropriateness of the current management targets and to develop limits to
fishing. This may be difficult to
achieve given the highly migratory nature of the species and the complexities
of the organizations involved. The Canada/US
Management Authorities are Fisheries and Ocean Canada (DFO) and the Pacific
Fishery Management Council (PFMC). International
management of the North Pacific albacore resource is shared by two
international fisheries commissions: the Inter American Tropical Tuna
Commission (IATTC) and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
(WCPFC). The International Scientific
Committee for Tuna and Tuna-like Species in the North Pacific Ocean also plays
some role in this process.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One might be a little concerned that the BC Albacore fishery
is provisionally certified sustainable by MSC without well-established
fisheries management targets and limits, but that might be unfair given the
greater shortcomings in a number of other MSC certified fisheries.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What else is on the Albacore packaging? The top right has a round label that
challenges us to “Trace this Fish…From Ocean to Table” and tells us to “see
back for code”. There is also a QR barcode
that you can scan into your smartphone. They
both lead ultimately to the same place.
The back of the package tells you to visit <a href="http://thisfish.info/">thisfish.info</a> where you can type in the “Trace this Fish” code
C001025. When you do this you learn a
whole lot more about the fishery. You learn
that “Your Albacore Tuna was caught by Korey Sundstrum off Barkley Sound and
landed frozen-at-sea in Ucluelet, BC on Jul 25, 2011. Who processed it? Pasco Seafood Enterprises Inc. in BC.” Neat eh?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<a href="http://thisfish.info/">Thisfish.info</a> is a project of Ecotrust Canada. Ecotrust Canada is an enterprising nonprofit
whose purpose is to build the conservation economy. They work at the
intersection of conservation and community economic development promoting
innovation and providing services for communities, First Nations and
enterprises to green and grow their local economies. They
have partnered with fish harvesters and seafood businesses to provide “Ocean to
Table” information. Information is
uploaded by fishermen and thus far <a href="http://thisfish.info/">thisfish.info</a>
has more than 250,000 records in its database.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
DFO is supposedly also launching a program to trace seafood
“from ocean to plate,” giving consumers what DFO claims will be accurate and
timely information on the seafood they eat.
Thus far there is nothing to show in the public domain so I wouldn’t
hold your breath.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Time to grill that albacore steak!<o:p></o:p></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-11857409561913983832012-02-13T13:22:00.000-08:002012-02-17T07:31:28.210-08:00Former MSC head spills the fish guts on the Alaskan salmon pullout<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
A former head of the MSC has <a href="http://www.robertsbridgegroup.com/what-we-think/alaska-pullou/">commented</a> publicly on the
pullout from the certification scheme by the Alaskan salmon industry. He questions whether it is a kamikaze move or
a considered action. He notes that
nobody expected a stalwart of the MSC certification scheme to abandon ship at
the height of the eco-certification bubble. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But maybe that bubble is about to burst?
Has the asymptote been
reached? Have the cumulative cases of
questionable MSC certifications finally reached the point where the brand is
beginning to lose value? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Brendan May gives us a rare peak into the dilemma that MSC
faces on a daily basis trying to play environmental groups off against commercial
enterprises. He recounts the hours spent
by MSC figuring out how to kick a fishery out of the programme so Greenpeace
and others might stop thinking they were a front for the industry or a satanic
incarnation. But very few fisheries have been kicked out.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The MSC certification of the Canadian longline swordfish
fishery a few days ago further weakens the MSC brand. Despite the objection of environmental
groups, MSC has certified a fishery in which, it is <a href="http://halifax.mediacoop.ca/newsrelease/9881">claimed</a>, two sharks <strike>die</strike> are cuaght for every swordfish caught (some percentage of which survive on release) and which causes 200-
500 endangered sea turtles to breathe their last every year.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As environmental groups have been quick to point out, not many people would be happy to sit down to a meal of MSC certified longline swordfish knowing that it comes with a side dish of endangered turtle and shark.</div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-60057404236393248252012-01-31T19:13:00.000-08:002012-02-01T10:53:38.232-08:00Alaskan salmon processors dump MSC<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is already old news, but it may be instructive to look
at the reasons given by the Alaska salmon industry for dumping MSC after more than a decade, and the response
from MSC, now that the fish guts have settled somewhat, so to speak.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Among the reasons given by the Alaskan salmon industry, the
Alaskan Fisheries Development Foundation and the Alaskan government, as
reported by <a href="http://thefishsite.com/">http://thefishsite.com</a> and
other media, is that MSC certification does not, in itself, make Alaskan salmon
sustainable. They consider the salmon
fishery to already be sustainable because it meets State and Federal
constitutional mandates for sustained yield, a commitment to scientific
research and the need serve public good. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to <a href="http://www.upi.com/">http://www.upi.com/</a>
the industry were also frustrated with the increasing complexity of MSC
certification. No doubt cost is also a factor
– not only for the certification itself, but also for annual audits and the
right to display the eco-label. Although
a non-profit, MSC has been able to fund considerable global expansion over the
last decade through fixed annual fees and variable royalties based on how much
MSC-labelled seafood is sold, as well as through donations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
MSC has not welcomed being dumped and has been <a href="http://www.thegreenpages.com.au/news/msc-responds-with-corrections-regarding-asmi-statements/">quick to express its chagrin</a>. It considers that whatever alternative
certification and eco-labelling scheme the industry comes up with, it will be
inferior with regard to independence, transparency, traceablity and quality,
attributes MSC has put forward to establish global brand identity.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Is the Alaskan salmon industry in the vanguard of a swing
away from MSC certification? There is no doubt that MSC certification is highly
complex and expensive. Is MSC
certification <u>necessary</u> for a fishery to be considered sustainable?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It all depends.
Nations like the United States and New Zealand have clear standards
embodied in policy and legislation regarding when overfishing is taking place
or when a stock is overfished. If a
fishery does not meet both of these standards then it is, by definition, not a sustainable
fishery. This is typically determined by
federal or state scientific stock assessments through an independent peer
review process in a transparent manner. Provided
the providence of products from sustainable fisheries is made clear in the labelling
by indicating the fishery geographic stock location, scientific species name
and capture gear type, the consumer has sufficient information to make an
informed decision.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Typically MSC accredited consulting companies do no new
analysis in reaching their sustainability determination. Rather, they piggy-back on the federal or
state scientific assessment, adding additional qualitative insights regarding
ecological impact of the fishery and governance considerations. In an MSC assessment a fishery on an
overfished stock or a fishery that is overfishing the stock can be granted “conditional”
sustainability certification and can carry the MSC eco-label provided it has
plans to become sustainable with regard to the MSC standard within a prescribed
period. Thus a fishery can be deemed provisionally
sustainable under MSC while considered unsustainable under USA or NZ federal standards.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Does the <a href="http://www.msc.org/documents/logo-use/msc-ecolabel-user-guide">MSC label</a> provide sufficient information for the consumer
to make a wise choice? Typically it does
not. There are 5 choices of text that
MSC provides to accompany their blue eco-label.
None of these contain any information on the geographic stock location
of the fishery, the scientific name of the species, or the fishing gear used. There is also nothing to distinguish
fisheries that have conditional sustainability certification from those that
meet all the MSC criteria. Consumers must take the MSC eco-label on faith
or visit the MSC website and do their own research to determine these important
details. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Marine fish stocks are a public resource and it is the
responsibility of governments to manage this resource for long term public
good. Nations like the USA and NZ are
well advanced in this regard and don’t have need of third party
eco-certification to augment their own legislation, policy and procedures. They only need to work on improving the
communication of this information to the public. Detailed product labelling, including whether
or not the product meets <u>both</u> sustainability criteria (not overfished and
overfishing not taking place), would allow consumers to make wise choices on
sustainable seafood. </div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span></span>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-88394823526254241862011-11-17T18:35:00.001-08:002011-11-17T18:42:11.231-08:00MSC Sustainable Fisheries Certification Works says new report<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">In October
2010 </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> announced that it had selected,
from the various contract bidders, MRAG Ltd to undertake the first detailed
analysis of the environmental impacts that have resulted from the first ten
years of </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">’s fishery certification program.
MRAG was supported in this contract by Poseidon Aquatic Resource
Management Ltd and Meridian Prime Ltd. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">These
consulting companies have recently <a href="http://www.msc.org/business-support/environmental-improvements">submitted their joint report</a>. You get what you pay for so no surprise that
the report concluded that </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> eco-certification really works. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA"><a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sustainability-certification-works-in-the-seas-study-finds-2011-11-15">The media release</a> states that this is an “independent” study. Not so.
MRAG Ltd. is a consulting company heavily engaged in the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certification game. Further, one of the report authors, David
Agnew, is a long time </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> insider as Chair of the Technical Advisory
Board and is now on staff as </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> Director of Standards.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The study
focuses on improvements in eight outcome performance indicators: stock status;
population reference points; stock recovery; retained species; bycatch species;
endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species; habitats and environments.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Improvements
were purported to have been evidenced over the period commencing with the
secret </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> pre-assessment, through assessment
and into the certification. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The
conclusion from the study was that </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> works.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Erik
Stokstad, <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6057/746.summary">writing in Science </a>is not convinced. Scoring is subjective and there
is no control study (i.e. how did fisheries not under </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certification progress over the
same period?).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">While </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> continues to certify fisheries that
are data-deficient, clearly not sustainable or which cause unacceptable
collateral damage on other components of the ecosystem we, the resource owners,
should reserve judgement regarding the efficacy of the program. <o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-61934926606469917762011-11-03T17:51:00.000-07:002011-11-03T19:06:42.346-07:00Objections stall MSC certifications of US and Canadian swordfish<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Two bids for <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker>
sustainability certification by pelagic longline fisheries on swordfish have run into
objections. These objections are currently
under “adjudication” by an <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> appointed
“Independent Adjudicator”.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The two fisheries seeking certification are the North West
Atlantic Canada Longline Swordfish backed by the consulting company Intertek
Moody Marine Ltd. and the Southeast US North Atlantic Swordfish Fishery backed
by the consulting company MRAG Americas.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These consulting companies are heavy hitters who don’t take
kindly to obstacles being placed in the way of their clients and they are
fighting back.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moody was acquired by Intertek for US$730 million in March
2011. Moody itself swallowed smaller
Canadian competitor TAVEL Certification Inc. in December 2009. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
MRAG Americas is sister company to MRAG Ltd. in the <st1:country-region><st1:place>UK</st1:place></st1:country-region>
which is owned by Sir John Beddington, chief scientific advisor to the UK
Government. Sir John is not without
<a href="http://blogs.nature.com/news/2010/01/beddingtons_biot_business_brou_1.html">controversy</a>. The president of MRAG Americas is Andrew
Rosenberg, a post doctoral assistant to Beddington at Imperial College London
in the early 1990s. <st1:city><st1:place>Rosenberg</st1:place></st1:city>
went on to become the deputy director of NOAA’s NMFS before leaving to form
MRAG Americas. He is currently also special
advisor to Jane Lubchenco, Undersecretary of Commerce and Administrator of NOAA.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The objection to the Canadian longline fishery certification
was filed by The Ecology Action Centre (<st1:stockticker>EAC</st1:stockticker>),
The David Suzuki Foundation, Oceana and the Sea Turtle Conservancy on <st1:date day="20" month="9" year="2011">20 September 2011</st1:date>. The objection to the US Longine fishery was
filed by the Turtle Island Restoration Network (TIRN) on <st1:date day="27" month="9" year="2011">27 September 2011</st1:date> and is supported by Wider
Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation Network (WIDECAST), Oceana, Center for
Biological Diversity, Ecology Action Centre and the Animal Welfare Institute.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The objections cite what have become standard concerns
regarding the “lowering of the bar” by consulting companies in favor of their
clients when it comes to <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> Principle 1. This
principle requires evidence of sustainable management strategies that meet the
UNFA Precautionary Approach requirements.
Procedural issues with regard to the certifications are also raised in the objections.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More importantly, the objections take task under <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker>
Principle 2 regarding the impact, and lack of monitoring, of indiscriminate pelagic
longline fisheries on bycatch species, particularly those species that fall
into the ETP category (endangered, threatened or protected). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of particular concern are species like Shortfin Mako shark,
Porbeagle shark, Loggerhead turtle and Leatherback turtle. The Committee on the Status of Endangerd
Wildlife in <st1:country-region><st1:place>Canada</st1:place></st1:country-region>
considers Shortfin Mako shark to be “Threatened” while Porbeagle shark, Loggerhead and Leatherback turtles are considered
“Endangered”. Under the US Endangered
Species Act, Loggerhead turtles are considered “Threatened” and Leatherback
turtles “Endangered”. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition to ETP species the additive impact of swordfish
longline fisheries on overfished tuna species is a concern, especially on
Bluefin tuna, off both the US and Canada.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> appointed and
salaried lawyer Wylie Spicer mulls over both objections, as well as stakeholder
submissions and the ardent counter-responses of Intertek Moody and MRAG
Americas, before coming to his “verdict” as the "independent adjudicator" under the complicated pseudo-legal
objection procedure put in place by <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker>, remember what is
at stake.<br />
<br />
Swordfish and bycatch species are public
property and should be managed for our long-term public good, and those of our
children and their children. This includes non-use value such as biodiversity. If bycatch species are threatened by pelagic linetrawl swordfish fisheries then we are the losers if these objections fail. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you like to eat swordfish, remember that there is an
alternative to the indiscriminate pelagic linetrawl that you can source. The North West Atlantic Canada harpoon
swordfish fishery was certified sustainable by <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker>
in June 2010. It has zero bycatch.<br />
<br />
Additional information on the Southeast US swordfish certification objection <a href="http://www.seaturtles.org/article.php?id=2113">here</a> </div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-4786921032077430172011-11-01T10:02:00.000-07:002011-11-01T10:02:45.827-07:00Should MSC revoke Newfoundland Grand Bank shrimp certification?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 13px;">Can a fishery be considered sustainably managed when
the scientific advice is consistently rejected by the management authority in
favour of larger TACs?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Clearly the Marine Stewardship Council and Moody
Marine think so because the fishery in NAFO area 3L is still certified.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Since 2009 NAFO fisheries managers have set TACs
<a href="http://fishyfellow.blogspot.com/2011/07/is-newfoundland-grand-bank-shrimp.html">higher than those recommended by NAFO scientists</a>. In addition, </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Denmark</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">in respect of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Faroe Islands</span></st1:place><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Greenland</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">, unhappy with their share of the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">, set their own additional quota in several years, a unilateral action
allowed under NAFO rules.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The latest incident is the 2011 decision for the 2012 </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">. <a href="http://www.nafo.int/publications/meetproc/2011/sc/scs11-17.pdf">Scientific advice from NAFO </a>was
</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">that
the </span><st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"> for 2012 should be less than 9,350 t to
reduce the risk of continuing decline.
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_2030992442">NAFO fisheries Managers instead set the </a></span><st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_2030992442">TAC</a></span></st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"><a href="http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/back-fiche/2011/hq-ac15a-eng.htm"> at 12,000 t</a> which
will incur a relatively high risk of continuing decline.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: 15.0pt;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">This resource peaked
in biomass in 2007 and has been in steady decline ever since based on both
Canadian and EU survey data. The decline
is expected to continue under the 2012 </span><st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt;"> set by NAFO.</span><span lang="EN-CA" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> Is this a sustainably
managed fishery?<o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-6907331704646651162011-09-26T18:00:00.000-07:002011-09-29T18:08:11.848-07:00BC Dogfish Fishery - Certified sustainable<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">There are a
couple of interesting aspects to the recent </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certification of the inside and outside fisheries in the British Columbia hook and line spiny dogfish fisheries.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">This is
apparently the first shark fishery to get </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certification. Sharks tend to be long-living, slow-growing,
late-maturing, low-fecundity species.
This combination of life-history traits means that they are vulnerable
to overfishing. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">A poorly
managed commercial fishery on low productivity species like spiny dogfish
typically ends up as a “mining operation” and is seldom sustainable. This seems to have been the case with the BC
spiny dogfish. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The fishery
dates back to 1870. Catches in the liver
oil fishery peaked at over 12,000 t for the inside fishery and over 25,000 t
for the offshore fishery in the 1940s. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Although indices
of population abundance are not available over this early period, it can be
reasonably assumed that the resource was essentially “mined out” in the 1940s
and 1950s. Catches dropped off sharply
in the 1960s and have remained low.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Since the
late 1970s, spiny dogfish has been fished as a source of food (including fins
for soup) rather than liver oil, using longline and trawl gear, with total
annual landings averaging about 1,500 t in the inshore and about the same in
the offshore.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Scientific
survey and commercial catch rate indices of abundance are all from the 1980s
onwards, well after the initial “mining” period had ended, so are uninformative
about the big decline from overfishing in the 1940s and 1950s. In 2010 the Canadian Department of Fisheries
and Oceans (DFO) carried out the first attempt at an assessment of stock status
since 1987, This was prompted by the
eco-certification bid being made by the fishing industry and a concurrent and
pending species-at-risk (of biological extinction) evaluation by COSEWIC under
Canada’s Species at Risk Act. A strange
concurrence of events! <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The
abundance indices in the DFO assessment showed no clear trends and did not
support the fitting of a mathematical population model to the data. Conclusions were therefore drawn from expert
opinion and subjective evaluation. The
assessment did not conclude that the fishery was sustainable, but rather that “There
is no immediate conservation concern”.
Given no evidence of a recovery from the decline that must have occurred
in the 1940s and 1950s from overfishing, it seems likely that the population
remains in a depleted state.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> eco-certification begun under contract to the consulting company TAVEL
in 2008. TAVEL was taken over by Moody
Marine Ltd part way through the assessment. Moody initially indicated they would apply the
default assessment approach. This
requires quantitative estimates of stock size and the impact of the fishery under
Principle 1 of the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> process. However, when Moody
realized in 2010, based on the new DFO stock assessment, that the data were
sparse and uncertain, they switched to the so-called “Risk Based Framework”
(RBF) for evaluating Principle 1. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">RBF was introduced
by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> in 2009 to enable scoring of
fisheries in data deficient situations, particularly for the “outcome” performance
indicators associated with Principles 1 and 2.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> states on its website that “<i>The
first years of </i></span><st1:stockticker><i><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></i></st1:stockticker><i><span lang="EN-CA"> certification have shown that the strong focus on quantitative data, to
prove a fishery is operating sustainably, can make it difficult for smaller and
more traditionally operated fisheries to become </span></i><st1:stockticker><i><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></i></st1:stockticker><i><span lang="EN-CA"> certified. This is particularly
true for, but not limited to, small-scale and Developing World fisheries.</span></i><span lang="EN-CA">”
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The last
sentence is particularly pertinent.
Application of an RBF type approach to artisanal fisheries in
underdeveloped countries which have a history of supporting small catches (thus
proving the fishery to be sustainable) seems justified. It would be unfair to discriminate in the
market place against such fisheries because they are unable to meet the
quantitative criteria applied in a standard quantitative </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> assessment of stock status and
impact of the fishery. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Should RBF also be
used for industrial scale commercial fisheries in developed countries such as </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA">Canada</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA"> which have access to government
research programs and modern methods of data collection and analysis? Some would argue that data deficiency in such
a fishery would be reason enough for it to fail a sustainability assessment.
Under “reversal of burden of proof” the fishery is guilty until proven
innocent. At best, RBF, by its nature, can
only provide weak evidence that a fishery is sustainable. It can’t make up for the
lack of data and quantitative analysis. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Two methods
are applied in the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> RBF approach: a system based on expert judgment (Scale Intensity
Consequence Analysis- SICA), and a semi-quantitative analysis to assess
potential risk (Productivity Susceptibility Analysis - </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">PSA</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">).
SICA is based on the structured collection of qualitative information
from a diverse group of stakeholders. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Similar
subjective risk-based approaches have been around for a while but have always
remained on the periphery of the scientific evaluation and management of
fisheries. They are generally considered
useful in a first-pass or triage approaches to select priority high risk cases for
more comprehensive scientific analysis. Generally they are used to identify “near death” cases, not the“healthy” ones. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">In the case
of BC spiny dogfish, RBF was applied to </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> Principle 1: “<i>A fishery must be conducted in a manner that does not lead to over-fishing
or depletion of the exploited populations and, for those populations that are
deplete the fishery must be conducted in a manner that demonstrably leads to
their recovery.</i>”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">When RBF is
applied to </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> Principle 1, the focus is on the performance indicator PI 1.1.1 which has to do with stock
status. Other PIs under Principle 1 are
either automatically given a passing score of 80 or are not applied in the
scoring, except one. This PI, “stock
rebuilding”, is only scored if “stock status” is given a score of 80 or more
but will be noted under “conditions” in the assessment document if the score
for the first PI is less than 80. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">Both the
inside and outside stocks of spiny dogfish achieved scores of 80 for SICA but
only 68 for </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">PSA</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> leading to conditions being place on the sustainability
certification. Under </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> rules, a fishery is only eligible to
use the RBF for PI 1.1.1 in subsequent </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> assessments if the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> scores resulting from both the SICA
and </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">PSA</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> analyses are 80 or greater. This means that RBF may not be used for any
subsequent </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certifications for the BC spiny dogfish fishery. They have used their "get out of jail free card". <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA">The conditions placed on the BC
spiny dogfish certification require that</span><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-size: 11pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 11pt;">measures be put
in place that will reduce the RBF risk score for PI 1.1.1 within the current
certification and that by the time of reassessment in 5 yrs there needs to be a
direct measure of stock status that can be compared with biologically based
reference points. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11pt;">To sum up, </span><st1:stockticker><span style="font-size: 11pt;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> has certified a fishery on a species with a life history that makes it
vulnerable to overfishing, on a population that is probably still depleted from
historic overfishing, and in the absence of a quantitative estimate of stock and
acceptable harvest levels. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11pt;">RBF cannot be used in the next assessment of the stock
in 5 yrs time according to MSC's own rules.
Unless new surveys and additional research are initiated by the
Department of Fisheries and Oceans or the stakeholders, this certification will
have been premature and temporary. It
will not build public confidence in the </span><st1:stockticker><span style="font-size: 11pt;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> eco-label for sustainable fisheries.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-6728256495392475132011-09-04T13:26:00.000-07:002011-09-04T13:27:33.119-07:00MSC Surveillance Report - South African Hake Trawl Fishery<div class="MsoNormal">The first <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> surveillance audit for the recently certified (2010) South African Hake trawl fishery has been completed by Moody Marine Ltd. and the report is now available on the <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> website.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The assessment is for both the inshore hake fishery on <i>Mercluccius capensis</i>, and the offshore fishery on <i>Merluccius paradoxus</i>. The offshore fishery is the more important of the two but this stock has been in a severely depleted state since the early 1970s as a result of overfishing. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">Although fisheries on both stocks obtained a score of more than 80 under each of the three <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> principles, a condition was placed under Principle 1 for the offshore hake fishery. This condition required that there should be improvements in stock status showing trends of recovery. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The Moody Marine team based their audit on the latest assessment by MARAM (Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group). This is the consulting company contracted by the South African government to do the assessments and develop the management strategy. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The latest MARAM assessment is not consistent with a recovery trend in spawner biomass for the offshore stock. Spawner biomass is only at about 60% of the estimated BMSY management target and female spawning biomass has recently shown a declining trend. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bVTzhItvns4/TmPexMcPAgI/AAAAAAAAADs/CgGJvR9ODwY/s1600/ScreenHunter_01+Aug.+23+16.04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="197" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bVTzhItvns4/TmPexMcPAgI/AAAAAAAAADs/CgGJvR9ODwY/s320/ScreenHunter_01+Aug.+23+16.04.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="MsoNormal"> The Moody team suggested that the continuing low spawner biomass indicated the need to develop a new, more effective, management strategy but concluded that there was nevertheless enough evidence that a recovery was underway for the fishery to pass the audit. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">It should be noted that this stock has been managed under various different management strategies (locally called operational management procedures) developed by MARAM since 1991, but all of them have proved to be ineffective in rebuilding the stock.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The certification of the South African offshore hake fishery as sustainable by <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> in 2010 and the passing of the first surveillance audit by Moody in 2011 is misleading. Consumers should not be fooled by the <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> eco-label applied to products from this fishery. These products are not from a sustainably managed fishery. South African offshore hake remains severely depleted, there is no sign of significant recovery, and the current management procedure appears to be flawed and needs to be replaced by one that may be more effective. <o:p></o:p></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-57293436768513941592011-07-15T10:12:00.000-07:002011-07-15T10:12:58.588-07:00Is the Newfoundland Grand Bank shrimp fishery sustainable?<div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The large boat northern shrimp <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Pandalus borealis</i> fisheries off the east coast of </span><st1:state><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Newfoundland</span></st1:place></st1:state><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Labrador</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> (</span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Canada</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">) have just received </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> eco-certification as sustainable.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Small boat fisheries on the same stocks were certified sustainable by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> in 2009 as the “inshore fishery on Canadian northern prawn”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The shrimp fishery on the Grand Bank of </span><st1:state><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Newfoundland</span></st1:place></st1:state><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> (NAFO Divisions 3LNO, Canadian Shrimp Fishing Area 7) was considered separately in the certification process because it is a straddling stock that extends beyond the 200nm EEZ and is therefore managed by an RFMO, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO). <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Given the serial depletion of most Grand Bank fisheries through rampant overfishing by </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Spain</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">, </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Portugal</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">, </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Canada</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and other nations over the last 60 years, one would think that sustainable management of the shrimp fishery by NAFO would be a high priority and that passing MSE certification would be a walk in the park.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Well, it was a walk in the park.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moody International Marine Ltd., the for-profit consulting company that did the assessment under contract to the fishing industry, awarded the fishery scores of 84.4% for Principle 1 (Sustainability of Exploited Stock), 84% for Principle 2 (Maintenance of Ecosystem) and 81.6% for Principle 3 (Effective Management System).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">There were some low scores within these overall averages that led to conditions being placed on the sustainability determination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The fishery is certified and products can carry the blue </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> logo, but to ensure ongoing certification </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> requires some progress to be demonstrated in annual audits by Moody towards improving these areas.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">So where were some of the low scores?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Harvest control rules and tools – 70%.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Turns out there aren’t any.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Neither are there any exploitation targets or limits.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fishery specific objectives (management objectives) – 60%.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again, there aren’t any.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">“Decision making processes” got a score of 80% and “Compliance and enforcement” got 90%. This is inconsistent with reality. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Scientific advice on a sustainable </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> for 2009 was 25kt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>NAFO went against the scientific advice and awarded a </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> of 30kt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Denmark</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> in respect of the </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Faroe Islands</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Greenland</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> did not agree to their share of the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and therefore set their own quota in excess of what they were allocated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is allowed under the NAFO Objection Clause.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Scientific advice for 2010 was that the current exploitation rate of 14% may be too high and scientists urged caution in the exploitation of the stock because it was declining.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They advised that exploitation rates should not be raised, but kept below recent levels.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Given that the stock was declining this would require a reduction in the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> but NAFO decided to keep the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> at 30kt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again the scientific advice was ignored.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Denmark</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> in respect of the </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Faroe Islands</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Greenland</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> set their own quota in excess of their allocation.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Scientific advice for 2011 was that </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> options at 14% exploitation rate or higher would be associated with a relatively high risk of continued stock decline.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A 14% exploitation rate corresponded to a </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>17kt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>NAFO set the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> for 2011 at 19.2kt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again the scientific advice was ignored.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The biomass of shrimp halved between 2007 and 2009.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This decline is expected to continue unless NAFO reduces the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">TAC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> in accordance with the scientific advice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It doesn’t look like this is going to happen before it is too late…again.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">How can this fishery be considered sustainable?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-63606855837987805022011-05-16T18:58:00.000-07:002011-05-16T18:58:20.794-07:00Opting out of MSC mackerel recertification because of cost and threats<div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">A group of mackerel handline fishermen from Mevagissey Cornwall (South West Hand Line Fishermen's Association) have decided to opt out of </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> recertification according to a <a href="http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/news/Mackerel-handliners-opting-accreditation-scheme/article-3407503-detail/article.html">news item from thisisdevon.co.uk </a><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The primary reason given is the “staggering” cost of £12,000 plus VAT that must be paid to the consulting company Moody Marine Ltd for recertification.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Fishermen also cited </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">’s threat to withdraw accreditation of all north east Atlantic mackerel fisheries in early 2012 unless </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Iceland</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and Faroes stop overfishing the mackerel stock.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">If </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> follows up with this threat, it seems highly unlikely that the Mevagissey handline fishermen would be refunded their recertification fee by Moody.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Fishermen are considering alternative cheaper ways of promoting their catch as sustainable, such as the grass routes “Responsible Fishing Scheme”.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The large fees charged by consulting companies like Moody for secret pre-assessments (up to $35K?), full assessments (up to $150K?), annual audits and recertifications (up to $20K?) reflect the value placed on the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> brand by large players in the fishing industry.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">It is not clear that smaller low tech fisheries such as the mackerel handline fishery can continue to afford the high prices charged for </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> certification, even though these smaller fisheries are often the most sustainable with least bycatch and impact on the ecosystem.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Alternative grassroots schemes like the Responsible Fishing Scheme or schemes provided by concerned environmental groups such as Seafood Watch and SeaChoice may prove to be increasingly attractive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-56817463159092179442011-04-14T11:45:00.000-07:002011-04-14T11:45:11.972-07:00MSC and the mackerel certification dilemma<div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The Marine Stewardship Council is facing a bit of a dilemma over its sustainability certification of </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">NE Atlantic</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> mackerel fisheries.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> announced </span><st1:date day="13" ls="trans" month="4" year="2011"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">April 13 2011</span></st1:date><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> that the independent adjudicator (retained under salary by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> to hear objections) had decided to uphold an objection to the certification of the Faroese Pelagic Organisation North East Atlantic mackerel fishery to the </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> standard.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The objection was lodged by Marine Scotland (government agency) against the assessment completed by the consulting company Det Norske Veritas.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The objection was that the Faroese fishery was not abiding by the management framework rules that were in place.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">From 2000-2009 the Faroese were part of an international trilateral mackerel agreement with the EU and Norway which respected the scientific advice on sustainable catch levels provided by the International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Recent changes in the distribution of mackerel in the NE Atlantic has made the stock more available and hence more attractive to Faroese and Icelandic fisheries and these two countries have unilaterally increased their catch levels outside ICES advice and the management framework.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Unless the EU or </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Norway</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> reduces their own catch, which they are unlikely to do, the total catch in 2011 will exceed ICES recommended sustainable levels and will put the resource at risk. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Iceland</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> does not seem to care because it is not certified by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> nor is it applying for certification.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But what of the other mackerel fisheries?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are 8 separate fisheries already certified by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and a 9<sup>th</sup> in the assessment process.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">fishnewseu.com reported on 13 April that </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> has stated that the decision should have no effect on already </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> certified mackerel fisheries which all fall within Norwegian or EU jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">This contradicts an earlier </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> news release of </span><st1:date day="16" ls="trans" month="7" year="2010"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">July 16 2010</span></st1:date><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> that “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Unless the situation is resolved by the end of 2011, the unilateral quotas and increases in fishing activity will result in suspension of </i></span><st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></i></st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> certification of fisheries committed to harvesting the stock sustainably</span></i><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">So which is it?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will all the mackerel fisheries be punished by </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> because two fisheries are being bad? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">On the face of it, they should.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ICES considers the NE Atlantic Mackerel fishery to be one stock, albeit composed of three spawning components.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ICES estimates that fishing mortality has exceeded Fmsy (the fishing mortality that gives maximum sustainable yield) since the early 1990s, so technically NE Atlantic Mackerel already has overfishing taking place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, the biomass is relatively healthy, above MSY Btrigger, a biomass reference point that triggers a cautious response when stocks fall too far below Bmsy (the biomass associated with maximum sustainable yield).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">ICES estimates that catch in 2010 was 930kt and that this would have to be lowered to below 672kt in 2011 to be consistent with management objectives under the MSY approach.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is unlikely to happen with Faroese and Icelandic fisheries not abiding by the rules.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">So now the dilemma: can the existing certified fisheries, who are abiding by the rules, still be considered sustainable if two non-certified fisheries are breaking the rules such that the sum of all the fisheries on NE Atlantic mackerel results in overfishing and stock depletion?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> is waffling on this issue. </span>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-53688367028109097752011-04-07T10:20:00.000-07:002011-04-07T10:20:42.611-07:00Turtles and sustainable swordfish<div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The Marine Stewardship Council deadline for stakeholder comments on the draft sustainability assessment report for the Canadian swordfish longline fishery is just days away.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Although there are inadequacies in the scientific assessment of the swordfish stock and the management of the fishery by both ICCAT and </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Canada</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">, swordfish are considered to be at or above the biomass that gives maximum sustainable yield and fishing mortality is below the level that achieves maximum sustainable yield.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">US</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> fishery parlance, the stock is not overfished and neither is overfishing taking place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>On the face of it the primary requirements for consideration as a sustainable fishery under international best practices are met. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The big issue is bycatch of other species such as turtles and sharks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Concern is greatest for the loggerhead sea turtle.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Estimated bycatch in the Canadian pelagic longline fishery is about 1,200 turtles annually out of a population of 17,000.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This species was determined by COSEWIC to be endangered in Canada in April 2010 because it is “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">declining globally and there are well documented, ongoing declines in the Northwest Atlantic population from which juveniles routinely enter and forage in Atlantic Canadian waters. The Canadian population is threatened directly by commercial fishing, particularly bycatch in the pelagic longline fleet, and by loss and degradation of nesting beaches in the southeastern </i></span><st1:country-region><st1:place><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">USA</span></i></st1:place></st1:country-region><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> and the </span></i><st1:place><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Caribbean</span></i></st1:place><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">.” <o:p></o:p></span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">A decision by the Canadian Government on whether or not to list loggerheads under the Species at Risk Act has yet to be made.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In its initial response on December 2010, Government stated that “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A voluntary Code of Conduct for </i></span><st1:place><st1:placename><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Responsible</span></i></st1:placename><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> </span></i><st1:placetype><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Sea</span></i></st1:placetype></st1:place><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> Turtle Handling and Mitigative Measures has been developed by the Canadian swordfish and tuna pelagic longline fleet.</span></i><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">This Code of Conduct includes measures such as avoiding areas of high sea turtle capture rates, gear hauling protocols to minimise harm to turtles, sea turtle handling guidelines, and usage instructions for de-hooking gear.</i>”<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">A Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans recovery potential assessment published in 2010 found that “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Reduction or elimination of mortality in Canadian waters alone is highly unlikely to be sufficient to achieve recovery</i>.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Although not the sole culprit, and despite efforts being made in </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Canada</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"> to reduce bycatch and increase survival of released loggerheads, the Canadian longline swordfish fishery is contributing significantly to the potential extinction of loggerheads. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The Canadian harpoon fishery for swordfish has zero bycatch mortality and provides a certified sustainable alternative source for consumers to consider.<o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-44478033161172662752011-03-25T13:36:00.000-07:002011-03-25T13:37:38.210-07:00Marine Stewardship Council - Acceptable time frames for rebuilding depleted fish stocks<div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">In the fall of 2010 </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> consulted with partners and stakeholders on acceptable rebuilding timeframes for certification of depleted stocks. </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> defines a depleted stock as one which has a biomass below BMSY (the biomass that gives maximum sustainable yield) or equivalent target level, but is still above a precautionary limit level. Fisheries on stocks which are depleted can become </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certified, however certification of such fisheries requires that there be a rebuilding plan in place which leads to the recovery of the stock within a specified timeframe.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">The </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> Fisheries Assessment Methodology addresses rebuilding under Performance Indicator PI 1.1.3. Currently, a conditional pass score of SG60 merely requires “reasonable expectation of success” with regard to rebuilding to the target biomass of BMSY within a specified timeframe. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">An unconditional pass of SG80 requires evidence that rebuilding strategies “are rebuilding stocks, or it is highly likely based on simulation modelling or previous performance that they will be able to rebuild the stock within a specified timeframe”. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">A perfect score of SG100 requires that “strategies are demonstrated to be rebuilding stocks continuously and there is strong evidence that rebuilding will be complete within the shortest practicable timeframe”.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">It is good that </span><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> is considering revising its methodology with regard to depleted stocks; however the consultation document only addresses a clearer definition of the timeframes for rebuilding to be associated with each of the three scores.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA">MSC</span></st1:stockticker><span lang="EN-CA"> certification of fisheries on depleted stocks as “sustainable” is highly controversial. See for example the ongoing saga of the conditional certification of the fishery on the collapsed offshore South African hake stock. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">It can be argued that the current SG100 requirement should be the <u>minimum</u> required in order for a fishery to be considered for a conditional pass score (SG60) and that an unconditional pass score (SG80 or 100) should <u>only</u> be given to a fishery on stock that <u>has already rebuilt</u> and is fluctuating around BMSY or above under a fishing mortality of FMSY or lower (the fishing mortality rate consistent with maintaining the stock at BMSY or above).<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-CA">A fishery on a depleted stock should never be considered sustainable. <o:p></o:p></span></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2270411085945892602.post-72120114097007561722011-02-21T11:39:00.000-08:002011-02-22T07:01:13.591-08:00MSC Surveillance audit – South African hake trawl fishery<div class="MsoNormal">It is one year into the recertification of the South African hake trawl fishery. Moody Marine Ltd has sent a team to <st1:country-region><st1:place>South Africa</st1:place></st1:country-region> to undertake the first surveillance audit of the fishery as required under the <st1:stockticker>MSC</st1:stockticker> eco-certification procedure.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The recertification the South African hake trawl fishery was not plain sailing for Moody. The unit of certification includes an inshore and an offshore fishery component on different species. The offshore hake, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Merluccius paradoxus,</i> is the main contributor to the fishery. It is in a collapsed state and did not improve during the previous certification period.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">One of the independent reviewers of the Moody recertification strongly argued against calling a fishery “sustainable” when one of the components remains in a severely depleted state. This was overruled by Moody in their assessment, but did lead to “Condition 1” in the certification – a requirement that a recovery trend be demonstrated in <i>M. paradoxus</i> within the certification period.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">So is there evidence that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">M. paradoxus </i>is recovering? It is hard to tell. The last public-domain stock assessment document is a 2008 paper by Rademeyer and colleagues at the MARAM consulting company based in the Mathematics Department of the <st1:place><st1:placetype>University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename>Cape Town</st1:placename></st1:place>. This assessment showed the spawning biomass trajectory up to 1999 and there is no evidence of rebuilding. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The Moody 2010 certification report provides the public with a rare look at the assessment process and the state of the stock. According to the report “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">models developed and implemented by </i><st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">MCM</i></st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> and its contractors are subjected to various reviews and debates through </i><st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">MCM</i></st1:stockticker><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">’s Demersal Working Group. Industry, through their consultants, participate in the debates of the Working Group and have been influential in guiding the research</i>.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal"><st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> is the South African federal government department of Marine and Coastal Management. <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> is a bit of a black hole. Nothing in the way of useful information is released to the public. The “contractor” to <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> is MARAM. MARAM developed the assessment model and also carry out the assessments using the model, apparently because of a lack of quantitative expertise at <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker>. MARAM is also responsible for the development of the Operational Management Procedure which is used by <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> to manage the stock. MARAM does not produce public documents related to its contracts with <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker>.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">The assessment in the Moody certification report extends the spawner biomass series to 2007. Spawning Stock Biomass continues to decline, reaching the lowest estimated level ever. Projections under the MARAM management procedure predict that recovery will take place following 2007, however such projected recoveries are notoriously optimistic and routinely get postponed in subsequent assessments. There needs to be actual realized evidence of recovery to satisfy Condition 1, not merely a projection. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">One assumes that the Moody team for the current hake surveillance audit will have MARAM and <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> documents at their disposal in order to evaluate whether or not Condition 1 is being met. </div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal">There should be full public disclosure by Moody of all relevant <st1:stockticker>MCM</st1:stockticker> and MARAM documents on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">M. paradoxus</i> used in the audit, otherwise the public are being kept in the dark and have a right to be suspicious.<o:p></o:p></div>Fishyfellowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15949701858040108583noreply@blogger.com0