Non-Governmental Organizations and Sustainability

NGOs recognize that the utilization of ocean resources needs to be “sustainable.”  Thus, they apply the sustainability principles derived from agriculture and resource management, but fail to acknowledge that marine fisheries are essentially wildlife, not managed input-output based systems. Entities such as Seafood Watch, Blue Ocean Institute, Environmental Defense Fund and Greenpeace advocate a sustainability scheme that is intended to preserve marine resources and the environment by recommending the harvest and consumption of “green” species and discouraging the consumption of “red” species and when they are not sure they accept the “yellow” species as acceptable alternatives.  This methodology does not recognize the relationship of species in the ecosystem.  The seafood they recommend may very well be the prey of the fish wish to protect, thus we (man) become competitors with the fish we wish to protect for the same resource. 

The rise of eco-labels such as the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) highlights the conflict. The MSC label was developed by Unilver and the WWF to certify marine fisheries as sustainable.  The label is de rigor with corporate interests such as McDonalds, Walmart, Target and Whole Foods. MSC is essentially an industry sponsored program that values commercial species over ecosystems and ignores the essential element of sustainability—man. Thus, wild capture fisheries are accepted as good (a commercial fisheries perspective) and aquaculture is bad (an environmentalists perspective).  The NGO movement is the unseemly union of environmental and commercial interests in which each camp claims it is doing its part for the long-term sustainability of marine fisheries. But, the sustainable movement is an agricultural/environmental movement not a wildlife management tool. 

Flawed assumptions lead to flawed efforts.  The NGO alliance has supported the MSC initiatives.  These have included certification of the Patagonia Toothfish (Chilean Seabass) fishery, which sustained a challenge to certification despite the overwhelming evidence this fishery is threatened; the Alaskan Pollock fishery- a leading supplier to McDonalds and now the subject of a rigorous challenge by Greenpeace; and the wild Alaskan salmon fishery which relies on hatcheries for up to 70% of the so called “wild” catch. The MSC is now seeking to certify tuna fisheries because of the tremendous demand by the tuna industry for the MSC label of approval.  To lead the tuna certification efforts the MSC hired the head of a tuna company.

The NGOs have also made a mockery of sustainability standards.  Whole Foods recently received a passing grade for its efforts to support sustainable seafood with a 47% score from Greenpeace.  Yes, 47% was considered passing.  Whole Foods sells 16 of 21 red listed fish on the Greepeace recognized seafood list. Whole Foods had the highest score. Other top scorers were Target and Walmart. Further, the Environmental Defense Fund has no problem supporting fisheries that their own safety recommendations are recognized health risks due to mercury and PCB.

 It is undisputed that virtually 100% of all wild capture fisheries are at or beyond sustainable capacity.  The NGO recommendations in light of this fact: eat more wild fish. Mark Bittman in a recent New York Times article suggest those that can afford the at risk species should support “sustainable” wild fisheries and the rest of us should eat more common wild fish such as anchovies (currently viewed as sustainable despite endangered in some areas and collapsed in others), mackerel (green but high in mercury) and herring (the food for the rest of the fish). A very myopic view that still over-harvests top of the food chain species while encouraging consumption of  those very same species primary diet.

We need to acknowledge that industry insiders cannot manage fisheries. Common sense and objective analysis must be brought to bear on these problems. This is especially true in light of the international nature of the issues involved and the limited global coordination of fishery management efforts.

I support the articulated goals of the NGOs and marine fisheries management organizations, but I also recognize the system is flawed and needs to be repaired.  Failure to do so soon will mean the end of many species as we know them and the destruction of the cultural connection to the sea for many communities.