A Better Understanding of How to Be a Smart Consumer in the World of Seafood
Abbie Kerr
Abbie is a fisheries scientist currently working off the coast of Florida. She is an avid ocean lover and diver with a particular interest in sharks as well as fisheries. After graduating, she decided to pursue a job working in fisheries and began working on commercial shrimp vessels collecting data for NOAA/NMFS in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic. After collectively spending roughly 80 days at sea she transitioned over to sampling and collecting data on commercial fishing boats that are permitted to catch reef fish and sharks in Florida.
A brief glimpse into the field of fisheries can reveal the shocking complexities lying just under the surface.
There are various methods of commercial fishing that have their own set of regulations. This can be a daunting topic due to the intricate policies and grey areas when it comes to the enforcement of these regulations. Uniquely, the ocean is the largest environment on our planet and regulating the numerous vessels navigating through this vastness is not so easy.
Since commercial fishing is so widespread, there are subtle differences within each region. Bycatch, overfishing, and the confusion behind what is sustainable and what is not can lead to stress-induced apathy regarding the problems in fisheries management. In an effort to simplify these problems, I hope to bring forth new perspectives and present information that promotes well-informed decision making in the consumption of commercially caught seafood.
Throughout the United States, there are various fishing methods that have been designed to target desired species in a certain region. The term “target” is used loosely since it is considerably difficult to catch “only” a select species when the ocean is home to unimaginably diverse populations. This is not for lack of trying, however, as many gear modifications have been implemented over the past decade in an effort to reduce unwanted catch. Unfortunately, casualties do prevail despite selective fishing techniques, but it is important to note the continued progress that is being made. For example, I work in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, which is home to the commercial shrimp industry. Shrimp is one of the top 5 most consumed seafood species in the nation (Love et al., 2020.) The method utilized to catch shrimp is one that is generally criticized but has seen progress in gear modifications and regulations to reduce environmental impacts.
Trawling is when large nets are dragged behind a vessel through the water along the bottom of the ocean floor. Trawling is associated with the issue of bycatch- bycatch is defined by the NOAA as “discarded catch of marine species and unobserved mortality due to a direct encounter with fishing vessels and gear” (Scott-Denton, et al. 2020.) It is important to note the discerning difference between discarded incidental take and all incidental take. In some industries a portion of the bycatch is kept for consumption or to be sold on the market, however this is not always the case and bycatch widely varies per region. This is one of the greatest ongoing issues in fisheries management with the United States ranked as having one of the highest levels of discards (Harrington et al., 2005.)
Two important devices have been implemented in trawls. Turtle excluder devices (TEDs) reduce mortality and catch rates of sea turtles and are simply a grid opening in the top or bottom of a trawl net. This allows small animals (shrimp) to pass through to the bottom of the net while the larger animals are caught in the grid and released through the TED opening. Bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) are another key component of improved trawling. This is a smaller, typically triangular or square shaped opening that allows unwanted fish to escape. These devices are randomly checked by coastguards and are also monitored by fisheries observers when present. This is a great stride in improving the trawling industry; however, the other side of the argument is that no system is perfect, and with how many vessels reside in the area it is difficult to assess how strictly regulations are followed.
Photo of a commercial shrimp boat in the Gulf of Mexico taken by Abbie Kerr
In an effort to better understand the varying levels of bycatch on commercial vessels, fisheries observers are deployed on fishing trips to document catch. NOAA defines this position as “professionally trained biological scientists [who] monitor commercial fisheries and collect data to support science, conservation, and management of U.S. marine fisheries.” The overall goal of an observer is to provide data on catch rates for both target and bycatch species per specific area, including protected species. (Scott-Denton et al., 2020.) This is a significant stride towards bettering fisheries management; however, observers cover an estimated 2% of the fishing efforts in the entire southeast region (Scott Denton et al., 2020.)
Despite the minimal coverage, the data collected by these programs have contributed to a number of important published works. With a compilation of several years’ worth of data, these organizations are able to publish a characterization of the species encountered on these vessels, providing more reliable estimated bycatch ratios. In another southeast program, the shark research fishery, which has 100% observer coverage, there are published works that outline the successful, observed effects of applied regulations. One example of this is the decline in dusky shark encounters due to the implementation of new regulations. With these regulations, a certain number of dusky mortalities can close an entire region to fishing for these vessels. Overall, “the dusky shark quota did reduce dusky shark catch, from 4.5% of shark catch in 2015 and 2.7% in 2016, to 1.8% in 2017. None of the regions exceeded the dead dusky cap to limit soak time or result in the closure of a region for the year, thus did not affect fishing opportunity,” (Mathers et al., 2018.) Fishery observer data greatly contributes to a better understanding of stock assessments, spawning seasons, gear modifications, life history and protected species.
A speculative issue on vessels with minimal coverage is the considerable amount of freedom to violate regulations. Vessels are subject to being boarded for inspection by the coastguard at any time and observers are diligent in documenting discernible violations; however, this minimal amount of enforcement often begs the question of how seafood could ever be deemed sustainable without question.
According to the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC,) sustainable fishing is defined as “leaving enough fish in the ocean, respecting habitats and ensuring people who depend on fishing can maintain their livelihoods.” Ultimately, sustainability is far from simple and exceedingly difficult to assess (Roheim et al., 2018.) It is impossible to quantify exact population levels and there is far more that we do not understand about our oceans than what we do know. Scientists are making progress in assessing populations, for example, through increasing life cycle assessments. This has quickly become a widespread, recommended framework to measure environmental impacts, (Ziegler et al., 2016.)
Unfortunately, there is little evidence to indicate a considerable demand by consumers for sustainable seafood. (Hallstein and Villas-Boas 2013.) Moving forward from 2013, consumers have access to more information through social media, internet browsers, and various documentaries. It is the consumers and buyers who drive demands in the market. Selecting and demanding more sustainable options provides incentive for governing bodies to improve regulatory and environmental performance for sustainable seafood (Roheim et al., 2018.) To sum it up, the consumer’s voice matters. It is even more important to support the nonprofit organizations (NGOs) leading the charge in conservation movements. Roheim et al. (2018) outlines how NGOs participate by “re-aligning practices [that] mirror or materialize norms and values in sustainability, through efforts to educate seafood consumers and the public about seafood production practices and environmental impacts, and by supporting programs to assess sustainable seafood.” Most often, NGOs are at the forefront of the battle and it is greatly important that we as a collective provide continued support.
Photo of a NYC seafood market taken by Camilo Fuentealba
There are varying definitions of what constitutes a sustainable seafood option, but MSC bases sustainable seafood on 1) sustainable fish stocks, which is ensuring that fishing remains at a level that allows it to continue indefinitely with productive and healthy populations; 2) minimizing environmental impact; and 3) effective fisheries management. There are several sites that provide a sustainable seafood list. The NGO, Oceana, utilizes the Monterey Bay Seafood Watch Guide which presents an overview of which species are abundant and which are overfished. There is an iPhone app, and you can narrow your search based on your region. Ocean Wise Seafood also has a site that outlines sustainability, and it is important to note that the Ocean Wise Seafood Program has a differing perspective on sustainability. Their program explains that,
“Ocean Wise Seafood is a recommendation program, whereas MSC is a certification program. Ocean Wise Seafood uses the sustainability criteria developed by Seafood Watch whereas the MSC has developed its own standards for sustainable fishing and seafood traceability. Authorized third-party certifying bodies assess and audit the fisheries against the MSC standard. Ocean Wise Seafood and the MSC have different criteria for sustainability and thus not all MSC certified fisheries are Ocean Wise recommended.”
Their user-friendly site also provides a list of the restaurants and suppliers that are partnered with them in each region. The differences in opinions and varying lists can naturally create some confusion amongst consumers who are seeking out the best sustainable options, so it is important for the individual to do their research. One can go as far as recognizing the method in which a species is caught and be familiarized with the regulations associated with it. No fishing method is perfect, so better understanding the various adverse effects can potentially simplify the decision-making process when selecting a seafood platter. A more realistic alternative to this is choosing a trustworthy organization that does this research and simplifies it in a user-friendly manner. Again, utilizing Ocean Wise Seafood as an example, this program selects sustainable seafood choices by evaluating the sustainability of each species harvested for seafood on an individual basis. They review the current scientific literature and consult researchers from the government, NGOs, academia, as well as researchers from Ocean Wise Seafood.
Photo of a commercial shrimp boat in the South Atlantic taken by Abbie Kerr
These lists are continuously subject to impermanence, causing difficulty in presenting a singular course of action for sustainability. At this moment, the Monterey Bay Seafood Watch site deems the following as some of the “best choices:” farmed abalone, farmed yellowtail, buri and greater amberjack and almaco jack, Atlantic char both farmed and wild caught depending on the region, farmed striped and sunshine bass, wild caught bluefish, carp, striped mullet and blue catfish, farmed clams, wild caught cobia and Pacific cod, farmed Atlantic cod and Atlantic halibut, various wild caught flounder, wild caught dolphinfish, Pacific and Atlantic herring, hogfish, Atlantic croaker, Atlantic Spanish and king mackerel, and farmed red drum (2021.) The list extends far beyond these species and is worth examining for the complete list of species. Several other lists exist on varying sites and are always subject to change. With farmed seafood becoming a recent mode of production, there are varying factors that determine whether or not it is a smarter seafood option, such as what species it is and the manner in which it is farmed. Ocean Wise Seafood asserts that “[i]n some cases, the farmed option is far better than the wild counterpart, especially with mussels, clams, oysters and scallops.”
There is so much that remains unknown about our oceans and perhaps the vast differences it carries causes a greater lack of responsiveness and understanding. Author, Katherine Courage, recognizes this and explains that “[f]or so many of the other animals we eat, we go to great lengths to disassociate the dish from the live animal: pigs become pork, ham, or bacon (only occasionally are they served in whole form); cows are beef; and even deer become venison. Sea creatures, for some reason, seem not to undergo this sort of transformation—except where foreign names are adopted (calamari) or fish are rebranded to make them sound more appealing (Patagonian toothfish becomes Chilean sea bass, for example). Is it simply that there is often less animal to work with, to cut away into different shapes (into nuggets or chops)? Or do we lose a sense of discomfort because the thing that we are eating is so utterly dissimilar to ourselves?” (Courage 2013.) Much remains in terms of the work that needs to be done to maintain balance in our oceans, however it is important to reflect on the significant strides being made in fisheries science and conservation and support those doing this work.
After presenting this overview, the question still remains of what exactly the best route to take is as a well-informed consumer. This is a debated question among many, and the leading, progressive dispute at hand is whether or not a consumer should completely omit seafood from one’s diet. I myself do not partake in the consumption of seafood. In fact, I am a vegan. This is purely due to my sensitivity level towards the treatment of other creatures. The first time I witnessed bycatch on a commercial fishing vessel I had never been so thankful for sunglasses as they hid my flow of tears. I do not expect everyone to be vegan, nor do I think that is the best solution to solve the issues in fisheries management.
Ultimately, in all dealings with nature, it boils down to the respect we give for the resources we extract and the gratitude we show the earth for lending us the tools we need to survive.
The issue at hand is not that fishing occurs, it is the intensity and the manner in which we fish. Industrialized fishing vessels that exploit populations and depersonalize the art of fishing, which we as humans have partaken in for centuries, have the potential to widen the gap in our dissociation from the natural world. Fishing has sustained populations throughout history and according to NOAA, “in 2016 commercial and recreational saltwater fishing in the United States generated more than $212 billion in sales and contributed $100 billion in the country’s gross domestic product” (2018.) To sum it up, the fishing industry isn’t going anywhere. With the increasing human populations across the globe, industrialized fishing seems to be the easy answer for fulfilling the high demand for seafood. The ultimate issue in fisheries management is that economies are heavily fueled by seafood, yet some of those economies are the precise mechanisms that cause such high intensity, damaging fishing.
In my opinion, swaying the demand as exclusively as we can towards sustainable products and diminishing the intensity of our demand for seafood is a great way for us as consumers to play our part; however, we as individuals can only do so much. These issues are inherently caused by the governments and higher officials overseeing the industry. It is important to note that fishermen and fishing fleets are, in most cases, not the villain. Everything that they do, with exceptions, is legal and following the regulations that the government provides. We can uphold our responsibility as consumers to demand what is in the best interest of our environment, but the pressure to solve these issues should not rest on our shoulders alone.
Apart from selecting one’s seafood carefully, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are increasingly important, if not most important, for moving forward in fisheries management. According to IUCN, 6.35% of the ocean is protected with only 1.89% marked as no-take MPAs. IUCN states that “MPAs do not have enough human and financial resources to properly implement conservation and management measures. Increased political commitments can help boost the governance of and resources available to MPAs.” With the necessary science and a larger breadth of protected areas for species to recover and reside undisturbed, I believe we can slowly develop hope that the fishery industry will no longer hold the power to push a species towards the brink of endangerment.
Ultimately, conservation practices such as these are in the best interest of all parties involved and should be high on our list of demands. Fish stocks will have the chance to recover, grow, and allow for continued fishing practices and consumption. There are always improvements to be made and issues will naturally continue to arise. It is important for those interested to remain active and involved. Read papers, have a basic understanding of regulations, stay involved in politics and exercise one’s political voice, seek out meetings, or simply use social media to follow those who work and study in the field you are interested in. The perfect conservationist does not exist. We alone cannot combat everything in this world we deem unjust and the pressure to do so does not solely rest on us as individuals. We do have the power to hold those with decisive capabilities accountable. In my opinion, any form of involvement is important, especially in the stress of today’s world. If one is simply selecting days to cut back on seafood, silently educating themselves, politically campaigning, or continually maintaining awareness with the seafood they are choosing to eat, then that is still a form of progress. Most importantly, do not let hopelessness and despair for the environment outweigh your desire to do good and fuel apathy. Humans have made quite the impact on earth during our short stay. Let this be a sign of hope that one day we as a collective have the power to make it a positive one.
Sources
Courage, Katherine. “Octopus! The Most Mysterious Creature in the Sea.” Pg. 89, 2013.
Hallstein, Eric & Villas-Boas, Sofia B., "Can household consumers save the wild fish? Lessons from a sustainable seafood advisory," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 52-71, 2013. https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeeman/v66y2013i1p52-71.html
Love, David C., et al. “Food Sources and Expenditures for Seafood in the United States.” NCBI, Nutrients, 17 June 2020. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7353403/
Mathers, Alyssa N., et al. “Characterization of the Shark Bottom Longline Fishery: 2017.” NOAA. NOAA technical memorandum NMFS SEFSC; 727. 2018. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/19803#
Ocean Wise Seafood Program. “Sustainable Seafood.” https://seafood.ocean.org/sustainable-seafood/
Roheim, C. A., et al. “Evolution and future of the sustainable seafood market.” Nature Sustainability, vol. 1, Perspective, August 2018. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-018-0115-z.epdf?no_publisher_access=1&r3_referer=nature
Scott-Denton, Elizabeth, et al. “Characterization of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Penaeidae and Rock Shrimp (Sicyoniidae) Fisheries through Mandatory Observer Coverage, from 2011 to 2016.” 2020. https://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/pdf-content/mfr821-22_0.pdf
Ziegler, Friederike, et al. “Expanding the concept of sustainable seafood using Life Cycle Assessment.” Wiley, Fish and Fisheries, 27 April 2016. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/faf.12159
Monterey Bay Seafood Watch, Recommendations. 2021. https://www.seafoodwatch.org/recommendations/search?query=%3Abuy%3BGreen