A fool's errand? Maybe not

Today is April 1, and while we don't do prank headlines here at SeafoodSource, be wary elsewhere if you see stories about Maria Damanaki handing over control of the European Commission's fisheries division to Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, or anti-salmon farming activist Don Staniford being named the new CEO of Marine Harvest.

What is not a prank, however, is news reported yesterday here in the United States that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is considering setting up its own sustainability eco-label, reminiscent of those issued by groups such as the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), Friend of the Sea and the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI).

We don't know much about what NOAA has planned at this stage. The interview Sam Rauch, NOAA's fisheries deputy administrator, conducted with our writer Christine Blank read like a politician forming an exploratory committee to consider running for office. NOAA's request for comments, including an email address, suggests the administration is testing the waters, so to speak, before doing anything yet.

What Rauch has disclosed about NOAA's plans suggests that this is not another attempt to educate consumers; rather, it seems this is more of a labeling system for large corporate buyers such as supermarkets and restaurants.

Regardless, it looks like yet another player jumping into the certification arena. At first blush, that might sound like a bad idea, given that the field is looking more contentious than ever. Emotions run high among fishermen, producers and processors when an outside group, however well-intentioned, tries to tell a generations-old seafood industry what to do. The MSC has taken a beating from ASMI, which hasn't been shy about promoting its Responsible Fisheries Management (RFM) program as a direct competitor and cheaper alternative to the MSC's certification program. The industry's concerns were visible in a 24 September U.S. Senate subcommittee hearing, where industry leaders pressed to keep outside NGOs such as the MSC out of government regulations pertaining to sustainability.

At the time, National Fisheries Institute President John Connelly noted that NOAA's track record for managing fisheries is "generally excellent." He and other advocates painted NOAA as a far better body than activist NGOs — they didn't mention the MSC by name, but we know that's who they meant — to make determinations on sustainability.

I don't easily jump on the "There oughta be a law..." bandwagon to regulate our way out of problems, but if NOAA is careful, this might be a useful breath of fresh air among the sometimes dizzying array of groups clamoring to certify your favorite piece of fish as sustainably produced. Just how NOAA plans to pay for such a program is unclear, but it's a good bet it won't cost as much to get labeled under a government-funded program as it might under a private label. Also, government agencies at least have the appearance of not being influenced — positively or negatively — by the vested interests of others to present a skewed version of the facts to fit an agenda.

Whatever the case, this will be one worth following, and weighing in on. To give NOAA your thoughts, write to [email protected]. Just remember to keep April Fool's Day out of the subject line.