Watching over the MSC

Let's get one thing straight: I think the Marine Stewardship Council is a great approach. In 1997, when Unilever and the World Wildlife Fund launched the MSC as a way to use eco-labeling and market incentives to drive improvement in the health of the world's fisheries, global fisheries production had been declining for a decade.

Governments all over the globe had simply failed to wisely manage fisheries. "Examining the history of fishing and fisheries makes it abundantly clear that humans have had for thousands of years a major impact on target species and their supporting ecosystems," wrote Daniel Pauly, a fisheries biologist at the University of British Columbia, and his co-authors in a 2002 paper published in Nature.

There had to be a better way. So the two giants — one from conservation and one from industry — put their heads together and created a new approach that's playing out today.

It's also a good thing that MSC-certified fisheries are reaching critical mass, so that buyers' choices are no longer a few obscure, boutique fisheries. As of late March, 69 fisheries were certified to the MSC standard, 118 are under assessment and 40 to 50 are confidentially talking to a certifier. In all, certified fisheries represent a catch of 4 million metric tons, and those in assessment total another 3 million metric tons, roughly 12 percent of the global wild catch.

But there's plenty more work to be done regarding the MSC, and we all need to be doing it. If the MSC is to mean peace of mind for consumers and buyers, so that we all know an MSC-certified product represents a responsible purchase that encourages health in the world's fisheries, then buyers must keep tabs on the credibility and reputation of MSC. And they must do what they can to ensure the MSC is driving real change on the water and isn't just a paper tiger.

As detailed in a story in the May issue of SeaFood Business, critics point to the pending certification of the British Columbia Fraser River sockeye salmon. This fishery has a lot of issues. For one, a judicial inquiry is underway into the decline of the fishery, prompted by the disappearance last summer of some 9 million fish Canada's Dept of Fisheries and Oceans predicted would swim back into the Fraser. No one knows why. Researchers attending an early April meeting about sockeye at Simon Fraser University indicate a number of factors: warming ocean temperatures, less availability of food, greater attention from predators and farmed salmon interactions, according to a report in The Vancouver Sun.

The 2009 fishing season was cancelled for the third straight year. One of the judicial commission's first tasks is to report on the five previous formal inquiries into the decline of B.C. Fraser River sockeye. There are sockeye stocks in the Fraser system considered endangered by a biological panel.

In January, the certifier recommended B.C. Fraser River sockeye for certification. In March, four groups filed formal objections, pledging to pay the cost of the MSC hiring an independent adjudicator to review the certification. The adjudicator may very well find that the certifier properly evaluated the fishery against the MSC standard — or not.

But, to my eye, certification of Fraser River sockeye fails the common sense test. There are just too many issues hanging over this fishery. To me, an eco-label means I can buy that fish in good conscience, and it's passed some kind of higher standard that means it represents an ecologically smart option.

It's not up to me. The MSC's practices are collaborative and science-based.

Kerry Coughlin, the MSC's regional director of the Americas, said that certification doesn't mean a fishery is abundant, but that it's well-managed and fisheries managers are responding appropriately. Commercial fishing is not a contributor to the low runs of B.C. Fraser River sockeye, she said.

Seafood buyers have amazing opportunities to drive change on the water by favoring MSC-certified fish in their purchasing. Fisheries then improve so they can be certified.
But there's still more to do. Buyers can be formally involved in the MSC's three governance bodies that ensure the council is following through on its mission: the technical advisory board, the board of trustees and the stakeholder council. Buyers can also be informally involved, said Coughlin, by talking to the commercial manager in their region.

"MSC is a collaborative organization and we view this as a partnership on all sides," she said. "We're constantly looking at policies and processes."

If you're not part of the ongoing conversation about the eco-label and what it means, I urge you to jump in and ensure that the MSC helps drive critical improvement on the water. The stakes are simply too high and we all have to help the MSC approach succeed.

You know the drill — without healthy fish stocks, we're all out of work. The MSC initiative must have enough teeth to ensure that fisheries are truly improving. Failure is not an option.
 

Subscribe

Want seafood news sent to your inbox?

You may unsubscribe from our mailing list at any time. Diversified Communications | 121 Free Street, Portland, ME 04101 | +1 207-842-5500
None