Weak Hook Controversy: can NOAA recommendation save bluefin tuna in the Gulf?

Following the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, there was understandable concern for a variety of species that inhabit the area, particularly those whose numbers were fragile and in decline to begin with. The Atlantic bluefin tuna was one such example, not only because its number worldwide are perilously low but because it is the Gulf of Mexico where the Western Atlantic bluefins go to spawn from March to June.

Pelagic longlining (PLL), one of commercial fishing's most indiscriminate methods, also occurs in the Gulf and with some scientists saying that as much as 20% of juvenile Atlantic bluefin tuna population was killed by the oil spill, many organizations are seeking to have the spawning grounds placed off limits to all PLL fishing during the spawning season. Their position is that, with a perilous population already weakened by the direct effects of the oil spill, to allow longlining to take place would spell disaster.

Equally as tragic is the fact that the focus of the longliners in the Gulf is not bluefin tuna. They are after the smaller yellowfin tuna, swordfish, and other species - making the bluefin merely accidental bycatch. Is it possible for the large and powerful bluefin tuna to be released if caught? Apparently not. There is a high mortality rate because the elevated levels of stress when caught, combined with the animals high metabolism and the warm waters of the Gulf, often prove fatal before any chance of release could take place.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has, to date, recommended that PLL boats use what are called "weak hooks." These are large hooks that are constructed with a smaller diameter wire so that a large and powerful fish like a bluefin tuna will have a fighting chance because the hook will bend, allowing the fish to release itself.

According to the results of field tests with participating longliners from 2008 to 2010, the NOAA Fisheries Service "found a statistically significant reduction in the catch of bluefin tuna of 56%, but no statistically significant difference in the catch of yellowfin tuna, swordfish, dolphin fish, or escolar on weak hooks compared to traditional hooks."

NOAA is considering making the use of weak hooks mandatory for the Gulf PPL fleet, but this has not necessarily won favor with many conservation groups concerned about the overall declining population of bluefin tuna and who have been demanding greater action on the part of ICCAT, the international body that basically regulates the tuna industry but which has continued to set annual catch levels that far exceeds levels recommended by even their own scientific panels.

Additionally, while some Atlantic Bluefin tuna would be spared by the use of weak hooks, there are countless other animals, from sharks to turtles to other unwanted bycatch, that would be needlessly killed just by virtue of the very nature of the longline technique itself.

As the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) describes it, "The pelagic longline fishery has a long history of deadly interactions with imperiled species. The weak-hook proposal acts as a stopgap measure to allow longline fishing to continue in spite of strict limits on bluefin tuna catch. Closing western Atlantic bluefin tuna breeding grounds during spawning season will not only afford bluefin tuna a greater chance to recover, but will also build a healthy ecosystem by protecting other bycatch species such as sharks, sea turtles and billfish."

CBD is currently waging a campaign through their own efforts and that of a email letter drive to Division Chief Margo Schulze-Haugen of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service to have NOAA consider the closure. If you would like to add your voice, click here.

Read NOAA's bulletin on weak hooks.

ICCAT & Tuna: "extraordinary" meeting - depends on who you ask

One final report on ICCAT (International Convention for Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) and the conclusions from its recent annual meeting: the future of bluefin tuna in 2011. As reported earlier, bluefin tuna - particularly Atlantic and Mediterranean tuna - are on perilously shaky ground. ICCAT currently limits its members to a catch quota of 13,500 tons of tuna. This past weekend in Paris, ICCAT set a new level for next year: 12,900 tons - a reduction of only 600 tons or 4 percent.

In ICCAT's press release, the meeting was described as "extraordinary."

Here is how the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) summed it up:

"At its annual meeting last year, ICCAT decided to set catch levels so that bluefin tuna would have at least a 60% chance of recovering by 2022. In October, ICCAT's scientific advisory committee reported that this goal could be met by keeping annual catch limits at the current level of 13,500 tons. Improving the chances of recovery, they added, would require cutting catch levels to below 6000 tons. On Saturday, ICCAT member countries agreed (pdf) to a 12,900-ton ceiling for eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna."

Here is how Oceana, who was in attendance to promote a range of tuna, billfish, turtle, and shark conservation measures, described the meeting's conclusions:

"While ICCAT reduced the allowed catch for eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna to 12,900 tonnes, this four percent reduction is almost laughable. Furthermore, ICCAT failed completely to take action to establish spawning ground sanctuaries, a basic and much-needed management measure. Oceana supports a closure of the bluefin tuna fishery until a system is in place that follows scientific advice on catch levels, ensures stock recovery, stops illegal fishing, and protects spawning areas in the Gulf of Mexico and Mediterranean Sea.

'This trivial quota reduction for the eastern bluefin tuna stock is a political decision, not a science-based one,' said Maria Jose Cornax, fisheries campaigns manager for Oceana. 'Without an industrial fishing closure, it actually encourages illegal fishing and fails to ensure stock recovery. This political outcome is not good for the fish or the fisherman, and will certainly result in further stock depletion.'”

Analogous to ICCAT and the economic interests it protects, is the energy/fossil fuel industry. Oil companies could break the back of our fossil fuel addiction in relatively short order with a major commitment and shift to alternative energy sources. They could dominate that new market as surely as they dominate oil and the environment would probably be the better for it in the end. But their focus is primarily on sustaining current business models with just enough token support in alternative energy so as to appear as if they are forward-thinking. They know what the future holds in store but choose not to fully address it.

ICCAT is following the same path, sustaining a dying fishing industry at the expense of dwindling marine species. Conservation groups, to their credit, will continue to pressure ICCAT to reconsider its fundamental strategy of minimal change for the sake of short-term financial goals. But what will it take? An empty sea?

Read the ICCAT press release.
Read the AAAS Science article on the ICCAT meeting.
Read Oceana's article on the ICCAT meeting.

Atlantic Shark Conservation: Oceana appeals to ICCAT for leadership

As reported earlier today, the ICCAT (International Convention for Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) is meeting this week in Paris as a part of the organization's annual review of bluefin tuna catch limits. But ICCAT's charter is not limited to the management of only tuna fisheries. It also considers the management of "tuna-like" fisheries, which is a catch-all phrase that can include other pelagic migratory predators including swordfish, sailfish, and sharks.

While outcomes from past ICCAT meetings have served more to support the commercial fishing industry than the support of ocean species conservation, recognized conservation groups, like Oceana, continue to bring information to the attention of the ICCAT regarding the rapidly declining numbers of apex ocean predators. This year, Oceana is focusing on sharks and the need for the ICCAT to seriously consider addressing the number of sharks being taken - whether legally or otherwise - and the potential for further abuse through under-reporting.

Oceana has released a new report that estimates that as many as 1.3 million sharks were taken in the Atlantic in 2008. Averaging the weight of the various 21 species listed in the report as being caught within ICCAT-monitored waters, that number equates to 65,000 tons of shark. To put that into perspective, the ICCAT currently limits tuna harvests to under 14,000 tons of tuna - and that is a figure that many scientists believe will doom the Atlantic bluefin tuna to extinction. Just what can we expect with 65,000 tons of shark disappearing each year?

On top of that, Oceana believes 1.3 million sharks could be a gross underestimation due to under-reporting. According to Oceana, based on scientific estimates from Hong Kong shark fin trade data, the true number could be three times higher - although, you can expect that figure to be dismissed by fishing industry advocates as speculative and unreliable.

“Sharks are virtually unmanaged at the international level,” said Oceana's Elizabeth Griffin. "ICCAT has a responsibility to protect sharks. It is time to protect our ocean's top predators."

While ICCAT does have in place minor shark fin restrictions and a prohibition on bigeye thresher sharks, there are other crucial Atlantic shark species that are afforded no fishery management or protection at all. This includes several species that are currently listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. Of particular concern are porbeagle, oceanic whitetip, scalloped hammerhead, and shortfin mako sharks.

According to an Oceana press release, the group's representatives will be calling on the ICCAT to implement the following initiatives:

• Prohibit the capture of endangered and vulnerable species, including hammerhead, oceanic whitetip, common thresher and porbeagle sharks;
• Establish science-based, precautionary catch limits for other commonly caught species in ICCAT fisheries, especially for at-risk shortfin mako sharks; and
• Improve the ICCAT shark finning ban by requiring sharks to be landed whole, with their fins still naturally attached

Considering the ICCAT's dismal track record, Oceana has its work cut out for itself. But they continue to go up against the pro-shark fishing interest groups in these international arenas, hoping that at some point forward-thinking policy makers will take decisive action in favor of sharks before it is too late.

As they push the agenda forward, we, as individuals, can support them and make responsible pro-conservation choices regarding shark, tuna, and billfish products. After all, the fishing industry is, in large part, simply responding to market demand.

Read the Oceana press release.

Atlantic Bluefin Tuna: species' future once again debated by controversial ICCAT

Starting this Wednesday in Paris, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) will hold its annual meeting to review catch quotas for the coming year. The 48 member governments of ICCAT constitute one of the few international fishery management organizations that can address the issue of rapidly declining stocks of bluefin tuna, billfish, and even sharks. But to date it has a dismal track record in the eyes of many scientific and conservation organizations.

At last year's meeting, the ICCAT ignored the recommendations of even their own scientific advisers and set catch levels at 13,5000 tons - well above the recommendations ranging from 6,000 tons to an all out ban. It became clear that ICCAT's mission was not the conservation of an aquatic species but that of propping up a dwindling industry in the short term.

So, once again, they meet to discuss the future of Atlantic commercial fishing in a time of worldwide economic pressures, a huge demand for bluefin tuna in Japan with astronomical prices to match, and political pressures to keep supporting a commercial fishing industry with the status quo - rather than transition it to a more sustainable future.

Gloomy outlook, but there is some interesting political jockeying going on.

According to the New York Times, "The European Union’s fisheries commissioner, Maria Damanaki, with backing from Sweden, Germany and Britain, has called for an Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean quota of 'less than 6,000 tons.' The union’s 27 members are supposed to reach a consensus and vote as a bloc."

Ready to challenge that proposal may be France, Italy, and Spain. France has come under fire, in particular, for an apparent reversal in their support of an outright ban proposed just 3 months ago at a UN meeting on endangered species. "In addition to the apparent about-face by President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government, the hosts may find the situation delicate for another reason: the French Agriculture Ministry was singled out in the [International Consortium of Investigative Journalists] report as having allegedly connived for many years to help French fishermen understate their catch," reported the New York Times. ‘‘'France is becoming the Darth Vader of the bluefin fishery,' Rémi Parmentier, an adviser to the Pew Environment Group, said in a recent interview. 'France appears to be doing its best to sink proposals to reduce the catch.'"

Following the Gulf oil spill and concerns of potential impacts on Gulf of Mexico bluefin tuna breeding grounds, the position of the United States is a mixed bag. Jane Lubchenco, head of NOAA, said that Washington would support the scientific recommendations - which lean towards radically reduced catch levels. But northeast politicians, who represent major industrial Atlantic fishing fleets, are riding the wave of unemployment concerns and resisting efforts to have the bluefin tuna listed as an endangered species under U.S. law. Again, short-term gain that serves only as a precursor to a total industry collapse.

The interesting wild card in all of this has been indications from Japan that they might consider stricter fishery management. At the recent Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) meeting, Japan stymied all efforts to protect tuna under CITES rules, declaring ICCAT to be the more appropriate forum. Now the pressure is on Japan to put their money where their mouth is. Being consumers of more than three quarters of the catch of Atlantic bluefin tuna, Japan could endorse significantly lower catch levels - or even a moratorium, as some Japanese officials have said they would be willing to support.

Or they can watch their market demand vaporize before their eyes in just a few short years with the loss of one of the ocean's great predator species. The battle of short-term versus long-term goals continues.

Read article in New York Times.

Bluefin Tuna: Mediterranean fishing closed early

Here's a post today from Mike at Beqa Adventure Divers regarding the Bluefin Tuna fisheries in the Mediterranean:

Med Tuna Fisheries closed!

Betcha you remember this!

Well, as I said, not all hope is lost! The much-reviled European Fisheries Commission has closed the Mediterranean Tuna fisheries one week early - much like they did last year! The situation of the Northern Bluefin continues to be dire and the Gulf oil spill has likely made things even worse (read this!) - still, this is good news as it clearly illustrates the desire to enforce sustainable fisheries. As is this - and I may add, very much contrary to these shenanigans!

The equally reviled ICCAT will meet in Paris this November, this after a host of preparatory meetings. This is the body that has the mandate, and contrary to CITES, the know how to regulate the Atlantic Tuna fisheries. Members here. The fisheries in the Mediterranean are regulated by the GFCM - members here.

Has anybody started talking to them - inclusive of talking to Japan? And even more importantly: is anybody stepping forward with ideas and funds aimed at mitigating the impact of possible quota reductions, especially when it comes to the poorer African and Caribbean countries - oh, and Greece? All whilst wielding the stick, as in leveraging development aid?

All kidding aside: has anybody learned the lessons of Doha and developed a realistic, and above all, unified strategy - or will the NGOs continue to be naive, badly prepared and fragmented, only to incur yet another inevitable defeat?

We shall see!

I have written several posts in the past regarding the decimated bluefin tuna population, the commercial fishery agencies that have dropped the ball time and time again, and the international organizations that have caved in to pressure from countries where the market demand is high. But more meetings are coming. The big question is will anything change? Will something be done before we say "Sorry, Charlie" for the very last time and watch an important pelagic species fade into extinction?

CITES Conference: a major disappoinment for ocean conservation

Having been on location for the past two weeks, I am now getting caught up on some conservation issues. And I am finding myself to be a bit disappointed and discouraged. The CITES conference that concluded last week in Qatar was definitely a letdown for ocean conservationists as proposed trade measures to protect marine species ranging from bluefin tuna to sharks were defeated.

Regarding the bluefin tuna, Japan apparently waged a vigorous campaign to defeat the proposed Appendix I rating, which would have initiated a complete trade ban. The populations of bluefin tuna are considered so perilously low that many marine biologists question whether extinction can be avoided.

There was a long list of sharks that were up for various levels of protection ranging from the hammerhead species to the spiny dogfish. All were rejected. And proposals to protect coral species were similarly defeated.

There were proposals that were adopted for several terrestrial flora and fauna - those that basically had little commercial value. In the end, what became clear was that CITES was more interested in the short-term gain of propping up dwindling trade in endangered species than in the protection of those species in the long term. Preserving the status quo of market-driven economies was more important than preserving the very resources that are the foundations of those economies.

Renown shark researcher Leonard Compagno, Director of the Shark Research Institute said, "CITES seems to be primarily about promoting trade in endangered species, not regulating or preventing it. Its mode of operation seems to favor behind the scenes lobbying and power-politics with certain countries dominating by their wealth and power, and species seem to become protected in the breach when parties are not interested in opposing CITES protection. It addresses a tiny fraction of biodiversity, and seems reluctant to be engaged in battling the biotic holocaust that stalks the world."

Perhaps CITES will take steps in the future - when the tuna boats return to port with their holds empty, when there are no more fins for shark fin soup, and when the last great polar bear has sunk to the bottom of the Arctic ocean. But by then, their only recourse will be to hang their heads in shame for their greed and lack of foresight.

I'm generally an optimistic and determined person when it comes to conservation. I think I need to curl up with some comfort food and rally my inner forces. Tomorrow is another day.

Click here to read the latest press release.
Click here to read the results of the proposals.

ACT TODAY: last day for U.S. comments on CITES tuna & shark protections

A last minute reminder from Oceana: today is the last day for U.S. citizens to submit comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the upcoming CITES convention. At the 2010 meeting, scheduled for March, several ocean species will be considered for protection under CITES' Appendix I, II, or III listings.

Under consideration are:

• Bluefin Tuna - heavily over-fished in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean.
• 8 Sharks - spiny dogfish, porbeagle, oceanic whitetip, dusky, sandbar, and the scalloped, smooth, and great hammerhead sharks.
• Red & Pink Corals - harvested for jewelry.

CITES has taken significant steps in the past to curb the trade in endangered species like rhino horns and elephant tusks. Here is an opportunity to make significant progress with several important aquatic species.

Again, this is the last day for U.S. public comments to reach Dr. Rosemarie Gnam, the U.S. representative for the CITES meeting. If you're a U.S. citizen, let your voice be heard!

Click here to send a message via Oceana (if the link does not work properly, go to the Oceana web site and sign up for their Wavemaker e-activist program).

Bluefin Tuna Update: ICCAT perpetuates bad management

Several times I have posted updates on the fate of the Bluefin Tuna, particularly those populations that have been heavily fished in the Atlantic and Mediterranean seas. The two organizations that could have an impact internationally on how bluefin tuna fisheries are managed are CITES and ICCAT.

In early October, I reported that scientific groups, including ICCAT's own advisers had recommended a severe cutback in the catch quota as the population was on the brink of collapse, having shrunk by more than 85%.

"Many countries turn to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) for guidance regarding commercial limits but their quotas have often fallen short of levels recommended by many research groups, showing a bias towards the commercial tuna fishing industry. But that may be changing."

I was wrong.

According to a press release from Oceana, the ICCAT has just approved a catch limit of 13,500 tons for next year:

"'The risk of collapse has already been addressed in previous assessments, and there is scientific consensus about what's happening right now. [The proposed quota] is not sufficient to recover the stocks and it will lead to individual vessel quotas that are too low to economically sustain fishing activities. This will definitely encourage underreporting of catches and illegal fishing, said Xavier Pastor. He added: 'ICCAT has now definitely lost its credibility and its CITES' turn to avoid the collapse of this species.'"

This means we must turn our attention to the next major CITES meeting in March to see if it will list Bluefin Tuna as an Appendix I endangered species, as has already been proposed by at least one CITES member nation. This listing would mandate a complete cessation of commercial bluefin tuna fishing.

Also mentioned in the Oceana press release, ICCAT apparently took little if any action regarding limiting the take of certain shark species:

"'Sharks are being caught without any limit at all in the Atlantic, and there is little hope now for getting these fisheries regulated in the near future,' said Rebecca Greenberg, shark campaigner with Oceana. 'ICCAT scientists recommended that mortality for shortfin mako be reduced years ago, and the Commission still has not done anything to implement this. ICCAT is ignoring the advice of its own scientists, and dooming species to overfishing and imminent stock collapse.'"

Despite the scientific data, ICCAT appears to be an organization dedicated to preserving a floundering industry rather than a floundering marine species. It's sad that they can't seem to live up to their own namesake.

Read the Oceana press release.

Tuna Populations: new ICCAT assessment and new Hawaiian venture

In September, I posted information on the status of the Bluefin Tuna and the efforts by Monaco to have this highly depleted fish listed by CITES as endangered, thereby initiating a commercial ban on the species. Unfortunately, the EU was not providing much support but Monaco was still moving ahead with the request.

Many countries turn to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) for guidance regarding commercial limits but their quotas have often fallen short of levels recommended by many research groups, showing a bias towards the commercial tuna fishing industry. But that may be changing.

An analysis by ICCAT's own advisers reports that stocks of Atlantic Bluefin Tuna are probably less than 15% of their original size.

According to an article in the online BBC News, "For a number of years, ICCAT has set quotas higher than scientists' recommendations. The pressure this puts on stocks has been compounded by illegal fishing for this valuable species, which according to some estimates adds 30% to the official quota. Atlantic bluefin tuna are mainly caught from countries around the Mediterranean Sea, but most of the meat is consumed in Asia, particularly Japan. Japan has previously argued that commercial fish species should be controlled by bodies like ICCAT rather than CITES. 'The right thing would be to impose a zero quota,' said Sue Lieberman, director of international policy for the Pew Environment Group."

Read the BBC news article.

And in a related development, Hawaii Oceanic Technology has received permission to establish the first Bigeye Tuna farm near the big island of Hawaii. The company intends to breed juvenile or tuna "fry" in a lab then transfer them to large pens three miles offshore.

By feeding the tuna only sustainable feeder fish species, resisting the use of antibiotics, and placing the tuna pens in water that is over a thousand feet deep, they hope to avoid some of the environmental concerns that have been raised by some ocean conservation groups about this operation and others worldwide.

It is important that 1.) we realize that traditional commercial tuna fishing is no longer a viable option as tuna populations are being drastically depleted worldwide, and 2.) raising tuna in an aquafarming operation is probably our best bet. But serious issues regarding ocean pollution and disease must be addressed if it is to have a viable future.

Read the MNN/AP article.

European Union Scorecard: 1 for sharks, 1 against tuna

Following up on two recent posts about the CITES status for Bluefin Tuna and Sharks, there's good news and bad news.

The good news: The European Union countries have agreed on a German proposal to submit two species of shark to CITES for consideration as an Appendix II listed endangered species. The two species are Porbeagle sharks, a deep water species in the North Atlantic that reaches a length of 10 feet; and the Spurdog, or Spiny Dogfish, a small 3-foot variety. Both have been heavily fished for their meat to satisfy European market demand and their populations have declined worldwide. An Appendix II listing would require close fishery management of their catches by all CITES member nations.

The bad news: The EU countries also rejected support of a Monaco proposal to place the Bluefin Tuna in an Appendix I status. This would ban all international trade in this species. The proposal was strongly opposed by Mediterranean countries, who have substantial tuna fleets and would, it seems, prefer to continue supporting those fleets with fishery management policies that have, to date, failed to produce a sustainable population. In fact, at today's catch rate, the species is bound for extinction in the eyes of many scientific and research experts.

Perhaps the conservation-minded Monaco will still continue with their proposal to protect Bluefin Tuna, when the CITES members meet in March of next year.

Bluefin Tuna: CITES endangered status could be its last hope

Some time ago, I posted information about actions taken by the ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) regarding acceptable levels of commercially-caught Bluefin Tuna. The organization, which is supposed to be in charge of managing the fishery for much of the EU and the Mediteranean, settled on catch levels far above the recommendations of their scientific advisors. The Bluefin Tuna's future did not look good.

And apparently it hasn't gotten any better.

Monaco has proposed to CITES (International Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species) to list the bluefin tuna in their Appendix I of endangered species. In so doing, it would completely ban the international trade in Bluefin Tuna by CITES member nations. With commercial levels set above recommended levels of sustainability, combined with poor fishery management and illegal fishing, the Monaco proposal would seem to be a last and final step in trying to save the Bluefin Tuna.

Oceana's European office has sent a letter to several members of the European Commission's environmental and maritime branches to support the Monaco proposal. Hopefully, a CITES Appendix I listing will provide the Bluefin Tuna with the opportunity to replenish its numbers - if it's not too late.

ICCAT: Putting Atlantic bluefin tuna conservation in its grave

Just a few days ago, I posted some hopeful information regarding proposed limits or regulations on Atlantic bluefin tuna and several shark species (see posting). A meeting was being held in Morocco by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT). It seems by the end of the meeting those hopes were dashed.

The ICCAT has chosen to ignore the advice from their own scientific advisors and agreed to reduce the annual catch from 27,500 tons to 22,000 tons for 2009. The scientific advisors presented data that showed that a catch of 15,000 tons was necessary if the species was to be preserved. Once again it seems short-term economic gain has won out over long-term conservation management. Considering that negative economic impacts on commercial fishing are not something that nature has ever given much of a damn about, there are those who believe that the ICCAT's action could seal the fate of Atlantic bluefin tuna.

Xavier Pastor, Executive Director for Oceana in Europe, declared: "ICCAT’s credibility has been destroyed by the negotiating countries who opposed responsible management measures for bluefin tuna. Instead of preserving the bluefin tuna stock from collapse, they gave in to the fishing industry’s short-term economic interests. With this decision, we can only wait for the disappearance of bluefin tuna."

Also under consideration were regulations regarding the taking of several depleted species of sharks. The only regulation to pass was the releasing of bigeye thresher sharks. (Read Oceana press release.)

To modify Starkist's old advertising slogan, "Sorry Charlie", which promoted discriminating tuna quality; it seems the ICCAT wants to say "Sorry Charlie, nice knowing you."

Teeth & Tuna: ICCAT and EU consider tuna and shark limits

In past postings I have mentioned the International Commission for Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT). It is the primary organization responsible for setting regulations regarding the taking of Bluefin Tuna in the Atlantic. That population is very close to reaching the classic "tipping point", where declining populations will suddenly plummet as the biological reproductive infrastructure collapses due to over-fishing. Already the population figures are showing staggering declines.

On a positive note, the ICCAT is meeting in Morocco and many of the participants, including representatives from the European Union and the United States, are feeling the heat from conservation organizations armed with not just "tree hugger" rhetoric but solid scientific data. There are several proposals on the table - from reduced catches to complete moratoriums, particularly in Atlanctic breeding grounds. (Read Oceana press release.)

Oceana also has announced that the European Union is seriously considering several regulations regarding the commercial taking of several pelagic shark species, all of which having been adversely impacted either as bycatch from longline fishing for tuna or by being specifically sought after. Included for discussion are thresher, hammerhead, mako, and blue sharks. (Read Oceana press release.)

“The EU plays an important role in shark fisheries in the Atlantic, and I’m glad to see them take this strong and positive stance to lead sustainable fishing for these species. If the rest of the ICCAT parties follow this lead, we will make a huge advancement in securing the future of these vulnerable animals,” declared Ricardo Aguilar, Director of Research for Oceana in Europe.

Since I have started this blog, I have watched Oceana.org grow as an international marine conservation organization with a particularly proactive stance: a growing force to be reckoned with. Let's wish them continued success.

Aquaculture: the key to true "sustainable" seafood

I was having a discussion with some people the other night about marine conservation issues and commercial overfishing. These folks were quite convinced that even sticking with "sustainable seafood species" was ultimately a lost cause - by removing fish without giving something back, you are upsetting the natural marine order and depletion of any species is inevitable.

That may or may not be true in every case, but it certainly is one reason why I support the aquaculture or aquafarming efforts taking place around the world. The logic behind these activities is pretty simple: we are giving something back.

• We raise cattle to insure we have a supply of beef.
• We raise chickens to insure we have a supply of poultry.
• And we do the same for fruits and vegetables.
  

But when it comes to the sea, for centuries we have just taken. Aquaculture can reverse that approach. But it's not without its challenges. Whether on land or at sea, there are issues of potential pollution from feed or animal waste, introduction of diseases or parasites, logistical challenges because of the required size of the facilities, and so on.

These are challenges that must be conquered and there are some definite strides being made. I have mentioned some in past postings regarding the Indian Ocean's bluefin tuna, Chesapeake Bay's blue crab, and more. I would strongly recommend that you support the companies and organizations involved in aquaculture. As the demand for seafood increases, it's the only logical answer.

Contaminated Seafood: how to find the "good stuff"

Seafood contamination - primarily in the form of mercury poisoning - is serious business. It has moved beyond the early contaminated species of tuna to other pelagics like swordfish and sharks and continues to spread to other species. But since uncontaminated fish (from sustainable species, of course) can be a healthy component of our diet, how can we be sure we're purchasing seafood that is safe? Where's a good safe place to buy safe seafood?

Oceana.org has assembled a great interactive mapping service: Interactive Grocery Store Map. With this map you can drill down to your local neighborhood and find stores that are on Oceana's "Green List."

This is a big help to the conscientious shopper but, of course, we need to also address the reasons for seafood contamination in the first place. Industrial processes that put mercury vapor into the air or through industrial discharge must be eliminated both in the U.S. and worldwide. The "liquid metal" was fun to play with when I was a child but in the 50+ years since, we've learned it's no plaything.

Bluefin Tuna: new advances in aquafarming

I recently posted a story about Tuna in the Mediterranean. Here's an interesting follow up in this week's TIME magazine. There is an article about the Bluefin Tuna found in the Indian Ocean between Australia and Indonesia (Click here to read article.). The tuna migrate through these waters to breed and because their migratory paths are predictable, their populations have been severely hunted, reduced to 10% of what they were in the 60s - all to meet the demands of the Japanese sushi/sashimi market. Okay, that's the bad news.

The good news is that one company, Clean Seas Tuna, lead by Hagen Stehr, is making progress in developing aquaculture techniques for tricking confined tuna into thinking they are in their happy mating grounds, enabling Clean Seas Tuna to gather fertile eggs for farming. The developed offspring could add to the levels of tuna currently being farmed in open water pens.

While Stehr has his skeptics, it is encouraging to see work continue in improving aquafarming techniques. To meet growing demand, advances will need to be made. Otherwise, many commercial species will continue to head towards eventual depletion.

P.S. - I'm always interested in what pops up in the general media, like TIME. It's an indication of what issues are being disseminated to the public at large. While we marine conservation advocates peruse our various web sites, blogs, and scientific sources, I also make a point of checking on publications as diverse as TIME and Fortune.

Spanish frigate needed to protect Bluefin Tuna

Here's some news and a word to the wise: swim quickly and carry a big stick (like a Spanish frigate!).

Sharks aren't the only fish in peril from the demands of a growing Asian marketplace. According to an article from the Agencie French Presse, posted by Seaweb.org, populations of Bluefin Tuna in the Mediterranean are being decimated by European fishing fleets to meet the Japanese demand for tuna (sushi). Though quotas and moratoriums are in place, the lure of the almighty dollar is too great. But apparently Spain has had enough and set out a hi-tech frigate to patrol the Mediterranean with the intent of observing and catching any suspicious vessel that may be in violation of regulations established by the European Union.

There are arguments from French and Italian fishing boats regarding restrictive limits on catches. But the bottom line is that the numbers of Bluefin Tuna have been decreasing drastically over the years - and an increasing demand from Japan doesn't help. Putting short term profit over long term sustainability is a recipe for disaster - and apparently a way to find the Spanish navy hot on your tail!