Alaskan Pollock
Member’s post ::
When we go to the supermarket, and pick up the box of frozen fish fingers, do we look for “made from Alaskan pollock” or an MSC label?
The Alaskan pollack fishery is often touted as one of the most eco-friendly, MSC assessed, sustainable fisheries on the planet. Do we then say to ourselves that we have done “our bit” for sustainable seas?
According to a report by Callander McDowell, if these fish fingers did come from the Alaska pollack fishery, and nowadays many do, we may be helping to destroy these once vast NE Pacific stocks. C & McD’s article quotes,
“Recently, at Billingsgate Fish Market’s Seafood Training School annual celebration, Peter Hajipieris, from Bird’s Eye, was asked at the meeting why; if Alaskan pollock is certified as sustainable, do packs of so few pollock products, especially in the frozen sector, carry the MSC sustainable logo. His answer was that high demand had meant that supplies of certified pollock were not so readily available and they now had to source fish from stocks that had yet to be certified.
This surely presents a dilemma since the main driver of Alaskan pollock consumption is its sustainable credentials and if the fish sold is not from a certified fishery then how can consumers be reassured that the pollock they are buying is actually sustainable?”
The most up-to-date information on pollack stocks was recently released. The 2009 survey data, was presented at the North Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting in Seattle. While preliminary, it confirmed the pollock population remains very low.
Quoting from “The Anchorage Daily News” on the data released,
“The surveys were 24 percent below what scientists expected, said Jon Warrenchuk, a fisheries biologist for conservation group Oceana who attended the meeting. “This is the lowest survey biomass they have ever seen, which is kind of worrisome,” he said.”
We here should take note, as some UK fisheries have MSC certification and others are pushing slowly towards it. The current Alaskan experience suggests that an MSC logo may not necessarily be the full answer for our dilapidated stocks. The last words of real wisdom are left to Callander McDowell,
“ The question now is whether the decline in Alaskan pollock stocks is the result of natural fluctuations in population or the fault of over-fishing?
The answer is irrelevant. Instead the question should be directed as to how fisheries are judged to be sustainable.
We have always believed that stocks can only be considered sustainable when the catch is equal to or less than recruitment and ideally, the catch should be set well below recruitment so the stock continues to remain healthy.
It has been argued that quotas are an indication that fisheries are well managed as they change with fluctuating populations, but quotas are also a feature of uncertified fisheries and have been used even in the most detested fishing regimes. Quotas are more a reactive method of management rather than proactive.
Surely the most sustainable of fisheries are those that are the most proactively managed. We have always felt that aquaculture is the best management tool available to wild catch fisheries since every fish that is produced by farming is one less fish that needs to be caught from the wild.
By comparison, sustainable certification seems to put increased pressure on stocks as the supply chain responds to calls to deal only with sustainable fish.”
Links to articles
Anchorage Daily News
Category: SSACN Announcements
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
