reLAKSation 268. Callander McDowell
Rough trade: According to Seafodintelligence.com, those that suspected that Russia’s ban on Norwegian farmed salmon was not quite food safety related, may find credence in the theory that there were other political goals, as the latest round of fisheries negotiations began this week. In fact, one of Russia’s negotiators openly admitted that the recent trade restrictions were imposed ‘to secure levers of influence for Russia’s delegation.’ Russia wants a larger share of the quotas for pollack, halibut, lancet fish and ocean perch against a background in which Norway has the potential of being Norway’s largest single seafood export market. The implication is clear. A trade off between more fishing quota for increased market access for farmed salmon. As Russia is believed to illegally harvest 100,000 tonnes of cod, it will be interesting to see whether Norway agrees to this trade off.
Earlier this year, we, at Callander McDowell proposed a similar trade off between the UK and Norway in which Scottish boats would be allowed wider access to Norwegian haddock stocks in return for free access to the European market for Norwegian salmon. The aim of this proposal was to negate the minimum import price restrictions imposed as a result of the EUSPG’s dumping complaints. Whilst the European Commission was not over-ecstatic about such a proposal, surprisingly, neither were the Norwegian authorities. Their response was farmed salmon were not considered part of the fishing quota negotiations. At the time, salmon prices were well above the MIP and therefore there was no pressure to consider such a trade off. There is much more pressure to resolve the Russian restrictions on salmon imports so could it be that salmon will now become part of the negotiation process?
Our view is that market access for fish is the same whether the fish is fished or farmed. The increasing reliance on farmed fish must ensure they are given a greater significance on the political agenda.
Turning the worm: The warning that the world will run out of seafood by the year 2048 has reached national headlines in every newspaper and on every TV and radio station. The warning, which appeared in the journal Science, was authored by an international group of environmentalists and economists lead by Boris Worm of Dalhousie University in Canada after studying catch records, fish populations and the oceans’ ecosystems for the last four years. They concluded that at the current rate of harvest, the seas will be totally depleted of all seafood in about forty years time. This should not be of any surprise.
Demand for seafood continues to increase and the seas can only provide a limited supply. The same could be once said for the land. Many thousands of years ago, the earth was populated by hunter-gathers who relied on the nature’s bounty for food. The amount of food available provided a system of regulation preventing the population from growing beyond what the land could provide. Then man discovered agriculture and by growing his own food, the population began to expand and continues to do so today. In every area of food supply, man has turned from hunter-gathering to agriculture and the seas will be no different.
Man has been farming fish for over four thousand years but this has been prevalent in areas far from the sea. The sea has been able to provide sufficient produce to meet demand but in recent years, aided by improved distribution and preservation, demand has increased to the point where the seas harvest has become threatened.
There is really only one solution. The world needs to invest in aquaculture. This is the only way that pressure can be alleviated on wild stocks whilst still continuing to meet the world’s demand for fish and seafood.
The environmentalists will be horrified at such a suggestion. They have vilified modern aquaculture in recent years but equally, they are concerned about the state of the seas. The problem is that the human race leaves a large footprint on the world. We cannot avoid this, whatever we do. Farming is certainly the option offering the least impact which is why it represents the future.
Boris Worm’s report provides a blinkered view of the state of the world’s fisheries. Farming is one way that we can ensure that cod, and other species, have not had their chips. It is time our industry spoke up.
Just one hour?: One such group critical of the aquaculture industry is the Salmon Farm Protest Group. The SFPG participated in a global week of action to draw attention to their concerns about salmon farming. However, it should be pointed out that the SFPG are so concerned about the impact of salmon farming that they were only prepared to devote just one hour of their time to their protest. This took the form of the distribution of leaflets outside various UK supermarkets.
SFPG Chairman Bruce Sandison reported that there were only two incidents where his members had been harassed during the protest, which he suggests is indicative of the response to his campaign. However, it could also be suggested that his members had been and gone long before anyone realised that the protest was even taking place especially as some of the individual protests were undertaken by just one or two people.
Seafoodintelligence.com provided a selection of Action Hour reports from SFPG supporters including David Wright from outside Asda in Hamilton. Mr Wright wrote that Asda had the pleasure of his company and that whilst he hates doing these things on his lonesome, he did give all his leaflets away. Adam Hughes from outside Sainsbury’s in Hempstead Valley wrote that he passed out about half his leaflets before realising that only 7 minutes had passed by. He then stopped handing them out to everyone but after a further 17 minutes he had to call it a day as he had no more ammunition! By comparison, David McGovern said that his action hour outside Sainsburys near Dundee lasted only 40 minutes.
Finally, John Holborrow wrote that he was joined by Mrs Holborrow, their three year old son and Patrick Rhea in Wandsworth.
It certainly sounds that SFPG members made a big impact on Saturday morning shoppers. Perhaps it’s an indication that they couldn’t get together enough people who were willing to spare more than a few minutes of their time to fight their cause. Maybe if shoppers really knew that the protest was organised by a few anglers who blame salmon farming for their reduced catches, then they might not have even given them a minute, let alone an hour of their time.