Tuna trade ban raising red flags for industry

The Obama administration is backing a proposal to declare Atlantic bluefin tuna an endangered species and ban international trade of the fish — a prized sushi ingredient and valuable commodity for local fishermen.

Pushed by environmental groups and the principality of Monaco, the trade ban would be the first dropped on a major commercial fishery under the United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, or CITES. Member nations will vote on the proposal at a meeting in Doha, Qatar, held over the next two weeks.

On Wednesday, the announcement that the United States would support a bluefin ban was immediately hailed as a "game changer" by the Pew Environment Group, which with Oceana, has spearheaded the drive for an endangered designation.

"Other governments can either can either join Monaco and the United States in boldly supporting the conservation of bluefin tuna, sharks and other marine species or they can yield to commercial fishing interests that focus more on short-term profits," said Susan Lieberman of the Pew Environment Group in a release.

But fishing industry supporters call it a dangerous precedent that could result in endangered species listings on numerous other commercial species as a means of circumventing traditional fisheries management.

A group of 15 lawmakers from Atlantic states — including five from Massachusetts — signed a letter written by U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, calling a trade ban counterproductive to existing bluefin conservation efforts and disproportionately harmful to U.S. fishermen.

Upon hearing that the United States would back the CITES listing, Snowe this week called the decision "egregious" and an act that would "penalize our fishermen for their contributions to the long-term sustainability of the species."

The American Bluefin Tuna Association went further.

"What this is, is a clear indication that the Pew Charitable trust is running NOAA and controlling the Obama administration and forcing this radical approach that will damage bluefin marketing prospects for years to come," said Rich Ruais, the association's executive director. "It is putting a label on stocks that bluefin are threatened to extinction. I think it is a devastating precedent."

The Snowe letter was signed by the entire congressional delegations of Maine and New Hampshire, plus U.S. Sen. Scott Brown and Congressmen John Tierney, William Delahunt, Barney Frank and Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts. U.S. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who did not sign, has not answered questions about his position.

The four-member Rhode Island delegation sent a separate letter to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service opposing a bluefin CITES listing.

Both sides in the debate acknowledge that bluefin tuna has been overfished, especially in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea.

But how to restore stocks of the fish, which traverse the ocean, has been a subject of intense argument.

International catch limits for the species are set by the International Commission for the Conservation of Tunas, or ICCAT, which has recently slashed quotas in an effort to bring bluefin populations back.

Last December, ICCAT reduced the international quota for Atlantic bluefin to 13,500 metric tons this year, down from 22,500 metric tons last year, and established a timeline for rebuilding the stock by 2023.

In the United States, domestic catch limits on bluefin set by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service already keep local fishermen far below the quotas set by ICCAT.

The fishing industry and group of New England lawmakers say ICCAT is the proper venue to limit the harvest of bluefin, not the blunter tool of a trade ban, a which mostly affects demand.

But NOAA says ICCAT has not gone far enough and the CITES listing is necessary to bolster conservation efforts and "keep the pressure on."

"We do recognize there has been progress, but we are concerned about compliance and concerned about backtracking," said Rebecca Lent, director of internal affairs at NOAA this week. "We want to keep the pressure on. We are not giving up on ICCAT. ICCAT is critical."

Exactly what the result of a CITES listing would be is unclear.

NOAA points out that the United States is a net importer of bluefin, so domestic demand for bluefin may be enough to support American fishermen.

But Ruais and the bluefin association say those figures are misleading, because they don't account for the seasonality of the domestic bluefin catch, which only runs for five months with landings concentrated during certain periods. Without an open Japanese market, prices will plummet whenever local fishermen are seeing their best landings, Ruais said.

The other question is what will happen in nations not as committed to conservation as the United States.

Japan, the dominant buyer for bluefin, has already signaled that it would not observe a CITES ban if one is approved. And even if another bluefin exporting nation does not pull out of the agreement, the possibility exists for an expansion of black market trade.

A CITES listing would provide a "fertile ground for a black market trade of bluefin that could be legally caught by other countries and laundered through those countries that take a reservation," Snowe wrote in her letter opposing a CITES listing.

"Meanwhile the U.S. fishermen who have led the world in conservation of the species would be excluded from this market thereby bearing the brunt of a CITES listing's economic impact," the Snowe letter said.

Patrick Anderson can be reached at 978-283-7000, x3455, or panderson@gloucestertimes.com

Fishing Industry Stories

Search Results

Discussion

Site Map

Contact Us