World Oceans Day is celebrated on June 8, an event that reminds us, among other things, that the sea is also a finite resource and that it is currently threatened by phenomena such as global warming, pollution and overfishing. , among others.
The data on the state of health of the oceans are not encouraging. According to figures from the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge, more than a million species of ocean flora and fauna are in danger, while more than 66% of the seas are damaged and only 3% of the ocean surface remains in the trouble-free present. For its part, the NGO International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) warns that each year a total of 8 million tons of plastic end up in the oceans, in addition to the fact that 20,000 large cetaceans die each year from being hit by boats. big size.
For its part, the United Nations Organization (UN) recalls that the oceans absorb around 30% of the carbon dioxide produced by humans, which cushions the impact of global warming. This organization also ensures that, at present, fish continues to be the largest source of protein in the world and that more than three million people around the planet depend on this food as the main source of this nutrient.
Therefore, it is urgent to take measures to reverse the situation in which the oceans find themselves, something that requires commitment and collaboration on the part of the authorities worldwide. This does not mean, however, that as consumers we do not have in our hands various actions to contribute to the preservation of seas and oceans. One of them is to select very carefully which fish we consume and look at some details that will allow us to choose one or the other based on its environmental impact.
According to Raúl GarcÃa, coordinator of the fishing program of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), an independent organization that works for the conservation of nature, “despite the fact that consuming local fish is always recommended, it must be taken into account that not all Km 0 fish are always sustainableâ€. This paradox also occurs in other areas (from livestock farming to garden products), since “the carbon footprint of transport is only 10%, so that sometimes it may be worth choosing a fish that has been fished far away but in a sustainable way, with environmentally friendly methods and with little environmental impactâ€.
An example of this is the fishing of wild salmon (mainly, but also of other marine species) in Alaska, an area where the laws to protect the oceans have been very strict for decades. This is explained by David McClellan, representative for southern Europe of Alaska Seafood Marketing, a public institution that brings together all the agents involved in salmon fishing and distribution: “In Alaska, deep-sea fishing is prohibited, since the industry Fishing is essential for economic development and gives work to many people, so that the legislation is very restrictive precisely to be able to guarantee that this activity can continue to be carried out for a long timeâ€.
The fact that you cannot fish on the high seas means that you only fish on the coast, in small boats, when the salmon have already gathered to return to their places of origin. This means that “you avoid having miles of nets floating on the high seas to catch the salmon that are still scattered, which also gives rise to a lot of by-catch and is quite an attack on the oceans.” In Alaska, McClellan explains, constant monitoring is carried out by the team of biologists who control salmon movements to ensure that they are always caught when they are in schools, at the optimal time and close to the coast. “Fishing is now so sophisticated that Alaska authorities long ago saw that it should be legislated on the matter based on what science says, not what fishermen want,†says the representative of Alaska Seafood Marketing.
The first question that consumers ask is how to know how everything we consume has been fished and, going even further, whether that method of fishing and the place where it has been produced is sustainable or not. It is complicated, since there are many factors involved and although the legislation has come a long way, there are still many pending actions. McClellan is clear about the first step: “Always ask the fishmonger you trust, because he has to know who the fisherman and the processor are. In short, where does that fish come from?
GarcÃa corroborates this: “The first action that will allow us to radically change things is to always inform us through the fishmonger. At first he may not know how to answer, but if more and more people ask him, he will be forced to offer us reliable information about the route that each fish has followed â€.
The problem comes, according to GarcÃa, once we have this information. “It is difficult to give detailed recommendations, so what we NGOs do is provide consumption guides, since the same species can be very well populated in one area and overexploited in another,” he says. An example of this is hake, which in the area of ​​Asturias and Galicia is at low risk, while in the Gulf of León, which stretches from the north of Catalonia to the south of France, it is in a situation of overexploitation. This means that, paradoxically, in these territories it will always be more sustainable to acquire a Galician hake than a local one. In order to know this, it is important, on the one hand, to have a reliable communication channel with an experienced fishmonger and, on the other, to have reliable information on the situation of each species at a given moment.
Fortunately, GarcÃa continues, labeling is getting better and better, so it will allow us to know some basic details that will help us make a decision. “In general, trawling has a very high footprint, while hook fishing has a smaller footprint. This must appear on the label, as well as what fish it is (that is, its name in Latin and the one it has in Spanish), if it has been extracted by extractive fishing or aquaculture and what fishing ground it comes from in the case that it is extractive â€, explains the WWF expert, who laments that, despite the fact that environmental awareness has increased in Spain, “it is still difficult for us to pay a little more for a sustainable product.”
Another sign that we are buying a sustainable fish are the MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) certification seals for extractive fishing and ASC (Aquaculture Stewardship Council) in the case of aquaculture (farmed fish). “They are two prestigious seals that have nothing to do with some certifications that hardly require an audit and little else, since not only the state of the population and how it is managed are studied, but also the impact of fishing on other species. and what is the governance framework, that is, the framework within which authority is exercisedâ€, explains GarcÃa. At the moment, only between 12-13% of world catches are certified.
World authorities, for their part, also have their fair share of duties in terms of sustainable fishing. To begin with, put a stop to illegal fishing. GarcÃa explains it: “Spain has a fairly robust regulation regarding illegal fishing, there is a very strict control on the matter. The same is not true in other countries, so the window on illegal fishing is wide open if not stopped. In other words, it may be that a container that is prevented from passing through Spain enters, say, Porto and arrives without problems at the Vigo fish market, or arrives by plane from Rotterdam. As long as the rest of the countries do not take it seriously, we are not going to move forwardâ€.
Lastly, one cannot talk about fish without mentioning aquaculture, which currently accounts for almost half of the production. Some countries, such as China, have a very powerful aquaculture development, which, according to GarcÃa, “could contribute to raising the world average, when the truth is that aquaculture is also stagnant.”
The same thing happens with aquaculture as with fishing: there are sustainable practices and there are those that are not. “In the case of bivalves or some vegetarian species, aquaculture can be very sustainable, and it can also be extraordinarily aggressive in cases such as bluefin tuna, which requires between 14 and 15 kilos of fish to fatten, an amount that can feed many families. In the end, we find ourselves with a luxury product, far from any sustainable parameter, which represents an economic waste and is only marketed in exclusive marketsâ€, says GarcÃa.
Despite everything, people like McClellan, from the oasis represented by fishing areas such as Alaska, Norway or Canada, assures that the battle against climate change is not yet lost if urgent measures are taken: “The sea has tremendous regenerative power, so we are on time. Now it is necessary to agree to the different countries, companies and institutions. It is the only way to guarantee a sustainable source of wealth and health from which we can continue to benefit for many years.â€
