Salmon battle in Seattle
September 13, 2024
By: David Mills
Next week SkeenaWild Conservation Trust, Watershed Watch and Raincoast Conservation Foundation are heading across the border to defend B.C. wild salmon against the ongoing assault by southeast Alaska fishing fleets.
Watershed Watch’s Fisheries Advisor, David Mills.
Our team will appear at hearings in Seattle hosted by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). We will have to persuade a U.K.-based adjudicator that salmon fisheries in southeast Alaska, which kill millions of returning Canadian salmon and steelhead each year, should not be certified as “sustainable” because they don’t meet the MSC’s standards. Sitting across from us will be representatives of the Alaska fishing industry—a US$15 billion behemoth capable of catching almost everything that swims in the North Pacific, including migrating B.C. salmon and steelhead.
The battle is uphill but we’ve come this far.
Why sustainability certification matters
The hearings are happening because our organizations filed a formal challenge with MSC against the re-certification of the ‘Southeast Unit of Assessment’ in Alaska’s salmon fishery. Vancouver-based Ocean Wise has already removed southeast Alaskan salmon from its list of sustainable seafood, but MSC remains the most influential seafood ecolabel in the world.
MSC certification gives seafood producers the right to use MSC’s famous blue checkmark logo, giving them easier access to high-value markets. In this case, the certification client is the Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, which represents the commercial and labour interests in the Alaska salmon fishery. If they lost their MSC certification for Southeast Alaska, it would be a big deal. Last year, that fishery unit generated US$117,066,718.
Sustainability certifications were originally intended to improve fishery transparency, prevent over-harvesting, and reduce bycatch. Yet something has gone wrong. British Columbia’s salmon, wildlife and fishing communities are paying the price, while Alaska’s multibillion-dollar fishing industry profits. Our goal is to refocus those core values and hold Alaska—and the MSC—to a higher standard.
The other side of the table
The Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation hired MRAG Americas, a certification assessment body based in Florida, to assess their compliance with MSC standards. We plan to show the adjudicator how the evidence used by MRAG to support certifying the fishery as sustainable is insufficient, out of date, and out of touch with actual fishing practices, which are not properly monitored, do not require the live release of bycatch, and do not provide appropriate data to evaluate impacts to stocks of concern.
Despite recurring concerns about Alaska’s fishing practices over many years, neither MRAG nor the Marine Stewardship Council has imposed conditions on the fishery to fix these problems.
We challenged recertification and an independent adjudicator found we have a case. While the adjudication process is underway, you can follow the document filings here. And you can read about how Canadian conservation groups filed an objection to the Alaskan salmon “sustainable” certification and how the independent adjudicator accepted our complaint.
What’s at stake
Canadian fishing communities know all too well the pain of loss. Whether it’s Indigenous people waiting upriver for their salmon to return, or dockside processors, deckhands, skippers, or steelhead guides, many have felt the long, steep decline in West Coast salmon fisheries. The truth is that many of our salmon populations are in dire straits, putting the animals and ecosystems which depend on them at risk. We can’t rebuild our salmon runs without Alaska’s help.
This is not all on Alaska but their interception fisheries are the largest source of mortality for many B.C.-bound salmon and steelhead populations in many years. We need the Alaskans to pull their seine, gill net and troll fleets back from Canadian salmon migration routes and stripping the “sustainable” label from their products will help motivate them to make that and other necessary changes to their fisheries.
Regardless of the outcome next week in Seattle, we’re fighting to defend B.C. salmon and steelhead on a wide range of fronts. You can help. Tell the Marine Stewardship Council that Southeast Alaskan interception fisheries are not sustainable using our letter-writing tool here. You can also ask our politicians to stand up for Skeena steelhead here.
Thanks for reading.
Share This Story!
Salmon battle in Seattle
September 13, 2024
By: David Mills
Next week SkeenaWild Conservation Trust, Watershed Watch and Raincoast Conservation Foundation are heading across the border to defend B.C. wild salmon against the ongoing assault by southeast Alaska fishing fleets.
Watershed Watch’s Fisheries Advisor, David Mills.
Our team will appear at hearings in Seattle hosted by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). We will have to persuade a U.K.-based adjudicator that salmon fisheries in southeast Alaska, which kill millions of returning Canadian salmon and steelhead each year, should not be certified as “sustainable” because they don’t meet the MSC’s standards. Sitting across from us will be representatives of the Alaska fishing industry—a US$15 billion behemoth capable of catching almost everything that swims in the North Pacific, including migrating B.C. salmon and steelhead.
The battle is uphill but we’ve come this far.
Why sustainability certification matters
The hearings are happening because our organizations filed a formal challenge with MSC against the re-certification of the ‘Southeast Unit of Assessment’ in Alaska’s salmon fishery. Vancouver-based Ocean Wise has already removed southeast Alaskan salmon from its list of sustainable seafood, but MSC remains the most influential seafood ecolabel in the world.
MSC certification gives seafood producers the right to use MSC’s famous blue checkmark logo, giving them easier access to high-value markets. In this case, the certification client is the Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, which represents the commercial and labour interests in the Alaska salmon fishery. If they lost their MSC certification for Southeast Alaska, it would be a big deal. Last year, that fishery unit generated US$117,066,718.
Sustainability certifications were originally intended to improve fishery transparency, prevent over-harvesting, and reduce bycatch. Yet something has gone wrong. British Columbia’s salmon, wildlife and fishing communities are paying the price, while Alaska’s multibillion-dollar fishing industry profits. Our goal is to refocus those core values and hold Alaska—and the MSC—to a higher standard.
The other side of the table
The Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation hired MRAG Americas, a certification assessment body based in Florida, to assess their compliance with MSC standards. We plan to show the adjudicator how the evidence used by MRAG to support certifying the fishery as sustainable is insufficient, out of date, and out of touch with actual fishing practices, which are not properly monitored, do not require the live release of bycatch, and do not provide appropriate data to evaluate impacts to stocks of concern.
Despite recurring concerns about Alaska’s fishing practices over many years, neither MRAG nor the Marine Stewardship Council has imposed conditions on the fishery to fix these problems.
We challenged recertification and an independent adjudicator found we have a case. While the adjudication process is underway, you can follow the document filings here. And you can read about how Canadian conservation groups filed an objection to the Alaskan salmon “sustainable” certification and how the independent adjudicator accepted our complaint.
What’s at stake
Canadian fishing communities know all too well the pain of loss. Whether it’s Indigenous people waiting upriver for their salmon to return, or dockside processors, deckhands, skippers, or steelhead guides, many have felt the long, steep decline in West Coast salmon fisheries. The truth is that many of our salmon populations are in dire straits, putting the animals and ecosystems which depend on them at risk. We can’t rebuild our salmon runs without Alaska’s help.
This is not all on Alaska but their interception fisheries are the largest source of mortality for many B.C.-bound salmon and steelhead populations in many years. We need the Alaskans to pull their seine, gill net and troll fleets back from Canadian salmon migration routes and stripping the “sustainable” label from their products will help motivate them to make that and other necessary changes to their fisheries.
Regardless of the outcome next week in Seattle, we’re fighting to defend B.C. salmon and steelhead on a wide range of fronts. You can help. Tell the Marine Stewardship Council that Southeast Alaskan interception fisheries are not sustainable using our letter-writing tool here. You can also ask our politicians to stand up for Skeena steelhead here.
Thanks for reading.
Thank you for your most valuable advocacy. Protection of salmon is essential!
BC needs to handle this at the PST Pacific Salmon Treaty talks. This proposed action harms marketing Salmon at a particular hard time for BC and Alaska. Not the right way to do this.
Hi John, thanks for the feedback. As with any complex problem, there isn’t any one solution. Unfortunately, Alaska has stonewalled when Canada seeks their cooperation to conserve our salmon populations. As a conservation organization, we have no standing at the Pacific Salmon Commission, and British Columbia’s influence has remained very limited. We’re forced to turn to consumers for help. We hope these things change, but meanwhile our salmon and steelhead are being hammered in Southeast Alaska’s interception fisheries, which target Canadian and other south-migrating stocks. Since our challenge of the Marine Stewardship Council’s certification is limited to harvest from the Southeast Alaska Unit of Assessment, most Alaska salmon would still carry the MSC label if the adjudicator supports our challenge. BC salmon are not MSC certified. I hope this helps.