SEAFOOD.COM NEWS [Seafoodnews.com] — September 24, 2013 — John Connelly, president of NFI, also testified at the sustainability hearing yesterday. Connelly focused on how the government should speak with a unified voice, and was astonished that the various agencies did not consult or know about NOAA's role in making US fisheries sustainable.
Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Rubio and subcommittee members, the National Fisheries Institute, the nation’s largest seafood trade group, is pleased to present thoughts on US government actions and third party seafood certifications.
Sustainability is a key component of NFI’s work. We rely on the long term availability of seafood resources — no fish in the future means no businesses in the future. Because of this commitment to the seafood community, I am on the boards of several global sustainability groups. For this testimony, though, I speak solely as NFI.
Fisheries management must reside with governments, whether state, federal or intergovernmental. The management of a common resource, while often aided by property rights, needs the underpinning of government oversight. For that reason, NFI is a strong proponent of NOAA Fisheries and the Council system.
For market reasons, some of our members, especially those who export seafood, have engaged in certification programs such as MSC. NFI is unfamiliar with any major change to a US fishery as the result of these certifications. However, seafood companies earn continued market access to American and European retailers by going thru steps beyond what is required under MSA and getting the third party certification.
Private sector transactions are based on business decisions. However, NFI is concerned about US government actions requiring third party certification for the 10 reasons outlined in our written testimony.
It appears that yesterday GSA modified its policies to reflect the preeminent role that NOAA Fisheries should play in government procurement policy for seafood. NFI supports those changes. NFI also thanks the several Senators who urged GSA to review its policy.
We strongly urge the Department of Interior and the National Parks Service to now follow suit. NPS based their June guidelines on GSA policy. Now that GSA has shifted, we ask NPS to publicly modify its requirements for vendors.
We further urge DOD to make clear that it believes NOAA Fisheries determinations are sufficient documentation of sustainability. The Pentagon should make clear to vendors to Navy and Marine mess halls, Army chow lines, or Air Force fine dining establishments that they should not require third party certifications to sell American fish to American sailors, Marines, soldiers, and airmen.
A last point, about root causes of this situation.
Even with the change in policy, NFI remains confused about the singular focus of seafood sustainability. Seafood remains a well-managed global resource. Seafood uses less water in its production than other proteins. Seafood has much better feed conversion ratios than other proteins. And seafood produces much less nutrient loads on the environment than other proteins. So why the GSA focus on seafood?
NFI believes much of this issue is a communications challenge. The best way to address the question of NOAA and sustainability is for NOAA to buy a printing press and develop a robust Twitter account.
NOAA’s fisheries management is generally excellent. Yet few in government or in the public know it. The fact that GSA, HSS, and the Park Service developed their policies without coordinating with NOAA suggests NOAA is too quiet, even in the federal family. This has left others to define what is sustainable and what is not.
Congress should require NOAA to develop an integrated communications strategy that explains, in lay terms, how the government manages our fisheries resources.
Part of that strategy should target institutional buyers of seafood. You and I, when we go to the grocer or restaurant, do not really decide among the variety of seafoods available. Rather, a few buyers at supermarkets decide for us. Often they have pulled seafood from their counters, under pressure from activist groups, even though NOAA reports these fish are managed sustainably. NOAA and Commerce need to be much more aggressive about explaining to stores that US fish is caught sustainably.
In a budget of close to $1 billion it is incumbent that NOAA not just continue to excel technically ….. but to also explain the good they do. Most of us don’t like to hear the boastful parent or the co-worker that grabs the credit. But in this case, it is exactly what NOAA Fisheries must do.
NFI’s recommendations in Connelly’s written testimony:
1. Congress Should Clarify that NOAA is the Arbiter of Sustainability of U.S. Caught Fish: Congress should enact legislation that clarifies for executive branch agencies that NOAA Fisheries, through its implementation of the Congressionally- debated and enacted Magnuson Stevens Act, establishes what sustainable seafood for U.S. Government purchases is.
2. NOAA Should Buy a Printing Press and Develop a Robust Twitter Account: NOAA Fisheries oversees a world class fisheries management system, with most stocks in excellent shape. NOAA Fisheries scientists report overfishing has ended due to the requirements of the MSA. Despite that fact, many Americans question the state of the nation`s fisheries.
NOAA Fisheries budget is about $880 million, yet its communications program is limited.
The average American hears little from NOAA Fisheries, and often only in response to some report about a supposedly imminent ocean resource calamity. The fact that GSA and HHS developed a policy and NPS began implementation without conferring with NOAA Fisheries is troubling. This lack of consultation suggests that Americans, including officials at NOAA`s sister agencies, do not know how the nation`s ocean resources are managed. NOAA Fisheries, to a great extent, is a government success story —- yet few know that story.
Congress should require NOAA Fisheries to develop a robust communications strategy that explains, in lay terms, how the government manages its fisheries resources, the opportunities available for all Americans to engage in the Council system, and the success NOAA Fisheries has had in ensuring an abundance of fish now and for the future.
The communications program need not go to formation of a NOAA eco- label. Labels require an extensive and expensive system behind it that can communicate to the nearly 320 million Americans or more than 500 million Europeans. A major part of that background support system would be communications about why an eco-label can be trusted. So, rather than expend money on an eco-label, NOAA Fisheries should spend a portion of its budget explaining the robustness and success of its management system. NGOs long ago determined that a broad advertising program is not as effective as a strategy of finding choke points in the supply chain as the best means to impact consumer choices. That is why so few NGOs advertise widely.
While the NOAA communications strategy should include appropriate tools to inform the general public, a focus should be on communicating to the 350 institutional buyers of fish in the United States. These grocery store and restaurant buyers determine what we are offered on the menu or at fish counter. Many of them have developed relationships with various sustainability partners. Few buyers, though, have regular interaction with the appropriate level of Department of Commerce or NOAA staff that can explain that fish caught in U.S. waters is sustainable. Fewer still corporate communications and marketing staff understand the political impacts of their decision to move to a third party certification system.
NFI feels strongly that if retail and restaurant corporate leaders, their communications and public affairs staff, and their buyers in the U.S. and Europe better understood how American fisheries are managed, the demand for third party certifications would be reduced. Absent that communications effort, neither Congress nor NOAA Fisheries should be surprised if third party certification or private groups` ranking dominates buyers` decisions.
This story originally appeared on Seafood.com, a subscription site. It has been reprinted with permission.