Too many sources are giving too much information on what is happening with fish stocks — and much of it is questionable. That was the message from Thor Lassen, president of Ocean Trust, to a roomful of distinguished scientists at the conclusion of a fishing symposium in New Bedford on Thursday.
When dramatic changes take place in ecosystems and fish populations, science has to be able to come up with some answers or the public will seek their information elsewhere, Lassen said.
"But how reliable are those sources of information? Are they science-based, peer-reviewed or transparent?" he asked, citing the numerous partnerships that have formed in the marketplace between environmental groups and large seafood retailers such as Whole Foods and Wal-Mart.
Many of these non-governmental organizations are producing guidelines, advising the public on which fisheries are sustainable and which types of seafood to avoid.
Ocean Trust is a nonprofit foundation, based in Virginia, with the goal of bringing science, conservation and food communities together, according to Lassen.
"The public is confused. We need to reconnect the scientists — the experts — to the public and the people in the seafood industry so there is some scientific basis to the information that gets out," he said. For example, rebuilding programs have increased New England groundfish stocks sixfold since the mid-1990s, Lassen said.
"Some people are making it difficult for the general public to know what to eat," said Dr. Richard Beamish, senior scientist at the Pacific Biological Station in Nanaimo, British Columbia and co-author of the book "The Future of Fisheries Science in North America" with Dr. Brian Rothschild from the School for Marine Science and Technology at UMass Dartmouth. "We have an obligation to communicate the science and what we know about stocks back to the public."
During the final day's discussion on fishery management, UMass Dartmouth's Steve Cadrin, who is also president of the American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists, said management in the U.S. has focused on fishing mortality while assuming that the environment is a constant.
"In that context, anytime a fish population goes down we interpret it as overfishing and anytime it goes up we view it as a management success," he said.
The next generation of fishery research scientists will need to confront the environment and all of its variables, he said. The current methods employed for assessing fish stocks also needs an overhaul, Cadrin added.
"The assessments are not a reliable basis for fishery management," he said. "The models are no longer working."
Read the full story in the New Bedford Standard Times