February 11, 2020 — The Association of Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers (GAPP) is seeking proposals for its first European Partnership Program, which are due on 15 March, according to a GAPP press release.
The European Partnership Program is an expansion of GAPP’s established North American Partnership Program. GAPP began soliciting proposals to drum up demand for Alaskan pollock in Europe after last year’s Groundfish Forum.
January 7, 2020 — A group of Alaska pollock industry officials arrived earlier this week in Shanghai for a 10-day visit to China as an exploratory trip to appraise opportunities in the country, according to a Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers (GAPP) press release.
The tour, sponsored in large part by a grant from the Emerging Market Department of the United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service, will also include stops in Qingdao and Beijing.
February 11, 2019 — A trade decision by the Trump administration has inadvertently protected a price advantage enjoyed by Russian-caught fish sold in the US, much of which ends up in fish sticks served to American school children.
For years, Alaskan fishermen have been frustrated by foreign competition from Russia, particularly in the lucrative pollock market. Caught in Russian waters, this cold-water cousin of the cod is processed in China before being sold in the US for use in frozen and breaded fish products, as well as imitation crab meat.
Russian pollock costs less than its US-caught equivalent. That’s helped it gain share of the roughly $200 million US market for frozen pollock, to the point that by 2017, about half the fish sticks served in US school cafeterias were made from fish caught in Russia and pumped with additives in China, according to the Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers, a trade group that represents 14 different seafood companies.
Domestic fish producers thought President Donald Trump would fix all that. The administration’s move to slap a 10% tariff last year on thousands of imports from China was supposed to erase the price advantage enjoyed by Russian fish. But instead of fixing the problem, the Trump administration has made things worse for Alaskan fishermen.
February 5, 2019 — Given that the harvesters of Alaska pollock are limited in how much they can catch and there is no shortage of sales, the only sensible tack to grow business seems to be increasing the fish’s value on the market, believes Craig Morris, the new CEO of Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers (GAPP).
Also, he’s not sure it makes sense to keep attacking Russian pollock as an inferior product.
“Russia is making a major investment in their fleet,” he said. “Potentially the quality differences between US and Russian pollock in five to 10 years are less than they are today. I think that’s one of the things we need to talk through … I would hate for us to invest millions of dollars to differentiate ourselves from Russian pollock and then, at the end of that campaign, [find out] the way that we chose to differentiate ourselves doesn’t make any sense.”
December 15, 2015 — The following was released by the Office of Senator Maria Cantwell:
U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell today announced that her bipartisan bill—which will change the market name of “Alaska pollock” to “pollock”—will be included in the Congressional spending bill, also known as the ‘omnibus.’ The bill will legally change the acceptable market name essentially outlawing Pollock harvested in Russia from being passed off as “Alaskan Pollock” in the supermarket. Representative Jamie Herrera Butler (WA-3) sponsored the bill in the House.
In 2012, 113 million pounds of Russian Pollock—which is less sustainable and lower quality than pollock from Alaskan fisheries—was sold to U.S. consumers as “Alaska pollock.”
“Alaskan pollock is one of the most sustainable fisheries in the world,” said Cantwell, a senior member of the Commerce Committee, “And American consumers deserve to know whether they are purchasing this high quality product or a cheap alternative with a misleading label. By changing the acceptable market name to pollock, it will be illegal to label pollock caught in Russia, as Alaskan. Americans will be able to shop with confidence, knowing that they are buying the real thing and not a knock–off.”
The Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers (GAPP) supports these efforts and have previously cited several reasons for the requested change:
• The use of “Alaska pollock” as an acceptable market name is misleading to consumers;
•“Alaska pollock” is understood by consumers to connote a geographic origin, not a particular kind of food from any geographic origin;
• The use of “Alaska pollock” as an acceptable market name is inconsistent with other similar fish species; and
• U.S. government programs support other efforts to provide accurate information to consumers about the seafood they purchase.
September 17, 2015 — The following was released by the Office of Senator Lisa Murkowski:
Today Senator Lisa Murkowski introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to change the market name of “Alaska pollock” to “pollock”. The change aims to better distinguish the pollock harvested in Alaskan waters from Russian pollock passing itself off as “Alaskan pollock” in stores nationwide.
In 2012, 113 million pounds of Russia’s pollock were sold to U.S. consumers as “Alaska pollock.” Murkowski believes the labeling move is necessary because Alaska’s fisheries are far more rigorously managed than Russian waters.
“Alaska is known world-wide for our top quality seafood. When consumers seek out the words, ‘Alaska, wild-caught’ at the grocery store, they shouldn’t be deceived by what they are actually getting,” said Senator Murkowski. “The change in nomenclature is necessary to avoid ongoing misrepresentation of the origin of pollock that is purchased and consumed in the U.S.”
This bill also makes a similar change to golden king crab, which has met the same problems in the market as pollock.
The Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers (GAPP) support Murkowski’s efforts and have previously cited several reasons for the requested change:
Background: The bill is the result of a long standing effort to get the FDA to change the name. Senator Murkowski has reached out to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) multiple times to push for the market name to be changed, including writing a letter to the FDA Commissioner this past May.
Notifications