An old polaroid of a 6 year-old me hangs in the entryway of my Pittsburgh home. I am wearing a polka dotted pink and orange swimsuit, my hair styled in the shortest possible bowl cut, and taking a nap under the Caribbean sun as our fishing boat jets across the sea. But the focal point of this photograph is not the succulent blues and vibrant greens of the tropical landscape. Instead, it is a close-up of my sleeping face, where the wet, shiny and slick skin of a bait fish is cradled between my cheek and shoulder. I can still recall that lovely smell of brine, salt, and irresistible fishy musk.

The sea is still one of our planet’s greatest mysteries and one of my greatest loves. While we have become much more aware of the disparities of our food system on land, there is still so much more we can do for the world under the sea. Our fish populations, fishery management, and (over)fishing practices may all be attributed to degrees of corruption within federal and legislative bodies related to commodity and factory fishing endeavors. As a result, mongers, fishermen, and fishing collectives are surviving in an imbalanced and unsustainable seafood economy. As consumers, our purchasing practices in produce, poultry, beef and pork are beginning to change. We understand that sustainability is important, as well as the promoting local, “slow food” business.

But what about fish? Ever heard of the Magnuson-Stevens Act or NOAA (The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)? How would you change your purchasing practices if I told you that your local fishery requires just as much attention as your local farmer, or that corruption in the fishing industry is just as detrimental to our health and the environment as the meat industry? Are there really “plenty of fish in the sea”?

Fish for Thought

There are two major governmental entities that control the seafood industry. The first is a law called the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management Act, or MSA (Magnuson-Stevens Act). It was passed in the 1970s to foster biological and economic sustainability for the ocean and its fishermen. But it was also passed to phase out foreign fishing activities proving harmful to our nation’s food economy and our aquatic ecosystems. As a result, the law maintains a fishery conservation zone that stretches up to 200 nautical miles offshore; for us land creatures: that’s about 230 miles. The MSA since has been amended and revised, including requirements for regional fishery management councils to provide detailed management plans (FMPs) and adhere to conservation methods when a fishery is labeled “overfished”. The MSA now contains 10 National Standards for fishery conservation and management, but applying these standards is easier said than done.

A Stock Market at Sea

An example of an FMP in action is the concept of a “catch share”. By analyzing scientific data, various fisheries are notified by the government in regards to how many fish in their area can be caught sustainably. Once a fishery is notified, a “catch limit” (total allowable catch) is set and then divided among the employees of a fishery.

A fishing business can purchase their catch limit and then choose to fish for their amount whenever they want; most likely, this will be when the species they are fishing for fetch their highest price. In a way, the ebb and flow of this market is based upon interactions between the environment and the larger fishery. For us land creatures: a fishery will not go out to sea if the seafood population is low. Rather, they will wait for the population to recover; in turn, the catch limit increases, market demand goes up, and presumably the fisherman makes a profit. On paper, this creates a more secure system in which a fishing vessel is incentivized to maximize the value of their share rather than try to catch as many fish as possible at an inconvenient time (Fisheries np).

But purchasing a catch limit is not any amount of chump change by any means. Many compliance costs related to the catch share program are one of the most prevalent reasons that smaller fishing businesses exit a fishery. Unfortunately, these costs are regulated by the federal government’s FMPs and are mandatory; costs include on-board observer coverage, monitoring costs, and administrative or share program enforcement fees. But these fees are disproportionately effective (Taylor np). Monitoring and observer costs are applied on a daily basis and are related to the size of a business and the amount of fish caught per pound. As a result: smaller vessels end up paying much more; they harvest fewer fish per day than larger vessels, but their smaller ship size incurs a higher observer cost per pound.

Big Fish in a Small Pond

I mentioned that there are two government entities controlling this complicated world of fishing. The second is NOAA: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The governing body of (elected) council members has two goals:

1. To ensure the productivity and sustainability of fisheries and fishing communities through science-based decision-making and compliance with regulations

2. To recover and conserve protected resources including whales, turtles, and salmon.

NOAA and the MSA interact in various ways to create a cohesive fishing market and a sustainable ecosystem. For example, NOAA Fisheries release two reports showing the number of landings and value of catch shares for U.S. fisheries as well as the economic impact of U.S. commercial and recreation fishing (Fisheries np). But these reports have not always been truthful.

During the Obama Administration, there was an immense push for anti-fossil-fuel energy policies, exposing CO2 influences on climate change and ocean acidification. As a result, an article from Scientific American explains that former NOAA scientist Jim Bates charged that his superior, Thomas Karl, had “adjusted” sea surface temperature measurements between 1998 and 2012 in order to make recent global temperature changes appear to warm more than twice as much as the original records (Scheer and Moss np). In reality, the data supported that the ocean’s temperatures had not increased in over two decades. This intersection of personal vendettas, politics, and the environment is also witnessed among regional council members. In the Gulf of Mexico, there is a large amount of contention around the procurement of red snapper shares. In 2017, members of NOAA gifted millions of dollars’ worth of shares to a selected number of commercial operators, many of whom have been linked to NOAA members that sit on the Gulf council. Furthermore, it was revealed that two commercial fishermen in the south Atlantic (sitting members of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council) are actively promoting an exempted fishing permit to explore privatization of public marine sources for select operators (Angers np). To some, NOAA is becoming an organization promoting personal interests and wealth rather than economic equity and environmental sustainability.

Despite the exposure and negative press, a perplexing paradox written in NOAA legislation still persists. NOAA states that “an affected individual is not permitted to vote on a Council decision that would have a significant and predictable effect on any financial interest held by that individual” (Angers np). However, the administration only requires that a “conflicted individual” declare their involvement in managing marine resources on his or her financial disclosure forms, absolving them from any further scrutiny. Sure, honesty is the best policy, but when it dramatically shifts the balance of power between public and private, our nation’s economy and environment immensely suffer.

It is clear to me that intragovernmental and public relations as they relate to NOAA and the MSA are flawed. Our oceans and small fishing businesses continue to struggle as scientists and councilmen butt heads and fudge the numbers to promote their own interests. As a consumer, it leaves me uneasy; how do we know when a fish is caught fairly and treated properly? Is our money going to support a small business or a large commodity fish operation? Did I just buy a fish and support the privatization of the ocean, or am I helping to manage the sea’s diverse and endangered ecosystem?

“Don’t Buy Fish From Strangers”

We can clearly see that the Slow Food movement has begun to “slowly” yield some positive results on land. We are more interested in our farmers’ markets, exploring accessible food resources in our communities, promoting urban farming practices, and growing food in our homes and backyards. Since we are actively trying to buy our produce and poultry from a friendly face, why can’t we do the same for our fish?

A CSF—Community Supported Fishery—allows us to do just that. For example, the New England Fishmongers is like a DIY-NOAA. Directly from its mission statement, the collective works alongside researchers and non-profits to give back to their community through valuable data sharing, educational workshops and fundraisers. They also provide fresh fish donations to local food banks, alleviating symptoms of food insecurity and access. Furthermore, founder Tim Rider does not sell fish through wholesalers who control the price of their product; this is a direct and sustainable sea-to-table movement. Rider asserts that their product reaches their consumer within 24 to 48 hours, and with smaller fleets, fishing practices become more attentive, quality-driven, and sustainable.

The average seafood at a restaurant has most likely travelled over 7,000 miles and gone untouched for about 10 days. Most of this seafood is also from farmed in unregulated ponds and crowded pens, and is intensely frozen only to be “refreshed” before service. These practices dramatically increase food waste, is financially wasteful, and—ultimately—is just not as delicious.

In this interview, Rider explains why restaurants working with his CSF are the better option: “We bleed our fish, we brine our fish, we make sure they're packed in ice and work diligently at the quality of our fish… it holds up tremendously well. [A chef] can buy our fish on Wednesday and serve it on Saturday, where the fish that's been around for two weeks that hasn't been treated that well, he's already starting to throw out." This same promise is made to the consumer; the New England Fish Mongershave an online store filled with weekly catches to be purchased for overnight shipping. Their market schedule is also available, if you happen to live near any of their many locations.

Another successful business venture on the west coast has created a local, sustainable, closed-loop economy that promotes the interests of local fishermen as opposed to the purchase of lesser fish. In Garibaldi, Oregon. The CS Fishery utilizes small, independently owned processing facilities that are in close proximity to their fishing grounds. They can immediately offload and process, “…sometimes within minutes instead of days”. As a result, the fishery points out the conundrum that many smaller fishing ventures face:

…in the past, the fish buyers would seldom differentiate between our fish and the lower quality factory fish. This would in turn bring down our prices to match the inferior fish and ultimately, there was no guarantee that the consumer would receive our well cared for product out of the co-mingled commodity fish.

By refusing to work with external processing facilities, product from the CD fishery no longer mixes and mingles with these commodity fish. Instead, the collective maintains what they call “the chain of custody” (supply chain) of their product. The Fishery therefore implement and enforce their sustainable harvest methods, handle and transport with care, and compensate fishermen for their efforts accordingly. The consumer also benefits: purchasing minimally processed seafood increases freshness and decreases cross-contamination, prices are not jacked up to wholesale standards, and you directly contribute to the financial vitality of the Portland community and beyond (you can buy their canned tuna online!)It is the embodiment of taste good, feel good, be good.

Finally, in New York, there is the Fulton Fish Market. It is second in size to the Tsukiji market in Tokyo; every night at midnight, between 1-2 million pounds of fresh seafood arrive on their docks. Even on their website—in the upper right corner—there is a countdown timer pertaining to this massive delivery. It thusly provides a higher degree of transparency to ensure every consumer benefits from their closed “chain of custody” in obtaining the freshest possible product. The market also has their own CSF, a vast network that promotes their growing “Fishmonger to Fork” movement. At just $18 per share, the consumer may pick up two dinner servings of fresh and sustainable seafood in their neighborhood from a specified location once a week.

These steps may seem small or even insignificant. But education and action is critical. It is apparent that intragovernmental relations overlap—and become overshadowed by—our nation’s capitalist nature. Personal vendettas and political corruption at federal and legislative levels render our oceans helpless, but as the slow food movement continues to grow, we have been presented with opportunities to support local business and sustainable ecosystems. Thus we have the chance to create sustainable, closed-loop economies in our communities that will not only nourish our bodies, but also the livelihood of our neighbors and the populations under the sea.

Works Cited

Angers, Jeff. “Opinion: NOAA Turns a Blind Eye.” Sport Fishing Magazine, Bonnier Corporation, 6 Mar. 2017, www.sportfishingmag.com/NOAA-fisheries-management-corruption#page-2.
Bell, Larry. “NOAA Lets Politics Corrupt Its Science.” CFACT, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, 14 Nov. 2017, www.cfact.org/2017/11/14/noaa-lets-politics-corrupt-its-science/.
“CS Fishery: What We Do.” CS FISHERY, JMorley Inc, www.communitysupportedfishery.com/what-we-do.
“Fisheries.” Fisheries | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Department of Commerce, www.noaa.gov/fisheries.
“How Catch Shares Work.” Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, www.edf.org/oceans/how-catch-shares-work-promising-solution.
“How to Reverse the Overfishing Crisis.” Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Defense Fund, www.edf.org/oceans/how-turn-around-overfishing-.
“New York City Fulton Fish Market.” Fulton Fish Market, Meade Digital Enterprises, shop.fultonfishmarket.com/?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Branded&utm_term=fulton fish market&utm_content=Branded_EXA.
Scheer, Roddy, and Doug Moss. “‘Catch Shares’ Save Fish Populations--and the Fishing Industry.” Scientific American, E-The Environmental Magazine, www.scientificamerican.com/article/catch-shares-for-saving-fish-populations/#googDisableSync.
Taylor, Peter. “Cost of Fishery Management.” Measuring the Effects of Catch Shares, Catch Share Indicators Organization, 8 Nov. 2012, www.catchshareindicators.org/cost-of-fishery-management-3/.

Plenty of Fish? A Look Inside our Nation's Fish(y) Economy

Works Cited