Macgregors Seafood Notes

Seafood observers and industry players awaited the fallout after a widely publicizedstudy in the journal Science made dire warnings about the future of the seafood industry. But some experts say the study will not have a major impact on consumption and consumer attitudes.
“Will consumers take notice? I guess some probably will,” Mark Ventress, chilled marketing controller at Young’s Seafood, told IntraFish. “But if you look at the growth of the [seafood] market lately, you have to expect it’s going to continue to be strong.”
Seafood companies need to take notice, however, he said.
“We absolutely need to reflect the reality of this article – and how people will view it – in our plans and attitudes about the future,” Ventress said.
The study – and its intense media coverage – will ratchet up pressure from consumers for seafood companies to act in environmentally sound ways, said Jessica Wenban-Smith, communications director for the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).
“An article like this really makes the issue come alive for people, makes them realize how urgent it is,” Wenban-Smith said. “People will demand more choice in the marketplace. It is already happening. They’re going to demand to know whether or not the seafood they’re buying is sustainable even more than before.”
Other industry observers felt the article’s effects will be muted once it fades from the front pages of newspapers.
Sustainable fishing is already an important and widely acknowledged issue, and one article isn’t going to make a tremendous difference to the industry, said Mattias Keller, managing director of the German Fish Processors Association.
“Most consumers know how important this is,” Keller said. “A report like this doesn’t shock anyone. It’s just another reason to push for more protections."
Richard Stavis, CEO of Stavis Seafoods in Boston, doesn't think the story alone will transform the industry or public opinion. "As is true with mercury, the issue is too complex to be captured in a sound bite," he said.
Stavis cited the fact people continue to eat chicken, despite reports of how chicken are treated inhumanely while they are being raised. "Consumers who choose to accept this article at face value have many seafood options," he said. "It’s easy to find species that are not being depleted or that are farmed responsibly."
As we move further into the future, Stavis says aquaculture will continue to provide more seafood for the masses.
"I’m not sure that this is a bad thing. We’re having turkey in our home for Thanksgiving this year. I’m able to buy it very cheaply and it is very high quality," Stavis said. "If I chose to, I could buy a wild or an heirloom turkey for a more unique and complex dining experience. I’d pay a lot more, but it’d be a fair value for what I’d got as well. There are markets for both products, and each has found its price point, balancing demand, availability, and the cost of production.
"I suspect that wild-caught fish and seafood will always be available, but that it will be sought after by discriminating consumers willing to ay a premium for it."
It seems highly unlikely commercial fishing will end by 2048 due to lack of fish,said Gunnar Knapp, a professor at the University of Alaska who studies the seafood industry. He recalled a silviculture course he took at Yale Forestry School where the professor was fond of saying: “It isn’t a question of will there be trees, it’s a question of what trees there will be.”
"I suspect the same principle applies at least to some extent to fisheries ecological systems," Knapp said. "As far as combating the perception that the oceans are running out of fish and commercial fisheries need to be shut down, I don’t know how you can combat this. There’s no easy solution. It’s a continuous task for industry, and probably one of growing importance."