[twofinbluna]

article from the AP

"The Maine lobster industry has long been held up as a well-run fishery. Now it's seeking a seal of approval to prove it.

Efforts are under way to have the state's signature seafood certified as sustainable by an international organization that evaluates fishing practices worldwide. With consumers demanding more "green" food products, the lobster industry stands to lose out if it doesn't get certified, supporters say."

 

[shebeen]

Heard that story on the radio yesterday.

Not for nothing but I've never seen the Marine Stewardship Council's 'blue ecolabel'...or even heard of them, the Council or the labels. Guess they must be hiding in one of those aisles I don't walk down in the supermarket.

FINALLY!....somebody who can determine what's sustainable and what isn't. lol
They gonna put those pain in the ass little sticky labels on lobsters.....like they do on fruit? Ah well, marketing is marketing.

It's all a racket if you ask me.

A friend of mine owns olive groves/olive oil company in California and does the 'organic' thing to the max....lot of extra work but he figures people there want that type of olive oil. So anyway, he sends his 'certified organic' application to the State of California expecting they'll be out to put his operation 'through the wringer' so to speak, to make sure it's....well....'organic'.

WRONG!

California got the dough, he got his 'certification'. lol

 

[NilsS]

From what I know of MSC certification, it's negligible at the consumer level in the U.S., but if the big buyers (i.e. Walmart, large supermarket chains, etc.) require it, it becomes tremendously important to the large suppliers.

 

[636943]

twofin,

I get the feeling you smell blood.



If the way that lobster bait is harvested in unsustainable, then lobster fishing in unsustainable.


And the lobster guys wanna be sustainable, right?

 

[HungryJack]

NilsS wrote:
From what I know of MSC certification, it's negligible at the consumer level in the U.S., but if the big buyers (i.e. Walmart, large supermarket chains, etc.) require it, it becomes tremendously important to the large suppliers.
McDonald's dropped Atlantic Cod for that exact reason.

 

[twofinbluna]

Spudders wrote:
twofin,

I get the feeling you smell blood.



If the way that lobster bait is harvested in unsustainable, then lobster fishing in unsustainable.


And the lobster guys wanna be sustainable, right?




To be honest that is not why I posted it, but your point is important...

Maine Lobstermen's Association and the Downeast Lobstermen's Association have been strong supporters of going back to more traditional herring gear(and what some would call 'more sustainable' gear) inshore and so I am sure the thought has crossed their minds that the issue of how their bait is caught may be involved in this decision. I cannot say for sure what impact it will have since I have no clue about MSC certification and what that entails. But you would think that in order for lobstering to be deemed 'sustainable' that the bait fishery that supplies it would be factored in.

This post edited by twofinbluna 11:15 AM 03/18/2008

 

[twofinbluna]

Nils, others-

What happens now if they get turned down for certification? Is there a risk that pushing to be certified can be risky? That is, if they were to end up being turned down, is that somehow worse than not having gone for certification in the first place? I hope that it works out, Lord knows we need the lobster industry in Maine...its all thats really left!

 

[shebeen]

NilsS wrote:
From what I know of MSC certification, it's negligible at the consumer level in the U.S., but if the big buyers (i.e. Walmart, large supermarket chains, etc.) require it, it becomes tremendously important to the large suppliers.

Got it...that makes more sense.

What I don't get is who judges what is 'sustainable'....and how is 'sustainability' determined?
A little too subjective/political probably.

 

[twofinbluna]

shebeen wrote:

NilsS wrote:
From what I know of MSC certification, it's negligible at the consumer level in the U.S., but if the big buyers (i.e. Walmart, large supermarket chains, etc.) require it, it becomes tremendously important to the large suppliers.

Got it...that makes more sense.

What I don't get is who judges what is 'sustainable'....and how is 'sustainability' determined?
A little too subjective/political probably.




good question

 

[HungryJack]

Answer

SCS

I'm sure you will have issues with them

 

[NilsS]

Guys -

The organization that makes the "sustainable" determination is the same organization that gets the money for making that determination. Needless to say, the whole process of environmentally certifying entities - not just fishing - is looked at with a certain degree of skepticism by some. It has been likened to legalized extortion, for example. But I know people whose organizations/fisheries are going/have gone through MSC certification and they have no complaints.

 

[HungryJack]

NilsS wrote:
Guys -

The organization that makes the "sustainable" determination is the same organization that gets the money for making that determination.
Only half true.
They only assess the data provided by a separate organization (also paid) that will review the fishery for a period of about 2 years,
before presenting its report back to MSC.

At that point, SCS (MSC), following their own published guidelines,
decide if the fishery is sustainable.

Nothing unusual here,
most industries have their own industry based certification bodies.

Certification Process - PDF

 

[HungryJack]

twofinbluna wrote:
What happens now if they get turned down for certification? Is there a risk that pushing to be certified can be risky? That is, if they were to end up being turned down, is that somehow worse than not having gone for certification in the first place?
Nothing negative would happen to effect their current market,
but it would close a door on a market they are attempting to tap with this move.
Which would be beneficial to their industry overall.

 

[Seajay2]

NilsS wrote:
Guys -

The organization that makes the "sustainable" determination is the same organization that gets the money for making that determination. Needless to say, the whole process of environmentally certifying entities - not just fishing - is looked at with a certain degree of skepticism by some. It has been likened to legalized extortion, for example. But I know people whose organizations/fisheries are going/have gone through MSC certification and they have no complaints.

I have decided to go into business just now. I will be selling official certificates of sustainability to the public. Prices have just been reduced to a 40% discount from the MRSP as determined by the Chief Operating Office of SRU (Sustainable R' Us), Mr. SeaJay the Second. Don't all jump at once, there should be plenty of certificates to go around, but the response to date has been tremendous, so don't miss out on these valuable certificates. Be the first kid on the block to collect them all. According to the local judge all you need is a job and a pen to sign the contract, and you drive away with the certificate. Caution, don't be fooled by imitation certificates, these that I am selling are the real official deal.

 

[twofinbluna]

LOL, seajay

 

[fishless12]

My parents have operating a farm in southern Maine for several years. They shy away from being certified "Organic" because the Maine Organic Farmers Union has many arbitrary rules that are difficult to follow. However, they do practice sustainable agriculture though crop rotation and other similar practices. I'll be the first to tell you this "green revolution" is full of phonies and other people just looking to make a buck, but I have to say that for the most part it's probably a good idea. Sustainability isn't a word that applies to wackos like the Burt's Bees Lady who essentially shut off a significant portion of the North Maine Woods to sportsman. The Burt's Bee's woman is a preservationist, not a conservationist.

Compare this green movement to American's various healthy eating crazes, fresh veggies are good for you, everyone knows that; However, diet soda has the word "diet" printed on the label so it must be good for you... You get the picture.

As far as a marketing tool, I think it's important for Maine lobstermen to take advantage of anything that will allow them to better market their product and generate more tax revenue for the state.

If this green revolution keeps people from buying a three quarter ton truck to pick their kids up from Soccer practice, then I guess that's a bonus too.

The idea behind the sustainable bait is important too. (might be a bit of an understatement)

 

[HungryJack]

Seajay2 wrote:

I have decided to go into business just now. I will be selling official certificates of sustainability to the public. Prices have just been reduced to a 40% discount from the MRSP as determined by the Chief Operating Office of SRU (Sustainable R' Us), Mr. SeaJay the Second. Don't all jump at once, there should be plenty of certificates to go around, but the response to date has been tremendous, so don't miss out on these valuable certificates. Be the first kid on the block to collect them all. According to the local judge all you need is a job and a pen to sign the contract, and you drive away with the certificate.
Caution, don't be fooled by imitation certificates, these that I am selling are the real official deal.
Thats why MSC has only issued about 30 certs for the entire world so far.
They hand them out to anybody who pays,
just like you believe

FYI - when you have the "turn back the clock" fishermen making fun of something,
you can almost guarantee what they chastise,
will have an important part of the future.
Ignoring the future is their speciality.

Basically, if they tell you it won't work,
put your money on it that it will.

 

[NilsS]

HJ -

Going through the MSC certification process is quite expensive. The cost depends on the fishery, but it can range into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Few fisheries, at least in the U.S., are organized in such a way as to be able to pay those kinds of costs, regardless of how lucrative the fishery is to the individuals in it. this is probably as important a factor in the slow growth of certification as any other. (I'd imagine there are also problems with insuring compliance, but I don't know that).

However, as more fisheries become certified, and as (or if) that certification begins to show demonstrable benefits, more applications will surely follow.

 

[HungryJack]

Nils, what you write is true.

But also consider that few fisheries at this time in the US would qualify as sustainable under MSC guidelines.
In the future, that should change.

And as you point out,
once you get the cert, its not permanent,
the fishery is reviewed yearly and re-certified every 5 years.
If parameters of the cert are not met,
it will be pulled.

"Few fisheries, at least in the U.S., are organized in such a way as to be able to pay those kinds of costs, regardless of how lucrative the fishery is to the individuals in it."

I would like to point out for your consideration the following;

the lobster fishery along the pacific coast of Baja is certified.
This fishery is comprised of about 500 fishermen, spread along 1000+ miles of desolate coastline,
working with pangas of 25 feet or less and hand hauling of wire traps
or free diving for the lobster.

With the average fisherman in this fishery being much "poorer" and facing much greater economic hardships than most US fishermen,
and this group of fishermen were able to raise the funds,
and organize themselves to acquire certification.
If they can do it with such limited resources compared to us,
then our fisheries/fishermen should be able to do the same,
if they wanted too.

Or could it be a bunch of Mexican fishermen are smarter businessmen than American fishermen ?

MSA Certified Lobster Fishery Baja Mexico

 

[billy262]

Jack,what's that silver pole under his legs? A mini harpoon?