The Marine Stewardship Council and Alaska fishing industry representatives are pushing back against a decision by Ocean Wise to drop its recommendation of MSC-certified salmon fisheries in Southeast Alaska.
Ocean Wise, a Vancouver, British Columbia, U.S.A.-based nonprofit organization, operates what it describes as a certification program providing recommendations of fisheries and aquaculture operations that meet certain criteria, including acceptable stock health, limits on bycatch, sustainable bait use, management effectiveness, and efforts to conserve and protect habitat and ecosystems. It relies heavily on assessments performed by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch program but also conducts its own assessments, which consider third-party audits conducted to align with other seafood sustainability certifications, such as MSC assessments.
Ocean Wise removed its approval of Southeast Alaska salmon fisheries on 11 July, blaming stock interception, bycatch, endangered species impact, and inadequate management to prevent overfishing. Specifically, it referenced incidental catches of “depleted southern Pacific salmon populations and the implications for endangered southern resident killer whales,” as well as a policy of withdrawing recommendations from fisheries where there is a formal stakeholder objection to MSC certification or if the certified client group is involved in a fishery lawsuit.
In April 2024, three British Columbia-based environmental conservation organizations had their jointly filed objection to the MSC certification of Alaska’s salmon fisheries formally accepted by an independent adjudicator. A separate objection filed over gillnet bycatch of seabirds was also accepted.
Additionally, Alaska’s salmon fisheries are involved in several lawsuits, including one filed in 2020 by the Wild Fish Conservancy seeking to prevent overharvest of wild Chinook in Southeast Alaska and protect the primary food source of the southern resident killer whale population. That suit remains active, with NOAA currently working to finalize two court-mandated environmental impact statements – one regarding an incidental take statement for Southeast Alaska salmon fisheries and the other investigating the impact of its prey increase program.
A separate lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity alleges potential violations of the U.S. Endangered Species Act after NOAA found 10 killer whales had been taken as bycatch by trawlers operating off the coast of Alaska, though the latter suit primarily targeted Alaska’s groundfish sector.
In its response to Ocean Wise’s decision, MSC said it was “concerned with the filters Ocean Wise applies to select MSC fishery certifications and how, in doing so, the processes that fuel the effectiveness and impact of the MSC program are misrepresented.”
“A credible eco-label should transparently demonstrate its assurance and decision-making processes as well as the impacts it delivers,” MSC said. “In the case of the ongoing objection to the fourth recertification of Alaska salmon, we are confident in the rigor and transparency of the third-party assessment process (including the MSC objections procedure). Following this process through to its conclusion will support strengthening and improving fishery performance and uphold the principles for a credible sustainability program.”
MSC said Alaska salmon had been certified for nearly 25 years and its certification remains valid, with its current certificate scheduled to expire in November 2024.
“The outcome of the recertification assessment will be determined upon the conclusion of the ongoing objection process that is being led by an impartial independent adjudicator,” MSC said. “The MSC stands by the rigor and thoroughness of its assessment process and the outcomes of third-party certification decisions.”
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Policy Advisor Dani Evenson said Ocean Wise misleadingly presents itself as a certification program that conducts its own rigorous independent assessments of fisheries.
“It is surprising that Ocean Wise, a seafood sustainability certification body that is looking to expand its footprint in global markets, would make recommendations about a fishery without checking the facts first. It calls into question the reliability of their assessments, which consumers expect to be based on a well-informed, scientific, and impartial methodology,” Evenson said. “Ocean Wise says they use ‘sustainability assessments from credible sources.’ Yet, they cite a formal objection by a stakeholder group to another certification body as the basis for their recommendations without doing their due diligence to validate the claims, which could have been accomplished using information that is readily accessible from multiple sources. Instead, they attacked fisheries that are sustainably managed.”
Evenson criticized the mechanisms put in place by Ocean Wise that require an automatic withdrawal of a recommendation from any fishery which has had an objection filed against it or which is involved in a lawsuit.
“Both the lawsuit and the MSC objections are still being adjudicated. This not only calls into question the impartiality of their recommendations, but also creates a concerning circumstance wherein anyone could object to any fishery, that may or may not be based on valid claims, and per Ocean Wise’s new guidance, they would recommend that consumers not purchase seafood sourced from that fishery,” Evenson said.
Evenson said Southeast Alaska fisheries are managed both by NOAA and the state of Alaska’s sustainable regulatory framework, as well as under the terms of the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
Jeff Farvour, a Sitka, Alaska-based salmon troller and Alaska Longline Fishermen's Association board member, said one environmental NGO in particular – the Wild Fish Conservancy – has waged a multi-year campaign to shut down the Southeast Alaska Chinook salmon fishery entirely.
“They have been petitioning MSC to decertify specifically our fishery – and not other troll fisheries that catch more Chinook eaten by southern resident killer whales. If they really thought they could have an effect on those animals, you’d think they’d start with the larger fisheries, but they haven’t,” he told SeafoodSource. “We've been a target for them, for unknown reasons, for a long, long time.”
Farvour said the NGOs that filed the objection have not been willing to meet or talk with his organization or other groups representing Alaska’s commercial salmon sector.
“They have said in court the Chinook fishery can just be closed down and we can make income from coho and chum, but they don’t know anything about us. There’s trolling permits that support each and every community in Southeast Alaska, and Chinook is a big driver of that income,” Farvour said.
Farvour said the NGOs have “driven a ...
