60-Second Earth

Have Wallet Cards Helped Fish?

Or simply hurt trees and consumer's brains? David Biello reports














Share on Tumblr

Listen to this Podcast

Americans eat more fish than ever. We now gobble up more than two million tons of seafood a year compared to just half a million at the dawn of the 20th century. Not only are there more of us, we're also eating more fish—globally.  

That's led to a global collapse of many fisheries , such as cod in the North Atlantic. To help forestall this ecological catastrophe a variety of sustainable-seafood certification schemes have emerged. And the Monterey Bay Aquarium released its first seafood wallet card in 2000.  

Intended to help sea-foodies avoid the worst fish, such as tuna or Chilean sea bass, wallet cards—and iPhone apps—have proliferated. But have they helped?  

The answer is no, according to a study in Oryx. Simply because the wallet cards are confusing.  

For example, even though the U.S. imports more than 80 percent of its seafood …wallet cards here focus mainly on fish from our national fisheries.  

Further adding to the confusion, different cards make different choices. Atlantic halibut is a no-go for most but Monterey Bay recommends it as a sustainable choice.  

After distributing more than one million wallet cards, Monterey Bay's own research reveals that they had no impact whatsoever—no changes in buying practices, no changes in the fisheries themselves. In fact, we're eating more seafood than ever and more of it comes from the least sustainable fisheries: shrimp, tuna and salmon .

—David Biello


14 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. omny 07:11 PM 1/28/10

    "Atlantic halibut is a no-go for most but Monterey Bay recommends it as a sustainable choice. "

    not true!
    http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/SeafoodWatch/web/sfw_factsheet.aspx?fid=100

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. jcu2105 08:50 PM 1/28/10

    "After distributing more than 1 million wallet cards..."

    Mr. Biello implies that a million cards distributed amongst the population is a really huge number that should have had a major impact, so if there hasn't been a measurable impact it must be because something's wrong with the cards. While a million may be a large number in some contexts, when it comes to population it's a drop in the bucket. A million cards distributed in the US means that only about 0.3% of Americans carry them (http://www.census.gov/). Even if all one million of those people follow the advice on the cards religiously, the impact would be pretty minimal...likely too small to measure. In reality, many people with cards probably try to follow the recommendations sometimes, but often end up buying non-recommended fish because they are at a restaurant where the menu doesn't list the source, or they are at a market with no good choices given, etc. I have a lot of trouble finding good sustainable choices at my local market, and I live in New York City!

    The cards are confusing? Green, yellow, red. Green means go for it, red means never eat it, yellow means don't eat it unless you don't have any better options. How much simpler could it be? And information about fish from other countries most certainly is included, in abundance. I have only used the Monterey Bay cards, so I don't know about the disagreements there might be between various cards. I don't doubt there are some, but I suspect they agree more than they disagree, and I doubt many people are carrying around 5 cards from different sources and cross-checking them while shopping. I suspect people pick one and go with it. So I really don't buy the confusion argument.

    I don't dispute Mr. Biello's main claim that the cards aren't having an impact, as disappointing as I find that news, but I think his reasons and reasoning are highly questionable. Or maybe he's not making any claims and simply reporting them, but in that case he needs to be a little clearer about who's claiming what.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. salc-toomuchfishy 10:32 PM 1/28/10

    American are eating more fish?
    No, they are throwing away more fish. Just look at all the pounds of seafood left over every night at ever supermarket and fish monger place all over the country! It's not being eaten, it can't stay fresh that long. What's happening is that there is gross overfishing for a media perception that people want more fish, which the importers push onto the distributors, you push it onto the fish markets and grocery store chains. At the same time, people are being told to cut down their consumption of fish by doctors and other media because of mercury concerns. Hence, tons of fish just sits there. Do the research yourself, be attention to fish markets and fish stalls in grocery stores, TONS of unbought fish daily.
    Where is it going? In a few days in the garbage.
    OVERFISHING for now good reason. Way more than there is demand, with PR from distributors telling the media to promote fish. Restaurants are selling more fish, because health conscious (and already fat) Americans are avoiding red meat on their "night out".

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. MCMalkemus 04:11 AM 1/29/10

    Up to 50% of a catch is dumped overboard prior to coming into port in the EU, in order to make the legal catch profitable.

    This can't help...

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. JamesDavis 08:03 AM 1/29/10

    They did the same thing with dairy products after WW2 and look at what a disaster that has been. Milk has become so contaminated with chemicles and pollutents that some people consider it too dangerous to consume and it will not be long before fish will join the list with milk and most other dairy products.

    When you over perscribe anything, there is always disasterous results and there will be casualties.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. Braddock Spear 09:56 AM 1/29/10

    The findings of the Oryx study shouldn't surprise anyone. Seafood guides are confusing because few industries in this world are more complex and dynamic than fisheries management. However, these guides still have value as they keep the discussion about sustainable seafood going. Simply pointing out their shortcomings will do nothing to further the movement and improve fisheries. They are one tool in the growing toolbox for consumers to help us make more informed decisions. We're all going to have to put in a little extra effort to make this work.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. aquaken 12:38 PM 1/29/10

    Speaking for the Monterey Bay Aquarium and its Seafood Watch program, Im extremely disappointed with David Biellos report. It contains both errors of fact and a conclusion that is dead wrong about the significant impact consumer awareness programs are having on the seafood market.

    First, the factual errors:

    -- Monterey Bay Aquarium distributed its first Seafood Watch pocket guides in 1999, not 2000.
    -- Seafood Watch has distributed not 1 million pocket guides, but 32 million; plus another half million downloads from out website and 200,000 downloads of our paperless iPhone app since it was released in February 2009.
    -- We and other nonprofits have ALWAYS agreed that Atlantic halibut is a red-list species to avoid. The Oryx authors were wrong, and Mr. Biello repeats their error.

    Finally, his conclusions:

    The Monterey Bay Aquarium and our colleagues in the sustainable seafood movement ARE having a real and measurable impact on the major seafood buyers. I strongly disagree with researcher Jennifer Jacquet and the other authors of the Oryx report.

    Grassroots consumer demand underlies the success that we and others are having with major buyers -- buyers whose seafood purchasing decisions are changing the way fish are caught and farmed worldwide. Theyre coming to the table in response to consumer demand inspired by programs like Seafood Watch. And their buying power is beginning to create change on the water, in the way fish are caught and farmed.

    Just this week, Target Corp. announced that, in consultation with Seafood Watch, it will no longer sell red-listed farmed salmon in any of its 1,744 stores across North America.
    Compass Group and ARMARK, North America's two largest food service companies, are now buying millions of pounds of sustainable seafood in collaboration with Seafood Watch. Santa Monica Seafood, the largest distributor in southern California and the Southwest, is moving its clients toward more sustainable purchasing through its partnership with Seafood Watch.

    Others in the broader sustainable seafood movement are forming similar alliances with major buyers.

    Consumer seafood awareness programs aren't the be-all and end-all, but they are a critical part of a campaign that must succeed if we hope to have a future with healthy oceans.

    Ken Peterson, Communications Director
    Monterey Bay Aquarium

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  8. 8. CliffGoudey 01:45 PM 1/29/10

    No, Americans eat more fish than ever has not led to a global collapse of fisheries. Instead, it's the result of poor fisheries management or in some cases its environmental factors having nothing to do with fishing pressure, such as loss or estuarine habitat, pollution, endocrine disruptors, underwater sound, etc. So why would anyone think that these wallet cards or any of the sustainability rating systems would have a useful impact? At most they have an impact on price, moving less favored species to a lower tier in the market, meaning that more needs to be caught in order for a fisherman to stay afloat financially.

    These programs are primarily fund-raising tools for the ENGO industry, giving the donor or program participant a false sense of having a useful impact when in reality they are simply letting someone else choose what sits in the middle of their dinner plate. What an odd state of affairs our fisheries are in.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  9. 9. chris_s_74 02:23 PM 1/31/10

    Let's put this in perspective...32 million cards distributed among a population of 250 million? Does this count repeat downloads or page views? Even well-informed and/or concerned members of society (myself and people with whom I have discussed this issue) had never heard of this.

    I'm all for local harvest, and that would extend to conservation of marine life, but ignorance is impeding implementation.

    As a loose analogy, if the teacher stands in front of the class, and everyone fails the test...it's not the students' fault, generally.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  10. 10. CliffGoudey 03:39 PM 1/31/10

    Ken Peterson, speaking for the Monterey Bay Aquarium wrote, "Just this week, Target Corp. announced that, in consultation with Seafood Watch, it will no longer sell red-listed farmed salmon in any of its 1,744 stores across North America."

    And just what dd this accomplish besides deprive Target's customers of a seafood choice. Does MBAq really think this action is going to result in fewer salmon being farmed? Or will it somehow make more wild salmon available? The only remarkable thing about these consumer pull schemes or boycotts is their ineffectiveness at doing what they claim to do. Again, their primary reason for existence is fund raising, therefore, they will not be gong away anytime soon.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  11. 11. europamoon100 06:11 PM 2/1/10

    In fact, we're eating more seafood than ever and more of it comes from the least sustainable fisheries: shrimp,...

    How did you get the idea that shrimp is one of the least-sustainable fisheries?
    Shrimp can and are being raised in "fish farms" and sold from there onto the seafood market.
    DAW

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  12. 12. europamoon100 06:12 PM 2/1/10

    In fact, we're eating more seafood than ever and more of it comes from the least sustainable fisheries: shrimp,...

    How did you get the idea that shrimp is one of the least-sustainable fisheries?
    Shrimp can and are being raised in "fish farms" and sold from there onto the seafood market.
    DAW

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  13. 13. europamoon100 06:13 PM 2/1/10

    In fact, we're eating more seafood than ever and more of it comes from the least sustainable fisheries: shrimp,...

    How did you get the idea that shrimp is one of the least-sustainable fisheries?
    Shrimp can and are being raised in "fish farms" and sold from there onto the seafood market.
    DAW

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  14. 14. europamoon100 06:21 PM 2/1/10

    Lots of concern has been expressed about the disposal of unbought fresh fish at fish markets. That is admittedly a bad situation, but do you realize that the vast majority of fish that is caught and delivered for human consumption is either A) frozen fish, or B) canned fish ?

    Frozen fish consists of any kind of edible fish that you can name, and large amounts of canned fish consists of salmon, mackerel, anchovies, etc. You can also buy canned oysters, clams, scallops, etc.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

Tweets could not be retrieved at this time

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Have Wallet Cards Helped Fish?

X
Scientific American MIND iPad

Tap into your MIND

Get Both Print & Tablet Editions for one low price!

Subscribe Now >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X