Loading
EP 566 | AIRED 11/29/2021
November 29th, 2021 --- This week, we take a look at the most controversial documentary of the year, Seaspiracy, and debunk some of the highlighted accusations. Join us as we take a deeper dive into what is indeed fact, and what is fiction.
--- It has been seven months now since Netflix’s “Seaspiracy” cast it’s line and hooked millions of viewers around the world; a documentary on the damage that industrial fisheries inflict on the oceans and humans.
Advertise Here: advertising@tradexfoods.com
This means, Seaspiracy only analyzed buoyant plastics which would of course lead to the conclusion fishing nets are the most problematic in the GPGP.
Another poorly misinformative statistic that potentially does more harm than good, misguiding people within their own organizations on what is true and what is fiction in environmental restoration.
What begins as a journey to explore the transient beauty of our oceans, continues on as an ambush on the fishing industry.
Seaspiracy claims fisheries observers and boat captains are corrupt and often lie about how much fish is caught.
The truth is, lying about catch data is highly illegal and results in stripping a fisherman’s license.
Though it would be ignorant to believe relationships between observers and captains have not led to questionable, sometimes deadly, outcomes, fishermen do stick within their catch amount when enforcement is present.
Therefore, it is rare there would be a chance for them to skew the numbers.
It was not long until Seaspiracy came after The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), saying the certification is too easy to obtain and not credible while adding there is no such thing as sustainability.
In fact, MSC certifications are carried out by third-party auditors using publicly available sustainability criteria.
These certifications are created and used to help consumers make educated purchases and assist in making sustainable options easy to choose.
Emily De Sousa: "Ecolabels and certifications like Ocean Wise, MSC, Seafood Watch are really great tools, especially for the average consumer - like we said, there’s just so much information out there to try and make sense of and it can be super frustrating. So I think ecolabels can be a really effective tool, they’re quick, they’re really simple for consumers to identify with."
Though DeSousa believes such organizations can always do better with addressing social factors in fisheries and seafood, as well as addressing financial barriers that prevent small scale fisheries from accessing eco labels- she reassures us that they are indeed credible in the way the film makes them out not to be.
Emily De Sousa: "In terms of ecological sustainability and certifying sustainable fisheries I think they are effective at that. My issues more so lie with the social side and the small-scale fisheries but I think they are an effective tool for the average consumer to identify a good seafood choice."
To continue on the bamboozling brigade, the film claims 1 in 3 fish imported into the US is caught illegally.
The truth of the matter is this estimate is based on import data from 2011 that has since been significantly corrected, reports De Sousa, with the methodology employed to make the estimate highly controversial.
The documentary briefly shifts their focus to call out Aquaculture, saying it is NOT part of the seafood solution when in fact, "Aquaculture is responsible for over half of seafood consumed globally and is a critical part of achieving global food security for a growing planet" says DeSousa.
As reported in DeSousa's paper, today, aquaculture is the fastest growing food producing sector in the world and is respo nsible for over half of seafood consumed globally. On top of this, approximately 20.5 million people are directly employed by the aquaculture industry..
In a last ditch effort to prove their misguided claims, the film reports there’s no such thing as sustainable fishing or sustainable seafood. Bottom line, fishing is bad and it’s all a conspiracy involving industry, governments, scientists, NGOs, your neighbor.
To put it bluntly from De Sousa- Just stop.
From a film that invites you to believe that sustainable fishing doesn’t exist and to cut out the seafood industry altogether, it was important for researchers like De Sousa to shed light on the truth behind the misinformation.
-- Closing Statement --
Emily De Sousa: "I think a lot of people often forget that fish is part of our food system. Seafood is a really integral part for a lot of diets around the world for a lot of people’s livelihoods around the world. The seafood industry employs hundreds of millions of people worldwide. So this industry is not going away and we can’t afford to have it go away from an economic standpoint, from a human nutrition standpoint. We need seafood, and the solution is not to stop eating seafood, it’s just to eat seafood better."
In the end, the overall goal of De Sousa’s paper hopes to show that you can still eat seafood in a sustainable way and eat seafood AND be an advocate and a champion for the oceans.
In what came into the world like a tidal wave, Seaspiracy quickly loses its credibility within the hurricane of misinformation and fictitious claims.
However, what it does allow for are the ripple effects of real conversations on the importance of sustainable seafood, and the future of the seafood industry as a collective, which hopefully continues to create a wave of discussions and actions for years to come.
As leaders in the seafood industry, we pledge to be a trusted and valued source of accurate information, to provide full transparency of the ever changing industry, and to commit to effective efforts in our sustainability initiatives