Mr.Goodfish answers your questions

Because the development of fishing was unlimited, in the belief that the sea was inexhaustible. Contrary to the terms often used, fishing is not a production. It’s a “harvest” that depends on a natural resource and a territory. It is because we have unfortunately ignored these fundamental facts that the current general state of the world’s fishing resources is a cause for concern. In 50 years, fishing techniques have evolved considerably. Boats are more powerful and tracking techniques are increasingly efficient. For a fish, it has become almost impossible to escape modern fishing.

When fish stocks are carefully monitored by scientists and managed sustainably, we see beneficial effects, as is the case for some European stocks.

In addition, modern issues such as pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, which are responsible for ocean acidification and global warming, are contributing to the disruption of ocean biodiversity.

To sum up: fishery resources are a capital asset that earns interest every year. The challenge is to protect this capital and rebuild it when necessary, so as to be able to fish sustainably, eventually harvesting only the interest.

The total disappearance of a fish species such as cod or bluefin tuna is possible, but highly unlikely. There will always be a few thousand individuals left to maintain the species. One thing’s for sure, however, and that is that gigantic stocks can suddenly collapse under the blows of overexploitation. This is what has happened to Mediterranean bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) in recent years, and to cod on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.

In 1970, cod fishing on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland represented up to 800,000 tonnes of fish. For over a century, starting with the “terre-neuvas”, cod was the emblematic species for many fishermen. From the 1990s onwards, this resource suffered an unprecedented collapse in stocks. A moratorium was introduced in 1992, banning all fishing until the stock showed serious signs of recovery. This measure put tens of thousands of people out of work. Today, in 2018, despite a few years of slight improvements, cod stocks remain very fragile in these areas. The conclusion of the 2018 studies showed a slight decline despite controlled and limited TACs. The hypothesis for this 2018 trend remains a fluctuation due to natural mortality. Worse still, other species of virtually no economic interest have reportedly taken cod’s place in this area. This sadly “famous” case now serves as an example not to be followed in terms of fisheries management, but it has to be said that, despite this disastrous experience, we are not immune to the collapse of certain major stocks.

The Mediterranean bluefin tuna has been through a difficult period, with a drop in the population making up the stock in the early 2000s. This overexploited resource saw its stock collapse due to overfishing. For several years, numerous measures were implemented or reinforced, such as the introduction of a minimum catch size, a fishing season calendar, fishing permits, etc., to regulate both professional and recreational fishing. For fishermen on the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts, this species was essential. The economy around this fishery has therefore been severely impacted, with many fishing boats sold, destroyed or adapted to target other species. Since 2012, scientific data show a steady improvement. The latest advice from ICCAT- International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, released in 2018, demonstrates that the stock has recovered to an ecologically sustainable level thanks to appropriate management measures. As of summer 2018, Mr.Goodfish has therefore positioned itself by adding this species to its lists.

Episodes of “overfishing” have been recorded for centuries. For a long time, these were very localized around areas where people made their living from fishing. With the development of fleets and conservation techniques enabling people to go further and longer distances, exploitation gradually spread and then “globalized”, all the more rapidly as demand grew. Between 1950 and the 1980s, global fish production rose from 40 million tonnes to around 80 million tonnes. Since then, this “production” has plateaued, with catches from fishing totaling 90.9 million tonnes in 2016 (FAO 2018). But in the meantime, from 1950 to today, the world’s population has grown from 2.5 billion to nearly 7.5 billion. Experts estimate a population of 9.7 billion by 2050, but nature can only provide what it produces, not more.

Halieutics is the science of fishing. Halieutics specialists use a wide range of measurements and observations to monitor the health of exploited fish populations, known as “stocks”. A decrease in the average size of fish caught is an indication of overexploitation. Resource depletion, in other words a reduction in the quantities caught, is another indicator of overexploitation. These are clues, not proofs, and it is on the basis of constantly renewed and verified observations and measurements that we can conclude that a stock is overexploited. These observations are made during scientific campaigns on oceanographic vessels, as well as on professional fishing boats.

Nevertheless, science faces a number of obstacles. There is a lack of general knowledge about the marine environment, and a lack of resources allocated to research teams to study this particularly difficult environment. It’s always easier to assess the resource when it’s possible to have a global view of the stock, like a herd of cows in a field. At present, science doesn’t allow us to have this global representation of the oceans, and there are always unknown zones and therefore data that we don’t have.

Depending on the species, scientific monitoring is more or less easy to set up. Depending on the biology of the species, its lifestyle (benthic, pelagic…), its habitat (coastal/broad, deep/surface…), it becomes more difficult to have access to data on the overall state of this resource.

The problem is that stocks have been exploited for a long time, and the measures taken are most often a posteriori, i.e. once the state of health of the stock becomes a cause for concern.

A Total Allowable Catch (TAC) is defined for certain stocks (notably in the North-East Atlantic, North Sea and Baltic) and species. This represents the maximum catch authorized by the European Union for a given stock in a given area. Quotas are then determined, representing the quantities of fish that can be caught by country, by fishery or by boat. In areas such as the Mediterranean and Black Seas, fishing is managed by limiting the fishing effort on the resource.

Other measures include minimum catch sizes, which are normally calculated on the basis of sexual maturity. The aim is to ensure that every fish caught has reproduced at least once. Unfortunately, as with quotas, we need to distinguish between so-called “biological” minimum sizes, which meet the above criteria, and so-called “political” sizes, which take little or no account of scientific advice to satisfy short-term economic interests.

Nonetheless, it should be noted that more and more fishermen are applying increasingly restrictive rules (e.g. catch sizes greater than regulatory sizes, fishing seasons, etc.) to preserve the resource and, in the short, medium and long term, their business. Good value-adding also enables better management of the resource: fish less, but fish better. The product is better preserved on board, the quality of the fish is better and its selling price increases.

Despite the challenges facing the world’s marine capture fisheries, effective management measures implemented in some regions have enabled real progress in reducing fishing pressure on overexploited stocks by allowing them to recover, as well as the recovery of marine ecosystems. In the European Union (EU), up to 70% of stocks assessed recorded either a decline in fishing effort or an increase in abundance in the Northeast Atlantic (SOFIA 2016).

Yes, of course. But the question is: which fish, in what quantities and of what size? If we continue to overfish, individuals will no longer have time to reproduce. This may explain the current collapse of certain stocks. But the real danger undoubtedly comes from the modification of natural balances induced by overfishing. The disappearance of the “big fish” leaves the way open for other species to become predators in their turn. The prey of yesteryear has become a predator of the larvae and juveniles of the species that ate it yesterday. The base of the population is sheared off by this new predator, often much smaller in size and sometimes of no economic interest.

Today, more and more scientists are stressing the need to take into account the entire food chain, and even more so the entire ecosystem of a species, when issuing opinions on the state of the stock.

The nutritional value of krill is highly debatable, but that’s not the crux of the matter. Exploiting krill means exploiting the base of the food web in the oceans and therefore endangering all the marine ecosystems that depend on it, not just whales, but also small fish, which are eaten by larger fish or birds, marine mammals and humans of course. Krill harvesting projects therefore pose a major threat to the balance of life in the oceans, and ultimately to our own food supply.

Yes, a wild fish eats at least as much as a farmed fish, and probably even more, because it has to hunt, so it expends energy to catch its prey.

But the big difference that farming introduces is that it allows billions of fish to live that would never have survived in the wild. This means billions of extra mouths to feed, in excess of what nature can provide. Let’s not forget that fish lay tens of thousands, often hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions of eggs per reproductive cycle. Most of these eggs will never be fertilized, and of those that are, only 4, 5, 6 or 10 will reach adulthood. Today, research allows almost 100% of eggs to be fertilized and a very high percentage of young fry to reach adult size. We then have to feed all these fish that would not have survived in the wild, and this is where the problem arises.

Wild fish (also known as forage fish) are the basis of the food chain in the oceans. Anchovies, sardines and capelin feed larger fish (mackerel, for example), which in turn are eaten by tuna, birds, sea lions, seals, sharks, whales and humans. Given the importance of these species in the food chain, the professionals who exploit them must be committed to controlling the stocks concerned, or risk seeing them – and their business – collapse at the same time. By managing forage fish stocks sustainably, the sustainability of the resource is guaranteed for the entire food pyramid.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) underlines the ethical problem posed by the use of forage fish for farming purposes. Indeed, these fish could be directly consumed by populations with neither the necessary animal protein resources, nor the means to buy carnivorous farmed fish.

This is already the case on all carnivore farms, where the feed (distributed in the form of pellets) is made up of at least 50% plant-based ingredients (soybean meal and other plant proteins, wheat gluten, protein-rich udders, corn gluten, etc.). Current research is even pushing this percentage up to 80%, or even 85% in some cases. It’s a choice. Is it acceptable for species that are exclusively carnivorous in the wild to become partially or totally vegetarian? That’s partly up to the legislator. But it’s nonetheless essential that farmed fish retain, even partially, the nutritional qualities of wild fish. It is therefore essential to provide them with “polyunsaturated” fatty acids known as “Omega 3”, which are found mainly in… wild fish. Omega 3s are also present in algae, making them a promising component for the development of substitute flours. Numerous studies are currently underway.

In order to provide carnivorous fish with the proteins they need for their development, new flours are being researched: insect flours. Insects are part of the natural diet of carnivorous fish, with different nutritional properties depending on the species, and they are quick and easy to raise, making them an ideal substitute. In any case, we must bear in mind that we will always, at one time or another, be limited by the quantity that nature can provide.

Yes, and that’s why the argument that “if fishing resources collapse, there will always be aquaculture” is not only false, it’s dangerous. And even if these resources were to remain at their current level, nothing would be solved. We fish around 100 million tonnes a year, of which 7 are thrown overboard and 90.9 brought back to dock (source FAO 2016 and 2018). Just over 72 tonnes are consumed directly by humans, and around 21 million tonnes are consumed indirectly by feeding poultry, pig or fish farms.

From 2019, the European Commission’s zero discard target for professional fishing will oblige fishermen to bring back to the quayside certain fish that have been discarded at sea (either because they are too small for the regulations, or for lack of economic interest, or because quotas have already been reached, etc.). The aim of this new regulation is to encourage professional fishermen to improve the selectivity of their fishing gear. As these products are not authorized for direct human consumption, they will be used in the cosmetics industry, in research and, above all, to manufacture animal meal, the feed for farmed fish. Projects such as EODE, set up by the Comité des pêches du Nord-Pas de Calais-Picardie, are looking for new ways to add value to these unwanted catches. The aim is to innovate in order to limit the financial impact of these new regulations on professional fishermen.

Other solutions are being considered to limit the impact of aquaculture on ecosystems and increase farming productivity: for example, integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, a farming method in which “the waste from one species is the food for another” (Richard, 2009). With current technical ratios, these figures suggest a global production of between 10 and 20 million tonnes of carnivorous fish per year in aquaculture. However, this will require global governance and a heightened sense of responsibility on the part of governments and professionals, for their own economic survival. In this case, the triptych of sustainability: environment-economy-society is more relevant than ever.

That is true, but in the case of bluefin tuna, the consequences of this type of farming are at least as problematic as those caused by other carnivorous species. The tuna grows in cages to make it a “super-fatty” fish that is highly prized by Japanese consumers. To fatten it up, it is massively fed: up to 15 kg of wild fish to make a tuna in a cage gain 1 kg! This causes many problems, but the main one remains that species such as horse mackerel, sardines, anchovies or mackerel, consumed in particular by countries with very low purchasing power, have seen their prices soar. By fattening up bluefin tuna for a some markets, many populations are deprived of an essential source of protein that is even vital for their diet. In a world that will have 9 billion people in 2050, is this still possible? Is this compatible with the United Nations concept of responsible fishing?

Some types of fish farming release a lot of organic matter into the marine environment. The more fish consume, the more they release. This is a significant problem, particularly for tuna farming, some of whose projects have not seen the light of day due to excessive pollution of the marine environment.

Regarding the first question, several attempts, each more attractive than the last, have been undertaken. It is impossible to measure the result, the young fish larvae or fry released into the wild suffer the same fate as those born naturally, namely being consumed or dying naturally in 99% of cases. One of the most interesting solutions is that of “sea ranching” which allows young salmon to be released into the sea which, after a long journey in the open ocean, return to their river of origin. But the young salmon in question are no longer really fry but young fish (smolts) which are very expensive in protein at this stage. The percentage of return is clearly not sufficient to guarantee the profitability (or competitiveness) of this type of farming compared to other more intensive and more controlled ones over the entire cycle.

Other approaches are being implemented, such as seeding bivalves, a technique that increases natural stocks of juveniles. The spat are born and grow in a hatchery before being released and stored at sea. Two examples, one in the Bay of Saint Brieuc with scallops, the other in the Thau basin with clams, both initiated by local professional fishermen.

It is important to take into account certain criteria in order to make a wise choice so as not to harm natural resources and the environment. Mr.Goodfish helps you in this regard. Here are the selection criteria used by Mr.Goodfish for farmed species:

1. Feeding aquaculture species

The species must be fed:

• with components from wild fish optimized for the development of each species.
• with sustainable feed: the feed used must come from a sustainable source, i.e. made
• with wild species subject to quotas or certified sustainable (in increasing proportion as part of the improvement of practices). Other sources of ingredients such as co-products, algae, insects and flax are encouraged.

2. Breeding practices
The species chosen must be raised in optimal conditions of animal welfare and public health:

• The use of antibiotics must be done only on veterinary prescription and in compliance with European regulations.
• Mr.Goodfish has also determined a maximum number of annual treatments and strict conditions of use.
• The species must be raised in accordance with their behavioral practices in the wild with a density adapted for each species.

3. The environmental impact
The selected species must be raised in optimal conditions of respect for the environment. The dynamic balance between the production area and its environment must be maintained:

• The dynamic balance between the production area and its environment must be maintained.
• The species produced must be naturally present in the environment when production is carried out in an open environment.
• The species must be fed with a quantity of fishmeal respecting a yield threshold set and optimized by species, avoiding the release of organic matter into the environment.
• The rate of fine particles present in the feed must be less than 1%. The quality of the environment must not be impacted by the presence of an aquaculture farm.
  The use of chemicals must only be done on veterinary prescription and in compliance with European regulations. Mr.Goodfish has also determined a maximum number of annual treatments.
• For cleaning the facilities, Mr.Goodfish favors the use of mechanical or biological treatments.

The different indicators and thresholds are available by species.