<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  >

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; shrimp</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/shrimp</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'shrimp'</description>
  <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:24:12 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>Environmental Defense: Shrimp By the Numbers</title>
    <link>http://kiramarchenese.greenoptions.com/2007/10/31/environmental-defense-shrimp-by-the-numbers/</link>
    <comments>http://kiramarchenese.greenoptions.com/2007/10/31/environmental-defense-shrimp-by-the-numbers/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:24:12 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Kira Marchenese</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Food Production]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[farming]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[seafood]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[shrimp]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[sustainability]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://kiramarchenese.greenoptions.com/2007/10/31/environmental-defense-shrimp-by-the-numbers/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>
<img src="/files/4/shrimp_hi_248x200.jpg" alt="" width="248" height="200" align="right" /><em>This <a href="http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?contentID=7260">post</a> is by Leslie Valentine, Online Writer and Editor at <a href="http://www.environmentaldefense.org/home.cfm">Environmental Defense</a>. </em>
</p>
<h3>1</h3>
<p>
Rank of shrimp in popularity among all types of seafood Americans eat
</p>
<h3>4.4</h3>
<p>
Pounds of shrimp the average American consumed in 2006
</p>
<h3>10%</h3>
<p>
Share of shrimp sold in the U.S. that comes from the Southeast U.S. (Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean), where fisheries and farms are held to stricter standards
</p>
<h3>90%</h3>
<p>
Share of shrimp sold in the U.S. that comes largely from Southeast Asia and Latin America, where environmental regulations are sometimes lax and often not enforced<!--break-->
</p>
<h3>33%</h3>
<p>
Share of U.S. shrimp imports that come from Thailand, our largest single supplier
</p>
<h3>$4.1 billion</h3>
<p>
Value of U.S. shrimp imports in 2006, nearly one-third of all seafood imports, compared with coffee imports of $3.1 billion and fossil fuels worth $300 billion
</p>
<h3>44%</h3>
<p>
Percentage of worldwide shrimp production that came from farms in 2005
</p>
<h3>12,000%</h3>
<p>
Increase in farmed shrimp production between 1975 and 2005. Production ballooned from just over 22,000 tons to more than 2.6 million tons.
</p>
<h3>3.7 million</h3>
<p>
Acreage of tropical coastal mangroves estimated to have been converted to shrimp farms, destroying important habitat for fish, birds and people
</p>
<h3>2</h3>
<p>
Number of pounds of wild fish it generally takes to produce one pound of farmed shrimp
</p>
<p>
<em><br />
More on <a href="http://www.environmentaldefense.org/page.cfm?tagID=1552">eco-friendly farmed shrimp</a>.</em></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://kiramarchenese.greenoptions.com/2007/10/31/environmental-defense-shrimp-by-the-numbers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Dolphins, and Turtles, and Seals - Oh My! The Effect of Fishing on the Animals We Care About</title>
    <link>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/08/03/dolphins-and-turtles-and-seals-oh-my-the-effect-of-fishing-on-the-animals-we-care-about/</link>
    <comments>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/08/03/dolphins-and-turtles-and-seals-oh-my-the-effect-of-fishing-on-the-animals-we-care-about/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 13:43:16 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Colleen Patrick-Goudreau</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/08/03/dolphins-and-turtles-and-seals-oh-my-the-effect-of-fishing-on-the-animals-we-care-about/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>
<img src="/files/4/seaanimals2.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="100" />
</p>
<p>
In my first exploration of the issue of <a href="/2007/07/05/one_fish_two_fish_lets_just_not_fish_by_catch_in_our_seafood_salad">by-catch in commercial fishing</a><a></a>, I looked at the devastating effects of fishing not simply for the &#34;target&#34; species, but on those animals who are unlucky enough to be caught in the lines, traps, hooks, and nets not meant for them. In this second part, I further explore this issue and take a look at how the dolphins, sea turtles, and seals - animals for whom we have affection - fare in our pursuit of gastronomic pleasure.<strong> </strong>
</p>
<p>
<strong>DOLPHINS</strong><br />
The public became aware of the problems of by-catch in the 1980s when campaigns were led against tuna companies for harming and killing dolphins when tuna were the targets. The relationship between dolphins and tuna is that yellowfin tuna follow and school beneath dolphins, so fishing fleets would look for dolphins on the surface, herd them and encircle them and set out the nets to catch the tuna – ensnaring the dolphins at the same time. An estimated <a href="http://www.hsus.org/about_us/humane_society_international_hsi/international_policy/treaties/the_dolphin_safe_label/">5 to 7 million dolphins have been killed</a> by this fishing method over the past four decades, the largest marine mammal kill in history.
</p>
<p>
In 1986, the International Marine Mammal Project organized a campaign, including a consumer boycott of tuna, in order to urge U.S. tuna companies to end the practice of intentionally chasing and netting dolphins, and to adopt &#34;Dolphin Safe&#34; fishing practices to prevent the drowning of dolphins in tuna nets. Dolphins are mammals and don’t have gills, so they drown while stuck in the nets underwater. There are other standards that a company must adhere to in order to label their tuna “dolphin-safe,” but it’s worth noting that just because it says “dolphin-safe” or “dolphin-friendly,” it doesn’t mean that dolphins were not killed in the production of a particular tin of tuna. It means that the fleet which caught the tuna did not specifically target a pod of dolphins.<!--break-->
</p>
<p>
Though the numbers are down since new techniques are used to catch tuna (400,000 dolphins killed annually in the 1960s and 100,000 in the 1980s), several thousand dolphins are still killed each year to satisfy our appetites for tuna. Dolphins &#8212; social, playful, intelligent animals &#8212; are also killed as by-catch in nets targeting trout. According to a 2003 BBC story by Alex Kirby called “<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2985630.stm">Nets Kill 800 Cetaceans a Day</a>,” more than 800 dolphins, porpoises, and whales die every day as they get tangled in fishing nets – that’s 300,000 every year.
</p>
<p>
<strong>TURTLES</strong><br />
Turtles are also common victims. Sea turtles are killed by the thousands. It’s estimated that <a href="http://seaturtles.org/press_release2.cfm?pressID=322">more than 20,000 sea turtles die each year after getting hooked on longlines</a>. Six of the seven species of marine turtles are listed as &#34;Endangered&#34; or &#34;Critically Endangered,&#34; and the outlook is increasingly grim. In the Pacific, leatherbacks are heading for extinction, fast, and in the Mediterranean, green turtle numbers have plummeted. Though pollution and disease contribute to this, the nets and long-lines of fishing fleets play a major role in their demise.
</p>
<p>
According to Duke University, which recently conducted a <a href="http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/InNews/study2004.htm">global assessment</a> of the problem, more than 250,000 loggerhead and 60,000 leatherback turtles are snared each year by commercial longline fishing, and tens of thousands die. The authors estimated that longline fleets from 40 different countries set about 1.4 billion hooks in the studied year of 2000, the equivalent of about 3.8 million hooks each day. Again, longlines are fishing lines that can stretch for 40 miles and dangle thousands of individually baited hooks. They are set at optimal depths and times to catch tuna and swordfish, shark, and other fish, and according to the data studied, the turtles most often die – not by drowning, by some kind of injury related to hooking or entangling.
</p>
<p>
<strong>SEALS</strong><br />
Another byproduct of the fishing industry is the brutal death of baby seals. Because of the overfishing of cod by the Canadian fishing industry in eastern Canada –- in the Atlantic Ocean for Newfoundland’s northeast coast &#8212; the cod population declined to such a degree that the government stepped in the late 1980s and imposed severe restrictions on commercial fishing. But it was too late. <a href="http://bulletin.ninemsn.com/article.aspx?id=134152&#38;print=true">Because of overfishing</a>, the fishery collapsed, never recovered, and the ecosystem changed such that it was no longer able to support cod fish.
</p>
<p>
What does all this have to do with the seals? Scapegoating the seals for the collapse of the cod fisheries, fishermen demanded a kill. In 2003, the Canadian government bowed to pressure from the fishing industry, and ordered the massacre of hundreds of thousands of seals, declaring war on the seals in hopes that massive seal kills will bring back the cod and keep their disgruntled fishermen working.
</p>
<p>
In fact, cod is not a major food source of the harp and hood seal diet. Further, recent evidence suggests that killing seals contributes to bacterial infestation on the ocean floor which leads to hypoxia, a condition in which patches of ocean lose all the dissolved oxygen and are unable to sustain cod or fish or marine life of any kind. However, these facts seem to have been brushed aside by the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans in their efforts to justify and continue the slaughter.
</p>
<p>
During the 3-year period of 2003-2005, the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) allowed a kill quota of 975,000 baby and adult harp seals and 30,000 adult hood seals. When the &#34;struck and lost&#34; seals are included (these are the animals who’ve been hit but lost in the icy waters), the total killed exceeds one million, making this the largest marine mammal slaughter in the world.
</p>
<p>
To find as many avenues as possible to profit from the annual, government-subsidized slaughter, Canada exports sealskins (furskins/pelts and leather), seal oil, and seal meat. Unfortunately, the demand for seal pelts has sky-rocketed, especially in Europe. Though seal meat isn’t doing so well, the Canadian government is trying to find markets for the bodies of the skinned seals. The kill continues to this day. The quota for the 2007 massacre was 270,000. Visit <a href="http://www.protectseals.org/">www.protectseals.org</a> for more information.
</p>
<p>
<strong>TSUNAMI<br />
</strong>Finally, while we’re talking about by-products/effects (not just &#34;by-catch&#34;), there is another by-product of consuming aquatic animals that went under the radar screen when an earthquake and subsequent tsunami in southeast Asia destroyed lives and communities at the end of 2004. Over 200,000 human lives were lost and an uncounted number of non-human lives. <a href="http://www.zmag.org/Sustainers/Content/2005-01/23shiva.cfm">Experts agree</a> that the destruction of coral reefs and mangrove trees played a significant role in the destruction caused by the tsunami. In many countries across Asia, including Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, mangroves stood all along the coasts in shallow waters. They offered protection against things like tsunamis. Over the last 20-30 years, they were cleared for shrimp or prawn farms. The shrimps and prawns are sold to Europeans and other foreigners at a price that does not take into account the environmental cost. The destruction of the coasts was also due to the building of large resorts where they should never have been built.
</p>
<p>
Of course, there are efforts to rebuild the shrimp farms, and we’ll see if we learn anything from the disaster. I’m a little skeptical, considering the fact that worldwide, shrimp farming has grown at an annual average of over 18% since 1970, and is the single most valuable internationally traded seafood product worldwide, valued at an estimated $50-60 billion at the point of retail.
</p>
<p>
<strong>BEYOND BY-CATCH<br />
</strong>The cost of our consumption of aquatic animals is extremely high - not just to the target species who were living perfectly peaceful lives before we come along and snatch them out of their homes, but also to the non-target species and entire ecosystems. And this is just one aspect of this issue. We have yet to talk about all the others, including factory-farm raising fish; the pollution in the ocean; the fishing of smaller fish to feed to the larger fish we raise to eat; the toxins, such as mercury, in the fish that we consume when we eat their bodies; the research that supports the fact that fish feel pain; the human health concerns of eating fish; or the ethical considerations of “catch and release sport fishing.&#34;
</p>
<p>
We have yet to explore the many problems with consuming salmon – for instance, the problems with farm-raised Atlantic salmon, which is probably one of the worst choices we could make: the fish are raise in cramped pens in the ocean, and their waste pollutes the surrounding water and spreads disease to wild fish. In the Pacific, escaped farm-raised salmon also compete with wild fish for food, and interfere with spawning. Furthermore, salmon are fed a diet of fish meal (tinted to give their flesh that characteristic &#34;salmon pink&#34; color) which further depletes the ocean food chain. Wild Washington or Oregon salmon is a poor choice, since overfishing and habitat destruction have endangered many species. And remember: the fish have to consume Omega-3 fatty acids from phytoplankton, from algae. If they don’t consume it, they don’t have it in their flesh. If they don&#8217;t get it, we don&#8217;t get it. So again, <a href="/2007/06/29/the_nutrients_we_need_are_plant_based">go right to the source</a> for your nutrients.
</p>
<p>
<strong>FOOD FOR THOUGHT<br />
</strong>A recent issue of <em>Fish and Fisheries</em> magazine cited more than 500 research papers on fish intelligence, proving that fish are smart, that they can use tools, and that they have impressive long-term memories and sophisticated social structures. The introductory chapter said that fish are &#34;steeped in social intelligence, pursuing Machiavellian strategies of manipulation, punishment and reconciliation … exhibiting stable cultural traditions and cooperating to inspect predators and catch food.&#34; A wonderful <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/animalrights/story/0,,2107775,00.html">U.K. <em>Guardian</em></a> story explores these notions, quoting Dr. Culum Brown, a specialist in fish behaviour at Macquarie University in Sydney, and co-author of <em>Fish Cognition and Behaviour</em>. He says, &#34;I spend half my life telling people fish aren&#8217;t stupid. Fish are more intelligent than they appear. The trouble is that most aquaculture treats fish as if they are little robots. They are not.&#34;
</p>
<p>
My hope is that we begin to question the criteria we use to determine the value of an animal’s life, who deserves to be spared pain, and who has a right to live free from harm, free from suffering, free from premature and unnecessary death.
</p>
<p>
My hope is that our hearts are large enough to include not only those with whom we can identify, with whom we can communicate but also those who don’t look us, those who don’t sound like us. May we be as fascinated by our differences as we are consoled by our similarities. We don’t need to travel to other planets to find interesting, exotic, different life forms. They exist right here, right now, on the earth and in the sea.</p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/08/03/dolphins-and-turtles-and-seals-oh-my-the-effect-of-fishing-on-the-animals-we-care-about/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>One Fish, Two Fish, Let&#8217;s Just Not Fish: By-Catch in our Seafood Salad</title>
    <link>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/07/06/one-fish-two-fish-lets-just-not-fish-by-catch-in-our-seafood-salad/</link>
    <comments>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/07/06/one-fish-two-fish-lets-just-not-fish-by-catch-in-our-seafood-salad/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 13:03:55 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Colleen Patrick-Goudreau</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/07/06/one-fish-two-fish-lets-just-not-fish-by-catch-in-our-seafood-salad/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><img src="/files/images/fishsmall_0.jpg" border="0" width="240" height="159" />According to the USDA&#39;s annual statistics survey, 10 billion animals are killed for human consumption every year in the United States. (Worldwide, I believe it’s 45 billion.)  However, it is more accurate to say that “10 billion <em>land</em> animals are killed for human consumption every year&#34;; otherwise, we’re disregarding the billions of aquatic animals killed for the same purpose – to satisfy human appetites. Although the number of aquatic animals killed for consumption in the United States goes unreported, annual estimates are more than 17 billion in the U.S. alone, and sport fishing and angling kills another 245 million animals annually. So, basically, we’re talking about over 27 billion animals – both land and aquatic – being killed every year in the U.S. so humans can eat them. We’re not talking about human survival – we’re talking about appetite. And these numbers don’t count the millions of aquatic animals killed every year as incidental catch.</p>
<p>Incidental catch, or &#34;by-catch,&#34; refers to unintended or unwanted animals caught by the fishing industry. It is estimated that by-catch-related mortality is causing population declines in <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/environment_pew_oceans_effects_fishing.pdf">13 out of the 44 species of marine mammals</a> that are suffering high death rates from human activities. Commercial fishers use a number of techniques for ensnaring animals, from setting miles of line and baited hooks (called longlines) to catch animals such as sharks, swordfish, and tuna, to using large nets to catch schools of fish. These large nets are towed underwater by what are called trawlers. A trawler is a fishing vessel designed for the purpose of operating a trawl, a type of fishing net that is dragged along the bottom of the sea (or sometimes just above the bottom at a specified depth).<!--break--> </p>
<p><strong>UNEARTHING THE OCEAN FLOOR</strong> <br />A single pass of a trawl <a href="http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/our-oceans/bycatch">removes up to 20% of the seafloor fauna and flora</a> - legally. And the fisheries with the highest levels of by-catch are shrimp fisheries: 80%-90% of a catch may consist of marine species other than the shrimp being targeted. 80%-90% of the animals caught in these nets that are targeting shrimp and prawns are actually non-target animals – they’re by-catch. </p>
<p>Shrimp are bottom-dwellers, which is why trawling nets are used to – remove them from the ocean. Since even jumbo shrimp are really small, the nets used to catch the shrimp are very fine, which means these nets scoop up all the animals – all the life – found on the ocean’s floor. According to a <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/030609/9oceans.htm">2003 U.S. News and World Report</a> article on fishing and its detrimental affects on the oceans of the world, every pound of shrimp that’s caught results in the killing of ten pounds of other marine life. According to the Worldwide Fund for Nature, in the Gulf of Thailand it can be 14 pounds of by-catch per pound of shrimp. </p>
<p>Now, a lot of the dead by-catch is made up of tiny animals that people don’t have emotional attachments to; that is, they may not be as cute as baby seals or dolphins, but they contribute to the oceans’ biodiversity and they have a right to be there – to live. </p>
<p>The other thing to consider is that the dredging along the ocean floor also breaks up coral and the habitats of bottom-dwellers. And because the same areas are dredged again and again, it’s not like these habitats and inhabitants have time to recover before being destroyed again. Fish populations, communities, and ecosystems are being destroyed so humans can eat shrimp cocktail.</p>
<p>The animals termed as by-catch are often discarded back into the ocean already dead or dying. Many are half-alive and die slow, unnecessary deaths. Trawl nets in general, and shrimp trawls in particular where the discard may be 90% of the catch, have been identified as sources of mortality for many species of concern, including <a href="http://www.cetaceanbycatch.org/pr.2005.06.09.cfm">endangered animals and cetaceans</a>, such as whales, dolphins and porpoises. Sea turtles, already endangered, have been killed by the thousands in shrimp trawl nets. </p>
<p>It&#39;s hard to get exact number, but another way to put this is that anywhere between 6.8 million and 27 million tons of fish could be being discarded each year. We may be looking at the one fish on our plate or the 5 shrimp in our seafood salad, but countless numbers of animals were dredged up and killed for the individuals we see on our own plates. </p>
<p><strong>CETACEANS (WHALES, DOLPHINS, PORPOISES) <br /></strong>I&#39;ve been focusing primarily about the by-catch caused by trawling nets and shrimp nets, but there are other commercial fishing methods that also result in by-catch. Nets tend to kill cetaceans (dolphins, porpoises and whales), and longline fishing kills birds, for instance. As for the first group, an estimated <a href="http://www.cetaceanbycatch.org/pr.2005.06.09.cfm">300,000 cetaceans</a> (whales, dolphins and porpoises) die as by-catch each year, because they are unable to escape when caught in nets. We may not think cod fish are particularly cute, but most people get pretty emotional about whales, dolphins, and porpoises. If we don’t consider the cod, perhaps we can consider the animals for whom we do have sympathy. </p>
<p><strong>SHARKS - THE TRUE VICTIMS IN THE HUMAN-FISH RELATIONSHIP</strong> <br />In the case of the shark by-catch in the tuna industry, &#34;<a href="http://www.spc.int/OceanFish/Html/TEB/Bill&#38;Bycatch/Bycatch/TechReport34/Contents.pdf">data</a> for Pacific longline tuna fisheries are limited, but available data indicate that shark catches are often as high as tuna catches and more than 50 species of sharks and fish are captured as by-catch in West Pacific tuna longline fisheries.&#34; (Incidentally, in defense of sharks, it has been estimated that a staggering 100 million sharks are caught every year, have their dorsal fins cut off - to serve in soup, and are thrown back into the ocean to die a slow death. </p>
<p><strong>SEABIRDS - MANY ON THE BRINK OF EXTINCTION</strong><br />As I mentioned earlier, seabirds are also inevitable &#34;by-catch&#34; victims, as they dive for the bait planted on long fishing lines, swallow the bait along with the hook, and are pulled under the water where they drown. Around <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/030609/9oceans.htm">100,000 albatrosses</a> are killed by longline fisheries every year, particularly where tuna are fished, and because of this, many species are facing extinction. This is very prevalent in the waters off Chile, where sea bass is aggressively hunted by boats towing fifty-mile longlines. </p>
<p>According to the <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/environment_pew_oceans_effects_fishing.pdf">Pew Oceans Commission</a>, Patagonian toothfish long-liners killed around 265,000 seabirds between 1996 and 1999; in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands, where the total breeding population of the black-footed albatross is 120,000 birds, annual fishing-related mortalities of 1,000 and 2,000 birds are significant; and longline fisheries in the U.S., including the Pacific cod fishery kills some 9,400 to 20,200 seabirds every year. </p>
<p>In subsequent posts, I&#39;ll address the dolphins, sea turtles, seals, and other marine mammals who are also written off as &#34;collateral damage.&#34; Look forward to more on the un-sustainability of farm-raising fish, on the evidence of fish intelligence, and much more related to our pursuit of gustatory pleasure. Check out my <a href="/2007/06/29/the_nutrients_we_need_are_plant_based">previous post</a> for the reasons to obtain Omega-3 fatty acids from plant sources rather than fish (hint: the fish obtain these fats from plant sources, too!)</p>
<p>Humans have no nutritional requirement for the flesh or secretions of other animals. Like the non-human animals we eat, we can go straight to the source - to the plants - for all the nutrients we need to survive and thrive.</p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://colleenpatrickgoudreau.greenoptions.com/2007/07/06/one-fish-two-fish-lets-just-not-fish-by-catch-in-our-seafood-salad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 80 queries in 0.536 seconds. -->