Behind the Most Traded Animal Commodity - Fish

Fish from all over the world are on display at Brixton Market in London.
Image source and caption: New York Times

"There are no fish in the sea here anymore," says one Senegalese fisherman. Without a livelihood, he tried to immigrate to Europe, following a route that has claimed 6,000 lives, including his cousin's. He failed but will try again.

This is just one of the revelations that appear in a New York Times story on the disappearance of African fish, due to foreign fleets plying the waters without oversight. Europe, facing its own fisheries collapse, is importing its supply globally, aided by such companies such as "China National Fisheries Corporation, one of the largest suppliers of West African fish to Europe." In the second story in the series, the Times points out:

Fish is now the most traded animal commodity on the planet, with about 100 million tons of wild and farmed fish sold each year. Europe has suddenly become the world's largest market for fish, worth more than 14 billion euros, or about $22 billion a year. Europe's appetite has grown as its native fish stocks have shrunk so that Europe now needs to import 60 percent of fish sold in the region.

None of this is particularly new -- you can read Charles Clover's book The End of the Line, which documented the practices that led to the collapse of cod stocks in the North Sea and which also spent many pages on the free-for-all underway in Africa.  (I interviewed Clover, Environmental Editor of the London Telegraph, on Salon). But it is news on this side of the pond, where we see very little about the depletion of distant fisheries, such as those in Africa.

The impact of that decline is measured in attempts by idle African fisherman to immigrate to Europe, the  disappearance of subsistence fish protein for Africans, and the rising price of fish in London.

Prices have doubled and tripled in response to surging demand, scarcity and recent fishing quotas imposed by the European Union in a desperate effort to save native species. In London, a kilogram of lowly cod, the traditional ingredient of fish and chips, now costs up to £30, or close to $60, up from £6 four years ago.

It's doubtful that Europe will be able to control or manage this global fish trade responsibly, given its consistent inability in the Mediterranean of staving off the collapse of blue fin tuna. (That link, by the way is to Carl Safina's blog -- the MacArthur fellow who wrote an amazing narrative on the blue fin's plight in his book, Song for the Blue Ocean).

As for sustainable alternatives, a Times sidebar pointed to a fish and chips joint in London where the chef is sourcing all his stocks sustainably -- at a price. A portion costs 10 pounds (about $20).

What the series so far has not examined are the use (or misuse?) of sustainable fisheries. Clover, in his book, for example, revealed that McDonald's Filet-O-Fish sandwich is sourced from sustainable fisheries certified by the Marine Stewardship Council, such as Alaskan cod and pollack. (You wouldn't know it, since McDonald's does not pay the licensing fee to use the MSC certification seal on its meals).

Is this practice still underway and does it extend to Europe as well?  I'd like to know...

- Samuel Fromartz

Will Starbucks Pull an Apple out of a Latte?

With news that McDonald's is entering the premium coffee biz with its own McLattes and baristas, Starbucks says "Basta!"

The company fired its CEO, who presided over a precipitous stock slide, and brought back Howard Schultz, the visionary who built the company.

This is reminiscent of Apple, where Steve Jobs came back on board in the dark days of a steep slide when the company's very existence was in question. The rest is history. Jobs not only managed to turn the company around but do something much more difficult: he transformed Apple into something new, a media company whose products fly off the shelves and commands hefty market share in addition to sex appeal.

So can Schultz pull off something similar with Starbucks? Lattes have gone mainstream, Starbucks sales are stagnant, and now it faces McDonald's. Or does it? The Wall Street Journal, which published the McDonald's story, notes that Dunkin' Donuts might take the bigger hit in this coffee war and makes another good point: The entry of the mainstream companies presents new competition but it also enlarges the market in a way that might ultimately benefit Starbucks.

According to Schultz's statement, Starbucks lost its way. It opened too many stores, became too bureaucratic and lost touch with the experience that was at the heart of its success. (Schultz had touched on these points nearly a year ago in a highly revealing memo -- nod to Romenesko's Starbucks Gossip blog). 

Schultz says "he will bring a “laser-like focus” to improving the customer experience and in making sure that the 'Starbucks experience' is markedly different from rivals..." the Times notes.  

Another interesting point: So many highly successful companies lose their way when the founding CEO steps down. Managers, often from outside the company, are recruited and too often they just don't get it. It's not in their blood. It happens time and again. This is a case study of that process. But Apple is the rare exception where the founder came back and brought focus and purpose to the company again.

Odds on Schultz succeeding: I'd say 7-to-3. But I'll stay loyal to DC's rockin' Murky Coffee whose high quality brew is only exceeded by its long lines. Yep, Starbucks grew the market too in a way that made it possible for independents to steal the frothy high-end. May the macchiato's always be strong, damn strong.

- Samuel Fromartz

The New Local Middlemen

Middlemen are often derided as making a buck off the back of the little guy. What this simplistic picture misses is the vital role wholesalers play in creating markets for smaller, and yes, local, farmers who can't sell direct or who want to diversify their income stream.

This isn't a sexy business. You won't see stunning pictures of farmers in lush fields. More likely, just a steel warehouse with forklifts and trucks at the concrete loading dock. Some of these businesses, like Organically Grown Co., in Oregon, are working hard at reducing their carbon footprint by running trucks on biodiesel, retrofitting their warehouses, replacing lights, and migrating to reusable plastic produce bins instead of waxed cardboard boxes. Others I've come across include Co-Op Partners Warehouse in the Twin Cities, Veritable Vegetable in northern California, and Tuscarora Organic in the mid-Atlantic. There are many more, but not nearly enough.

Amid the din of the Iowa Caucus, NPR this morning profiled one start up in northern Michigan making a go at creating a local wholesale produce business. It's worth a listen. Expect more entrants into this niche as local food grows.

- Samuel Fromartz

Organic Film in the Works

A couple of years ago, an NYU grad student interviewed me on camera for a student project on organic food. Then I kept running into her at various organic events as the project has blossomed into a real film. And now the former student, Shelley Rogers, has won some impressive help for her project, What's Organic About? I am not endorsing it -- having not seen it -- but the preview clip is compelling and hints at some familiar fissures, such as local v. organic, big v. small.

If you're in the organic food industry, you'll recognize some of the figures, including the inimitable Marty Mesh of Florida Certified Organic, whose usual antics (opps, I mean statements) at National Organic Standards Board meetings are only matched by the inimitable Jim Pierce of Organic Valley (whose brief statements to the board should be collected and published as organic poems, haikus and parables. In the future, he should try limericks.) In any case, Marty's in the movie and I look forward to seeing more. Now without further adieu, a promo clip:

Workin' in the New Year

I got this great quote by Studs Terkel in a holiday email. He's the one-time radio interviewer, journalist and oral historian who was required reading when I first training to be a reporter. Something to think about for the new year.

“Work is about daily meaning as well as daily bread. For recognition as well as cash; for astonishment rather than torpor; in short, for a sort of life rather than a Monday through Friday sort of dying... We have a right to ask of work that it include meaning, recognition, astonishment, and life.” - Studs Terkel

Writing a story about a restaurant a few years ago, I asked Anthony Bourdain, the renegade chef and writer, "Restaurants always die. What's the secret to longevity?"

Bourdain replied: "The secret to longevity is to decide early on what one does well and then do it relentlessly, fanatically well, never wavering, never letting things slide, never allowing oneself to lose sight of one's original standards and intentions, and not falling victim to trends or unreasonable fears."

Advice that could be applied to far more than restaurants...

This is Brooklyn?

I grew up in Brooklyn. I spent many hours on the subway, going to Coney Island, or to the Promenade in Brooklyn Heights. I went to school on Clinton Hill, skated in Prospect park, and cleaned up Fort Greene park on the first Earth Day. (There were empty drug vials in the park then, now there's a farmers' market). But in all that time, I never saw anything like this, ever. It shows how much the urban farm and garden movement has come, and it rocks. The farm, pictured above, is located on asphalt covered in 2 feet of compost. It's from an article by Kelle Carter, farm field coordinator for Seeds of Change, the organic seed and food company. I came across it looking for seeds. Worth a read.

Safina's Blue Fin Blues

I've eaten blue fin tuna -- the last time was perhaps 3 years ago. No longer. I now know enough to understand this fish is in danger of collapse - as in disappearance - as this illuminating post by Carl Safina makes clear. He's author of Voyage of the Turtle and other books and co-founded Blue Ocean Institute (which like several others, has very useful information on sustainable seafood choices).

His post on the ineptitude of bureaucrats 'managing' the fishery is astute.

The largest remaining Atlantic bluefin population-which breeds in the Mediterranean-is now also endangered with collapse. The quota for fishing in the eastern half of the Atlantic and in the Med is more than double what the Commission’s own scientists recommend. Moreover, recent catches have exceeded the limit by more than 50%. Actual catches are about 230% higher than scientists recommend, meaning that for every one fish that can be sustainably caught, fishermen are killing more than three. The population has halved since the 1970’s, with most of the decline occurring in the last 5-6 years. It’s the familiar Bluefin story: Illegal fishing is rampant, too many fish are being caught, and the population is headed for collapse.

Image source: National Geographic

Who Needs California?

OK, we're getting to the time of year when produce fiends like me begin to wish they live in California, because the veggies there never stop. But this past year, I had pretty good luck in DC, growing my own and eating veggies from the garden from late-April through this week. It may even go longer, though today we had our first real snow and it might have blown out the lettuce. We'll see.

Here are some pictures taken last Sunday of the veggies we've been eating (not pictured are kale and Swiss chard, both still going strong). Many people give up the garden in August, but for me that's when things really got going. I seeded a lot of greens, especially Asian greens in August and September, and am still reaping the bounty. For awhile now, most of the produce we've been buying is fruit. That little patch of mesclun mix lettuce, by the way, would amount to more than one pound.

Click on the image to start the slide show:

The Price of One Penny

In the long and sordid history of farmworkers, a few glaring examples manage to jump out of the background noise and make national news. Such is the case with the decision by Burger King to refuse handing out a one penny price increase to tomato pickers in Florida because it has been so vehemently opposed by conservative growers.

Eric Schlosser, author of Fast Food Nation, weighed in in on this issue in the N.Y. Times:

Migrant farm laborers have long been among America’s most impoverished workers. Perhaps 80 percent of the migrants in Florida are illegal immigrants and thus especially vulnerable to abuse. During the past decade, the United States Justice Department has prosecuted half a dozen cases of slavery among farm workers in Florida. Migrants have been driven into debt, forced to work for nothing and kept in chained trailers at night. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers — a farm worker alliance based in Immokalee, Fla. — has done a heroic job improving the lives of migrants in the state, investigating slavery cases and negotiating the penny-per-pound surcharge with fast food chains.

He pointed out that the pay increase was tiny compared with the bonuses reaped by Burger King's equity owners. It would also be tiny in comparison to the amount spent at this season's charity balls, which gather the  wealthiest to raise money for the needy. Were the root of the problem - poverty - addressed head on with decent wages, fewer feel-good band aids would be needed.

I would venture that this decision by Burger King's management - disastrous from a public relations point of view - will not go away soon.

USDA Gives Update on Organic Pasture Rule

A new organic pasture regulation has been fully reviewed by the USDA, bringing it one-step closer to completion, Barbara Robinson, deputy administrator for the USDA's National Organic Program (NOP), said Wednesday.

In an update at the National Organic Standards Board meeting underway in Arlington, Virginia, Robinson said the the NOP is working on the supplemental language to the regulation, dealing with the economic impact of the regulation, compliance with the paperwork reduction act, and impact on small producers. "We're going to get this done shortly and then it goes over the OMB (Office of Management and Budget)," she said.

USDA expects to run into some issues with OMB, which has viewed every organic regulation except for materials as a "major rule" that needs extra vetting. That means OMB will likely take another 60 days for review, in which time Congress will also get to look at it. Robinson said she plans to visit with OMB when USDA first sends over the regulation for review to impress the importance of it.

The upshot seems to be that the regulation won't be out of OMB until late first-quarter, which presumably is when it will first be published for comment.

A wide coalition of organic dairy farmers is pushing for a requirement that ruminants receive at least 30 percent of their nutritional needs from fresh grass during the growing season, but not less than 120 days.   Currently, the organic regulations only require "access to pasture," which meant a cow might rarely get a blade of fresh grass and live out its productive life on feedlots. A clear pasture regulation would end that practice, though it is unknown what the final rule will actually say.

Organic dairy farmers have been pushing for a change in this regulation since at least 2000, and the new rule change language has been under review at the USDA since 2005.

Amid Protests, Pennsylvania Shelves Milk Action

Pennsylvania has decided to delay its order drastically limiting what processors can say on milk labels, due to a rising public backlash, the St. Louis Post-Gazette reports. But the stay may only last for one month.

The issue had blindsided Governor Ed Rendell, who received complaints about his Agriculture Secretary's decision. "The governor's office, which was not involved in the initial decision, will participate in reviewing the new rules 'both in the way they were promulgated and their effect,'" Rendell's press secretary said in the press report.

Opponents of the decision are still wary, since the delay is only temporary. The key issue is whether the state will widen the panel reviewing the issue to include legitimate representatives of consumer groups who oppose the state action.

"There was some level of surprise," Chris Ryder, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, said of the opposition to the state's new labeling restrictions. "We weren't anticipating quite this response."

Pennsylvania's Milk Cover-Up

By Samuel Fromartz

If one trend has been clear in recent years it's the desire by consumers to know where their food comes from and how it's produced.

Product labels – whether organic, local, or produced without antibiotics and hormones – provide a way for consumers to get that information and make a choice.

So why is Pennsylvania swimming against the tide? Late last month, the state Department of Agriculture told 19 dairies that they cannot use language such as "Our farmers’ pledge: no artificial growth hormones," or "From cows not treated with the growth hormone rBST," starting January 1, 2008.

Ohio, New Jersey and Indiana are reportedly mulling similar restrictions. If this occurs, consumers will be denied the right to choose the milk they want and farmers banned from describing their practices.

Pennsylvania Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff said the action was promoted by concerns among "consumer groups," farmers and processors, though the action was entirely in line with the policy position of Monsanto, which makes synthetic bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST).

Surveys clearly show consumers desire more transparency — not less — on milk labels. Lake Research Partners found 80 percent of consumers supported the labeling of rBGH-free milk products. The Natural Marketing Institute found that 53 percent of shoppers look for dairy products free of artificial hormones. And Opinion Research found 81 percent of respondents would prefer to buy dairy products derived from cows that do not receive synthetic hormones, assuming little or no pricing difference.

Critics and scientists have raised questions about a possible link between rBGH and a cancer-promoting hormone in humans -- a link denied by Monsanto and other scientists. What is known is that the drug does increase the risk of animal illness, though it also boosts milk production by about 10 percent, which is the reason it is used. Although the Food and Drug Administration approved rBGH in 1993, it has been banned in the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan.

Wolff argues that since the synthetic bovine growth hormones are indistinguishable from naturally occurring hormones and cannot be detected in milk a label that indicates their absence would be impossible to verify. All milk is also tested to be free of antibiotics, so there's no reason to label their absence either.

But Pennsylvania's action also limits statements about production practices, making it impossible for consumers to identify producers who follow a regime they agree with. Starting in January, a farmer cannot say on a milk label, "I don't use rBGH or antibiotics on my farm" – even though this statement may be factually correct.

Such production claims can be verified. Inspections are required by law for organic farms, for example. Conventional milk producers can issue legal affidavits about their practices under penalty of fraud. But Pennsylvania closed off this avenue by saying that such affidavits were now unacceptable as a basis for label claims.

Organic milk companies have not been exempt from the action. Aurora Organic Dairy and Horizon Organic have gotten letters from the state.

This whole debate isn't new, but it has gained steam as national companies sought out milk produced without rBGH and crimped Monsanto's market for the drug. Dean Foods, the largest milk processor in the nation, has switched some plants to rBGH free milk production. Starbucks, Safeway, and Kroger are going that way too; Chipotle Mexican Grill also plans to convert its entire cheese supply by the end of the year. Many natural food stores have long sold milk produced without synthetic hormones.

By stating they avoid milk produced with rBGH, these companies are following federal directives on the matter. As early as 1994, when the Food and Drug Administration approved Monsanto’s synthetic growth hormone, the FDA allowed production claims, such as "from cows not treated with rBST."

For the past several years, Monsanto has sought to limit these absence claims because they believe they disparage competing milk. In 2003, it sued Oakhurst Dairy in Maine over a label statement that read, "Our farmers' pledge: no artificial growth hormones." The suit was settled out of court, when Oakhurst added the qualifying language: "FDA states: No significant difference in milk from cows treated with artificial growth hormone."

Last year, Monsanto appealed to the FDA to review the approved label wording for rBGH and also sought action from the Federal Trade Commission regarding advertising of rBGH free milk.

The FDA declined to act, noting that it would only intervene in cases where fraudulent claims – as opposed to product descriptions – were made on the milk label. In dismissing Monsanto's complaint, the FTC also found no instance where a national company made false claims about rBST.

Having failed to limit the label in the federal arena, it now appears Monsanto is lobbying state governments to cover up the labels and reduce consumer choice.

Pennsylvania was the first to fall. If other states follow, consumer choice and a farmer's right to free speech will be dealt a blow.

But consumer groups, farmer organizations and milk processors are fighting back, first off with a letter writing campaign to the governor. Expect more action ahead.