Blog: Oceans

John West – changing their tuna?

Posted by Willie — 16 December 2009 at 3:36pm - Comments

It’s nearly Christmas …. And as I write this it's even snowing outside the Greenpeace office, so maybe it’s time for a little goodwill and some good news.

Way back in 2008 we published a league table ranking the major tinned tuna suppliers in the UK on a number of environmental criteria. Back then big brands John West and Princes were languishing at the bottom of the pile. When we updated that league table in June 2009, we reported some significant process from many of the UK's big retailers – with Sainsbury’s, Co-op, M&S, Waitrose and Asda all increasing their commitments to more responsible sourcing of the tuna in their cans.

Backing down on bluefin?

Posted by Willie — 16 December 2009 at 2:57pm - Comments

You know, I wouldn’t be surprised if somewhere someone decided to name a roller-coaster 'bluefin'. The ups, downs, twists, and turns are certainly hard to follow in this fish's political fortunes, and at the end it could end up making us all feel quite sick.

Post the farcical ICCAT meeting we have seen a follow-up meeting of ICCAT’s Pacific counterparts, whose jolly gathering in Tahiti showed a similar lack of ability and spine when it comes down to making useful or necessary decisions.

Backing down on bluefin?

Posted by Willie — 16 December 2009 at 2:57pm - Comments

You know, I wouldn’t be surprised if somewhere someone decided to name a roller-coaster 'bluefin'. The ups, downs, twists, and turns are certainly hard to follow in this fish's political fortunes, and at the end it could end up making us all feel quite sick.

Post the farcical ICCAT meeting we have seen a follow-up meeting of ICCAT’s Pacific counterparts, whose jolly gathering in Tahiti showed a similar lack of ability and spine when it comes down to making useful or necessary decisions.

Subsidising extinction

Posted by Willie — 4 December 2009 at 11:39am - Comments

Bluefin tuna - sometimes you just can't believe how absurd the story gets.

News today from WWF and a Green MEP show that over an eight-year period the EU bluefin tuna fishing industry received subsidies totalling €34.5m. Yes folks, your tax helped fund the overfishing of a species now teetering on the very brink of extinction. A species that 21 out of 27 EU countries now think should be subject to an international trade ban.

Subsidising extinction

Posted by Willie — 4 December 2009 at 11:39am - Comments

Bluefin tuna - sometimes you just can't believe how absurd the story gets.

News today from WWF and a Green MEP show that over an eight-year period the EU bluefin tuna fishing industry received subsidies totalling €34.5m. Yes folks, your tax helped fund the overfishing of a species now teetering on the very brink of extinction. A species that 21 out of 27 EU countries now think should be subject to an international trade ban.

Is the UK finally getting serious on marine protection?

Posted by Willie — 19 November 2009 at 12:04pm - Comments

As you probably know by now, marine reserves have a huge role to play in ensuring a future for our oceans, which is why we fish-huggers campaign so vehemently for them.

The scientists tell us that between 20 and 50 per cent of the seas need to be set aside as fully protected, no-take zones – off-limits to all damaging and destructive activity. That means no mineral extraction, dredging, dumping or fishing.

Getting progress on marine reserves is a bit like juggling with Slinkys  – it's one of those issues where the politics seems to agree with you, but just manages to deliver precious little. Our politicians all say the right thing when it comes to protecting areas of our seas, there are international commitments, and deadlines for creating protected areas, and there is a huge public demand for doing so. Even the fishing industry is not 'in theory' opposed to them.

Is the UK finally getting serious on marine protection?

Posted by Willie — 19 November 2009 at 12:04pm - Comments

As you probably know by now, marine reserves have a huge role to play in ensuring a future for our oceans, which is why we fish-huggers campaign so vehemently for them.

The scientists tell us that between 20 and 50 per cent of the seas need to be set aside as fully protected, no-take zones – off-limits to all damaging and destructive activity. That means no mineral extraction, dredging, dumping or fishing.

Getting progress on marine reserves is a bit like juggling with Slinkys  – it's one of those issues where the politics seems to agree with you, but just manages to deliver precious little. Our politicians all say the right thing when it comes to protecting areas of our seas, there are international commitments, and deadlines for creating protected areas, and there is a huge public demand for doing so. Even the fishing industry is not 'in theory' opposed to them.

Political flip-flops on bluefin?

Posted by Willie — 16 November 2009 at 11:36am - Comments

As ICCAT souvenirs, delegates will be packing their bags in Recife with a delightful polo shirt emblazoned with 'ICCAT' and a bluefin tuna, and a pair of flip-flops in Brazilian colours.

Somehow this is quite fitting.

The meeting has just come to a close, and the rushed final sessions have agreed as much as they could. In that haste, several things were put off to be considered again next year. Like the protection of endangered mako and porbeagle sharks, and measures to reduce the bycatch of seabirds and turtles. These sorts of delays are common in ICCAT when agreements can't be reached. But hey, why do today what you can put off until next year, right?

Political flip-flops on bluefin?

Posted by Willie — 16 November 2009 at 11:36am - Comments

As ICCAT souvenirs, delegates will be packing their bags in Recife with a delightful polo shirt emblazoned with 'ICCAT' and a bluefin tuna, and a pair of flip-flops in Brazilian colours.

Somehow this is quite fitting.

The meeting has just come to a close, and the rushed final sessions have agreed as much as they could. In that haste, several things were put off to be considered again next year. Like the protection of endangered mako and porbeagle sharks, and measures to reduce the bycatch of seabirds and turtles. These sorts of delays are common in ICCAT when agreements can't be reached. But hey, why do today what you can put off until next year, right?

ICCAT: complying through gritted teeth

Posted by Willie — 15 November 2009 at 7:16pm - Comments

The vultures were literally circling overhead as we approached the ICCAT meeting venue this morning… so something is on its last legs.

So, with just one day of the ICCAT meeting left, it’s time to see what has been achieved here this week. The short answer is ‘not a lot’. Despite a week of meetings, including extra, lengthy, evening sessions, virtually nothing has been decided on or agreed yet. Decisions on quotas for fish like bluefin tuna, protection of sharks and seabirds, are being left until the last minute, and all need to be discussed on the last day.

Syndicate content

Follow Greenpeace UK