Oceans

Turtles, sharks and tuna: why we’re working to protect our ocean

About a third of the world’s fisheries have crashed, and the rest are in bad shape. It’s a stark reality that affects not just our own food security, but the health and future of the many creatures that travel through the farthest reachs of our ocean. Out in the high seas, far beyond view of our coasts, sharks and whales glide through the deep blue water; a lone sea turtle pops her head up for air, catching a glimpse of the birds soaring overhead. Far from national boundaries, and protected by no country, these deep waters are rich in biodiversity—sustaining everything from corals to mammals to the fish we eat. Despite their importance, these international waters—and the life within them—are at risk. A lack of coordinated oversight has led to overfishing, illegal fishing, pollution, and habitat destruction. Marine life struggles with all these stressors—and a warming climate. A unique refuge Through their interactions with Latin America’s coasts, the high seas form rich environments called outcropping systems. Near Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Panama and Brazil, these nutrient-rich waters feed species of great ecological and commercial importance. Within them live the mahi mahi, yellowfin and bluefin tuna, sailfish, swordfish, and others on which the fishing industry—and therefore much of the region’s economy—depends. In fact, deep-sea fishing for tuna and similar species in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans generates more than $1.2 billion in revenue a year, according to the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. In the Eastern Tropical Pacific, it’s estimated that a single hammerhead shark generates as much as $1.6 million dollars in tourism throughout its 35-year lifespan, according to a study by the University of Costa Rica. Beyond the economic value they provide to humans, the high seas also hold tremendous value for the species that depend on them. Five species of sea turtle, most of which are threatened, migrate through these waters to lay their eggs on coastal beaches. The outcropping systems also provide essential breeding grounds for blue and humpback whales. Nobody governs the high seas According to a 2014 Global Ocean Commission report, the degradation of these important ecosystems is driving the entire ocean to the point of collapse. In fact, 12 percent of the species living in the Eastern Tropical Pacific are in danger of extinction, according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Current international legislation has gaps that leave these offshore waters unprotected, further endangering the marine life that lives in them, explains Gladys Martínez, AIDA’s Senior Marine Attorney. The greatest current need is to create marine protected areas, off-limits to commercial activity. We also need an authority that mandates environmental impact assessments for activities on the high seas—something that was not contemplated when the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the most sweeping agreement governing world oceans, was created.  Our hope is that a new international treaty convened by the United Nations General Assembly will soon fill these gaps. Representatives from governments around the world have already had several successful meetings to pave the way for its negotiation. We’re working as part of the High Seas Alliance—a coalition of 32 NGOs—to ensure the voice of Latin American civil society is heard in the creation of this new treaty, which will protect the deepest reaches of our ocean far into the future.    

Important progress made towards ocean treaty

States meeting at the United Nations in New York took an important step towards launching negotiations for a new treaty to protect the biodiversity of the high seas (areas beyond the national jurisdiction).  Making up two thirds of the global ocean, marine life in the high seas is not effectively protected. A new treaty will rectify this, putting in place measures to protect the rich and globally significant biodiversity and ecosystem services of the high seas and to govern activities undertaken there sustainably. Although the wording of the recommendation did not reflect the very strong support for rapid UN action towards a treaty, it will enable the General Assembly to convene an Intergovernmental Conference. The 35 member organisations of the High Seas Alliance which have campaigned for this treaty were pleased with the recommendation to move forwards. Peggy Kalas of the High Seas Alliance said: “This is a significant step for the high seas and humanity since we are all dependent on the ocean for a healthy planet. A new treaty will bring law and governance to this most neglected and besieged part of our world and we are closer to that goal now. We are profoundly thankful to the many, many states who have worked so hard to achieve this; their determination to protect the global commons for all humankind has been inspiring.” The decision of the Preparatory Committee will now go the UN General Assembly. The overwhelming majority of states are pushing for the next step to be an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) convened in 2018.  An IGC would mean formal negotiations on the text of a new treaty would commence. "Today marks a significant step forward for the world’s ocean," said Lisa Speer, Director of international Oceans at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Sylvia Earle said: “The nations of the world took important steps towards a treaty today. The high seas are half of the world and need the rule of law. To those who have worked so hard at the UN and in support of this moment, we extend an ocean of gratitude and carry forward optimism for a high seas treaty.” Veronica Frank of Greenpeace said: “Although we hoped to see a starting date included for the negotiating conference, it was good to see such overwhelming support for moving the process forward and so many people around the world speaking up for ocean protection. It is now for the UN General Assembly to make that step forward for the ocean and for all the people that depend on it. Anything less would fall short of what is our blue planet needs to recover." Gladys Martínez, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, said: “We applaud the commitment of so many delegates to protect nearly half of our planet. We are both proud and grateful for the work of Latin American nations in this regard.” Maria Damanaki of the Nature Conservancy said: “This is a demonstration of global collaboration, and a step towards protecting half of our planet, which today is an unregulated no man's land. We join our partners in the High Seas Alliance in commending the states and organisations that have worked effortlessly to make this happen." “This represents a major step in a long journey driven by a large number of committed states. We need to continue this momentum through to the General Assembly to deliver a resolution for an Intergovernmental Conference” added Tim Packeiser of WWF. In June all States signed on to a global call to action for the ocean, of which the high seas is a major part.   

Shark conservation is at risk in Costa Rica

In Costa Rica, it’s now up to the government to decide the future of endangered hammerhead sharks. If the government halted the export of all hammerhead shark products in the next year, it could stave off extinction of these amazing creatures. That’s the recommendation of Costa Rica’s Scientific Advisory Council for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. The Convention is an international agreement to prevent trade from threatening the survival of wild animals and plants. Of the nearly 100 species of sharks and rays in Costa Rica, 15% are in danger of extinction due to overfishing and environmental destruction or degradation. Hammerhead sharks were listed as an endangered species in 2014 and have lost up to 90% of their population. In response, the Scientific Advisory Council recommended in April 2017 that Costa Rica should prohibit export of hammerhead products for at least one year, or until the country reduces hammerhead fishing and the health of the species improves. The role of the fishing industry Shortly after the ­­­­­ Scientific Advisory Council made its recommendation, the Costa Rican government issued an executive decree. The Costa Rican Institute of Fishing and Aquaculture (Incopesca) and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock were given authority over the export of products made from threatened or endangered sharks. However, both government agencies favor the fishing industry over marine conservation, according to Mario Espinoza Mendieta, researcher from the University of Costa Rica and member of the Convention’s scientific council. “This dynamic tips the balance in favor of the production sector,” Espinoza said. Incopesca’s Board of Directors represent various fishing interests across the country—a position that does not always align with the protection and sustainable use of marine resources, according to Espinoza. Recently, Incopesca was questioned because it failed to prosecute shrimping boats that were illegally fishing in protected waters. Shark commerce While exporting shark products is permitted within the regulations established by the Convention, shark finning—the practice of cutting fins and throwing the shark back into the ocean—is illegal in Costa Rica. Considered a delicacy in some Asian countries, shark fins are often valued at upwards of $100 per kilo. Last February, a Costa Rican court issued the first felony criminal sentence for shark finning against a Taiwanese businesswoman who was found in a port with illegally harvested shark fins. Using international law, AIDA and Conservation International worked with Costa Rica’s Public Prosecutor to help resolve the case. A responsible decision The governments of Colombia and Ecuador have developed campaigns to protect hammerhead sharks. But in Costa Rica, Incopesca is responsible for the future of the species and will hopefully take the Scientific Advisory Council’s recommendations into account. Because the hammerhead’s numbers are so low, it may only take one bad decision to cause their extinction. Other species, including the gray shark, are also at risk from the fishing industry. If Costa Rica wants to preserve its natural wealth for the future, it should set an example of preservation by putting principles of sustainability over economic gain.

Chilean chum: How eating salmon in the US hurts Patagonia’s coastal wildlife

After two years of vegetarianism, the Texan in me decided that an entirely plant-based diet was not going to work. The experience, however, taught me to consume meat ethically. Wherever possible, I now choose organic and sustainable “farm to table” meat and poultry. But when it comes to my favorite seafood—salmon— “farm to table” can take on a whole new meaning. Salmon is one of the most popular seafoods in the United States, and over a third of all salmon in the U.S. comes from Chilean salmon farms, which raise the carnivorous fish in off-shore enclosures along the Patagonian coast. Although salmon is healthy—it’s loaded with omega-3 fatty acids and B-vitamins—increased U.S. demand for salmon is having an unhealthy impact on Chile’s environment. These farms endanger delicate coastal ecosystems, contribute to oceanic pollution, and threaten marine life along the pristine Magallanes shoreline. Chile is the second largest global exporter of the fish, and salmon farming is one of the country’s largest industries. Today, that industry is growing. There are already over 100 salmon farms operating in the Magallanes and, as of March 2017, plans for 342 more were in the works. Driving this expansion is a booming worldwide salmon market. But even though the U.S. boasts a salmon industry of its own and wild-caught Alaskan salmon is considered some of the best in the world, U.S. consumers ate over 144,000 tons of farmed Chilean salmon in 2016, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A fishy situation While fish farms are one solution to the many problems associated with overfishing, Chile’s unregulated salmon industry has serious environmental side-effects. These salmon farms disrupt their environments because overpopulated waterways create anaerobic conditions that deprive the local wildlife of oxygen. Often treated with excessive amounts antibiotics and pesticides, uneaten salmon feed and salmon feces also pollute coastal seafloors and introduce chemicals into the environment. Because they are not native to the southern hemisphere, salmon that escape their pens can disrupt local food chains. Salmon also frequently die in their enclosures, and the decomposing fish raise levels of ammonia in the water. Although research is still underway, scientists speculate that higher concentrations of ammonia, along with El Niño weather patterns and warming oceans caused by climate change, may be responsible for Chile’s recent “red tides.” These toxic red algae blooms kill coastal wildlife by the millions, inundating Chilean shores with dead fish (including salmon), birds, and whales. To fight back against this destructive industry and the harmful impacts of globalized seafood trade, AIDA filed a claim with the Chilean government expressing concern that salmon farms are harming local ecosystems. “We want to improve the way things are being done by aiming for sustainable development that will not ruin the fragile ecological balance of the Patagonian seas,” AIDA attorney Florencia Ortúzar said. AIDA also recently began a petition asking that Chile investigate the damage caused by salmon farming in the Magallanes and sanction those responsible. You can sign the petition here. New migration routes Today, the U.S. salmon industry practices catch and release: it is known for producing high quality fish, yet 80 percent of Alaskan wild salmon is traded away. So why does the U.S. produce some of the world’s best salmon, but consume some of the world’s most environmentally harmful fish? The answer, in short, is globalization. Filleting and de-boning salmon is a process too delicate to mechanize as in other meat industries. Because labor is cheaper in Asia, U.S. salmon is shipped to processing plants in China, which then re-distribute the processed fish across the region. While some of that salmon makes it back across the Pacific, the U.S. market is flooded with cheaper farmed salmon from around the world. Now, Chile’s industry “is facing competition from Canada and Norway,” according to trade analysis group Datamyne. After expressing concerns over high levels of antibiotics in Chilean fish, U.S. retail giant Costco decided in 2015 to stock Norwegian salmon instead, further muddying the waters in the U.S. salmon trade. To make matters worse, a study by conservation nonprofit Oceana concluded that nearly 43% of “wild” salmon sold in the United States was misidentified. While it is difficult to tell whether farmed salmon is mislabeled as “wild” during trade or once it shows up on the menu, lax labeling laws in the U.S. make it difficult to tell exactly where that salmon steak came from. So for seafood lovers like me, there may be few good options for eating salmon sustainably, besides taking up fly fishing. But for the sake of protecting Chile’s coastal wildlife, maybe it’s time U.S. consumers make their voice heard. If we’re going to import salmon from Chile, we should at least demand the country regulate its farms to be more environmentally friendly. Maybe it’s also time the U.S. salmon industry started keeping its catch in its own boat. Sign the petition to protect Patagonia’s Magallanes coastline here.

Calling on Chile to protect Patagonia from the risks of the salmon industry

More than half of the salmon farms in Chile’s Magallanes Region are depleting oxygen from sensitive marine waters, suffocating marine life. Civil society organizations filed an administrative complaint and a petition calling on the government to investigate and punish farm operators, and to enforce existing regulations. Santiago, Chile. Civil society organizations filed a complaint today asking the Superintendent of the Environment to investigate damages caused by salmon farms in the Magallanes Region of Southern Patagonia, and to sanction the companies responsible. According to government reports, salmon farms in the area are depleting the water of oxygen, causing a serious threat to marine life. The organizations also launched a citizen’s petition to support the formal complaint. “Salmon farming concessions have been approved in Magallanes without a detailed assessment of the impacts the industry may have on the region,” said Florencia Ortúzar, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. “The damages are already occurring: a report by the Comptroller General of the Republic found that, between 2013 and 2015, more than half of the salmon farms in Magallanes created anaerobic conditions, gravely threatening marine life.” Chile is the world’s second largest producer of salmon. The industry, which developed on coasts further north, has now entered the Magallanes region in the southermost tip of the country. The pristine waters there are highly vulnerable to human activity. Magallanes has the largest number of protected natural areas in the country; it shelters such protected species as the blue whale, the sperm whale, the Magellanic penguin, the elephant seal, the leatherback sea turtle, the southern dolphin, and the Chilean dolphin. “Salmon farms are cultivating more fish than the ecosystem can withstand. They are filling sensitive waters with chemicals and antibiotics,” said Francisco Campos-Lopez, director of #RealChile. “Those chemicals, combined with the feces of the animals, cause a dangerous lack of oxygen in the waters, endangering sea life.”    NOTE: More information available at aida-americas.org/salmonfarms Press contacts: Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA Attorney, +56 9 7335 3135, [email protected]  

Protecting Patagonian Seas from Salmon Farms

The ocean needs more from us

For decades, the ocean has protected us from the impacts of climate change, absorbing 90 percent of the excess heat produced by global warming. It’s given us food and the genetic resources we use to produce life-saving drugs. As if that weren’t enough, it’s enabled millions of families to thrive in an economy based on its bounty. Despite its importance, the ocean remains unprotected in large part; no country governs the high seas, international waters that comprise 64 percent of the ocean’s total surface area.  Management measures have given rise to a patchwork of uncoordinated protections. But efforts to care more for our ocean are gaining steam. Negotiations are underway for an international legally binding treaty that seeks to protect life in the high seas. I’ve been involved in the negotiations since they began. AIDA is a member of the High Seas Alliance, which is actively participating in the process; we are also the only Latin American organization represented at the meetings. Last month I participated in the third meeting of the United Nations Preparatory Committee, which is developing elements of a draft text for a treaty under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. During that meeting, government representatives from throughout the region actively expressed the need for a strong treaty. The next meeting, July 10-21, is expected to develop recommendations that will hopefully lead to an Intergovernmental Conference to negotiate the treaty’s content. Among other things, the treaty will support the creation and management of Marine Protected Areas, regions of the high seas that will be conserved to help protect the rich biodiversity of our oceans. Protection at a high cost In addition to absorbing a large part of the planet’s excess heat, the ocean absorbs nearly 30 percent of all greenhouse gases. But this protective role comes with serious consequences. By interacting with and absorbing pollutants such as carbon dioxide, the ocean suffers from acidification—a phenomenon that reduces levels of calcium, an element necessary for the formation of shells—and loss of oxygen, essential for life under the sea. These impacts consequently affect the food supply and employment in the fishing and tourism industries. In light of the Paris Climate Agreement, and of the negotiation of this new treaty for the high seas, governments around the world can and must do more to protect marine ecosystems from the impacts of climate change. Marine Protected Areas The International Union for the Conservation of Nature has called on governments to protect 30 percent of the ocean through such conservation measures as the establishment of Marine Protected Areas. Two years ago, one of the smallest countries on the planet, Palau, took a big step toward realizing this goal. Recognizing the benefits of a fully protected marine reserve, the North Pacific island nation designated 80 percent of its marine territory (an area the size of Spain) as a reserve in which trawling, mining, and other harmful extractive activities are forbidden. Palau’s decision protects the nearly 1,300 marine species and 700 varieties of coral that call this small corner of the world home. In Latin America, countries such as Chile, Ecuador, and Costa Rica have followed Palau’s example by safeguarding waters within their national territories. While their intentions are noble, they should also include the high seas. Building on the momentum of marine conservation around the world, the high seas treaty must be developed, and our oceans better protected. In the ten-plus years I’ve worked as an environmental attorney, I have learned a valuable lesson: all of the life that surrounds us comes from the ocean. It’s time to care for it as well as it cares for us. 

AIDA statement on the death of thousands of fish in Costa Rica

The recent mass die-off of anchovy—a species on which birds, marine mammals, and other fish depend for nutrition—must be analyzed in detail. Upon finding the cause, an integrated solution must be implemented at the national and regional levels. San José, Costa Rica. On February 15, thousands of anchovy washed onto the beaches of Puntarenas, two kilometers from the gulf of Nicoya. Experts from the National University of Costa Rica have ruled out algae-producing toxins and a red ride—which occurs from excessive proliferation of microalgae—as possible causes. At this point, authorities do not know why the fish died. The anchovy is a species that contributes greatly to the balance of the marine environment. Many species of birds and marine mammals, as well as other fish, depend on the anchovy as a vital source of nutritients and protein. Responding to the incident, Gladys Martínez, attorney with AIDA’s Marine Biodiversity and Coastal Protection Program, said: “It is vital that we analyze in detail the factors that may have caused this mass anchovy die-off. We have to determine what is affecting them and prevent a similar situation from happening again. Once the cause is found, a solution must be implemented that takes into account all components of the marine environment. “In addition, it is important that Costa Rica work both nationally and regionally on a comprehensive solution. Anchovy is a common species in the region and, although not highly migratory, it does move over short distances, warranting the involvement of surrounding nations as well.” Press contact: Gladys Martínez, AIDA, [email protected], +506 8321 4263

Costa Rican court issues first criminal sanction against shark finning

In a historic decision, a Puntarenas court convicted a businesswoman for shark finning. The woman had brought shark fins to port separated from the body, a practice illegal in Costa Rica, with intentions of selling them abroad. The Public Prosecutor’s indictment was supported by civil society organizations that argued her actions violated national and international laws protecting marine life.   Puntarenas, Costa Rica. On February 7, the Trial Court of Puntarenas imposed a six-month prison sentence on a Taiwanese businesswoman for illegally trading in shark fins. The woman had brought to port shark fins detached from the animals body and gathered together with a wire, a process know as finning. She had intended to sell the fins abroad. This ruling is the first time the practice, illegal under national and international law, has been punished in Costa Rica. “We are pleased that, from the power of the Judiciary, Costa Rica has sent a clear signal that its priority is to protect the country’s sustainability. The response to the finning was appropriate, and responsible fishermen and environmental authorities will applaud it as such. At Conservation International, we reiterate our commitment to sustainable fisheries, transparent management of marine resources, and control of the country’s environmental regulations,” said Marco Quesada, director of the Costa Rica Program of Conservation International (CI). In 2011, justice failed in favor of the businesswoman. That decision was rebutted by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which obtained a second trial in which the crime was finally punished. The final sentence indicates that the businesswoman is responsible “for the crime of ordering the removal of the shark fin without the respective body, to the detriment of the natural resources” of Costa Rica. “This is a truly historic sentence, as it’s the first time there has been a criminal conviction for shark finning. We applaud the efforts of the Public Prosecutor’s Office to enforce the national laws and international commitments of Costa Rica. We hope this case will be a precedent that helps prevent this practice from happening again,” said Gladys Martínez, attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). AIDA and CI assisted in the resolution of the case, which dates from 2011, by advising the Public Prosecutor’s Office on arguments of international law. According to Costa Rican law, shark fins must arrive to port naturally attached to the shark’s body. In cases such as this one, the fins are removed and the body tossed back to sea so the fishing boats can hold as many fins as possible.   “Shark finning is a crime punishable in Costa Rica by articles 139 and 40 of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Law. In addition, Costa Rica has ratified various international treaties that oblige it to protect the environment. These obligations include the protection, conservation and sustainable use of marine resources,” reads the document provided by both organizations to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for use during the trial. Press contacts: Gladys Martínez, AIDA, [email protected], +506 8321 4263 Marco Quesada, CI, [email protected] +506 2253-0500 ext. 129/IP 5484

Chile’s Salmon Farms: Sustainability is Impossible

By Florencia Ortúzar Chile is the second largest producer of salmon in the world. For more than 20 years, the industry has put profit above environmental protection. In the absence of government regulation, large-scale salmon farms release contaminating chemicals and create oceanic dead zones. They hurt other species and harm the people and communities that depend on the ocean for sustenance. The situation is bad, but it could get worse as the industry looks to expand into new areas of pristine waters. Bad Practices Salmon farming in Chile will never be sustainable because it requires much more protein to operate than it generates. Salmon are carnivorous. To produce one kilo of salmon you need about five kilos of wild fish for feed. Years of bad business practices and lack of government regulation have resulted in serious environmental damage, which has, in turn, brought grave social consequences to those who depend on seafood for their livelihoods. On the Big Island of Chiloé, for example, seaweed and shellfish gatherers, artisanal fishermen and people who work in plants that process wild-caught fish are experiencing massive unemployment. This social crisis is a direct result of the environmental catastrophe caused in large part by the salmon industry, which has extensive operations in the area. In Chile, developers must present declarations or environmental impact studies that examine their project’s potential to harm nature. Despite the great risk to ecosystems, salmon farms are supported by mere affidavits, and not by studies that would allow for the identification and proper handling of potential negative impacts. The result is thousands of salmon hatcheries. Each one consists of floating cages that, without sufficient spacing or adequate sanitation, house thousands of salmon crammed into small spaces (half the space allowed in Europe). Although it seems difficult to believe, and despite the law saying otherwise, in Chile no studies have been done on the ability of the ocean, lakes, and rivers to accommodate the number of salmon that are grown. These captive salmon are fed pellets that contain a mix of wild fishmeal, pesticides, dyes, fungicides, and chemicals used to speed growth.  A majority of these pellets are not consumed and simply fall to the seabed.  Additionally, each salmon is injected with an exorbitant quantity of antibiotics (up to 5,000 times more than used in Norway). Finally, the waste generated by the fish, which contains chemicals, also accumulates on the ocean floor. More than 20 years of these practices have caused dead zones in the ocean where life is no longer possible. Another serious problem with the industry is that salmon often escape from their cages. According to a report by the NGO Terram, escaped salmon in Chile represent 1.5 percent of the total production, equivalent to more than 9,000 tons per year. Some studies report that this percentage could reach as high as five percent. Although by law farms must have recapture plans, they rarely succeed. Salmon are an aggressive fish. When free, they compete with native fish for food and shelter, and transmit disease. Crisis in the Sea In May, Chile’s coasts were devastated by an unprecedented red tide, believed to be the country’s worst recent environmental crisis. The natural phenomenon, characterized by an excessive increase in microalgae, resulted in the beaching of whales, squid, sardines and even birds. Captive salmon were also affected and the industry suffered huge losses: thousands of tons of salmon carcasses rotted in floating cages. The death rate was such that the national maritime authority authorized the release of 9,000 tons of dead salmon into the sea. According to the salmon industry and the government, the red tide was caused by El Niño, which was aggravated by global warming. However, some scientists have said that the salmon industry is largely to blame for submitting the ocean to their bad practices for so many years. Patagonia Without Salmon Farming! Not only has the salmon industry not learned from its mistakes, but it is also looking to expand into new, uncontaminated waters. It’s happening in the Patagonia regions of Magallanes and Aysen, where approximately 3,100 applications for salmon farms are awaiting approval. Farms were even proposed for places declared as priority conservation sites. Together with our allies, AIDA is working to ensure salmon farming and other industries comply with environmental standards. But there’s something you can do too, as citizens and consumers. Vote with your pocketbook. By purchasing only sustainable seafood products, you can help prevent the creation of more dead zones in our oceans.