Just an FYI, Seafood Watch is now sending form responses to those who contact them about this. Below is my response to their response. Please feel free to recycle or reuse any of this content or the language on
Wild Steelhead Coalition's page if it's helpful. This
article also has more details.
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your response, by the sound of it you're sending many of them out.
But as you've undoubtedly heard by now, your response and the revelation that Seafood Watch is now reviewing the "Good Alternative" designation for the Hoh River further undermine your organization and it's credibility unless the same review is also considered for the Quillayute and Queets rivers at the very minimum.
For instance if your reasoning for reviewing the Hoh is that it once again did not make escapement goals and returns were at a near record low in 2016, then the same reasoning and review should be applied to the Quillayute system, where the same was true in 2016.
Or if your reasoning for reviewing the Hoh is that it's returns of wild winter steelhead have declined by more than 34 percent since 1980, then why not also review the Queets, where despite arguably the best steelhead habitat in the Lower 48, much of it protected in Olympic National Park, runs have declined by more than 47 percent by 1980. In the Queets as in these other rivers, over-harvest, insufficient catch monitoring, and a lack of approved fisheries management plans by tribal commercial fishers using non-selective gillnets are the primary factors still pushing these fish towards an Endangered listing.
We respect tribal treaty rights to responsibly harvest salmon and steelhead when abundance allows. However, the long-term decline of Washington's wild steelhead runs, their current dire state, and the use of non-selective methods such as gillnets make it grossly inappropriate for Seafood Watch to label these fisheries as a "Good Alternative", a label that conjures false notions of sustainability in the minds of grocers and consumers.
The fervent reaction from fish conservationists in the Pacific Northwest you're no doubt hearing should not come as a surprise. My organization and several others have previously sent messages urging Seafood Watch to reexamine these designations and consider the latest data from sources independent from the tribal commercial fishers.
At this point, Seafood Watch needs to make clear that it recognizes the flaws in it's assessment of these fisheries by publishing a statement withdrawing "Good Alternative" designations for all non-selective wild steelhead fisheries on Washington's coast. And then reexamining them with an eye towards the latest data from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the use of assessment methods designed for in-river salmonid fisheries, and a critical mindset regarding non-selective gillnet fisheries, for both wild steelhead and by-catch. Anything less severely comprises the integrity and reputation of your organization.
Sincerely,
Chase
