‘Dolphin-Safe’ Tuna Sought

A coalition of environmental groups is urging tuna canners to disclose on product labels whether the fish was netted with practices that may also harm, or kill, dolphins. The movement is the latest in a series of attacks that animal rights groups have launched against food producers.

Representatives of the domestic tuna industry, beleaguered with criticism that some of their methods are cruel, deny their operations have reduced dolphin populations.

The issue is of particular importance in a rich tuna fishing area called the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, a body of water that stretches from Southern California to Equador. Frequently, schools of dolphins and tuna become intertwined during their hunt for the same kinds of food: crustaceans, squid, anchovies and other small fish.

Oftentimes, the dolphins will become entangled in the purse seine nets used by fishing boats to catch tuna. And because the tuna frequently swim below the air-breathing dolphins, the mammals are used by some fisherman as a way of finding the fish, one of the top-selling species in this country.

About 830,000 tons of canned tuna are sold annually in the United States, according to industry estimates. However, the processing, which originated in California, is now global in nature. Often, canners fail to disclose where the tuna was caught, let alone under what conditions.

Even so, 20 advocacy groups are urging consumers to stop purchasing those canned tuna brands that may be the result of netting that also entraps dolphins. However, there is presently no way of knowing which products qualify for this designation.

“Consumers should be given the right to choose (through labeling disclosures),” said Christopher Croft, Dolphin Coalition director. “And in the meantime, people should boycott eating tuna.”

The effort has received Congressional support, in the form of legislation introduced earlier this year by Rep. Barbara Boxer, (D-San Francisco). The measure, the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act, calls for labeling canned tuna as to whether it is “Dolphin Safe.” The bill, which has 126 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives, is scheduled for a mark up--or committee vote--sometime in early January.

“Consumers deserve to know that the product they are buying resulted in an incidental kill of one of the most intelligent animals known to man,” said Boxer. “There are ways of catching tuna without killing dolphins.”

Under the bill, those products resulting from indiscriminant netting would have to be labeled, “The tuna in this product has been captured with technologies that are known to kill dolphins.”

Virtually the entire U.S. tuna fleet uses the purse seine netting method but only a small percentage of the fishers inadvertently capture dolphins in their nets. Boxer says that her bill would actually give American tuna processors a competitive advantage because foreign fleets are more likely to use methods harmful to dolphins.

“If we require these labels then there will be a phasing out of these methods and that will harm the foreign fishing fleets. And, so be it,” she said. “It will hurt the American fishing fleet much less.”

Although the measure would not outlaw the practice of netting dolphins along with tuna, penalties for label violations would include fines and imprisonment.

Among those organizations supporting the dolphin legislation are the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the National Audubon Society and the California League of Conservation Voters.

August Felando, president of the San Diego-based American Tunaboat Assn., said that the legislation threatens the industry’s livelihood.

“It will destroy us,” Felando said. “This labeling does not serve a public purpose in terms of nutrition or food safety. This would be an unreasonable intervention by Congress in the free marketplace. This is a conspiracy to bring about boycotts and harm the industry. That the U.S. government would be a partner to this is unreasonable.”

Further, Felando says that the current dolphin population in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean is healthy and remains unthreatened.

“In 1979 the federal government estimated that there were over 11 million porpoise in this area. Since then the estimate exceeds 12 million,” he said. “The porpoise stocks are in good shape. They are stable and there is no evidence being presented to change that status.”

(The words dolphin and porpoise are often used interchangeably. The mammals are both members of the cetacean species.)

Felando’s San Diego-based group represents 40 purse seine vessels, or the bulk of the United States’ commercial fleet of 65 boats. Although the purse seine method employs a net, it is more selective in the types of fish caught. There is also a concerted effort by fishermen to release dolphins caught in the purse seine nets unharmed in response to public concern about the issue.

Each year the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission establishes a quota on how many dolphins can be killed by the American fleet as a result of the purse seine method. The 1989 quota is 20,500 mammals. Felando says, however, that not more than 14,000 will be inadvertently destroyed because of U.S. fishing methods.

There are federal observers on virtually all U.S. tuna boats to monitor the dolphin quota. In the coming season, 100% of the tuna fishing operation will be monitored by on-board government representatives. Therefore, precise numbers on how many dolphins are killed annually will be forthcoming.

“Yes, they are below the quota this year,” said the coalition’s Croft. “But they exceeded the quota last year and in previous years.”

Congresswoman Boxer said that the current levels, though reduced, are unacceptable.

“Fourteen thousand dolphins is too high,” she said. “Saying that ‘only 14,000 were killed,’ is simply not a satisfactory answer.”

Croft also disputes claims that dolphin populations are stable.

“All the evidence I have seen indicates that we are talking about a severely depleted dolphin population,” he said.

Felando, of the Tunaboat Assn., says that there is little data available on the actual stocks of dolphins. However, with an expanded on-ship observer program better numbers on dolphin casualties will be available.

“A lot of the organizations come out with accusations and tell the public untruths about the status of the porpoise population. But they don’t tell the people what we are doing to rescue the porpoises,” Felando said. “Our statistics indicate that most are caught and released unharmed. But this message will not get out.”

The fleet is attempting to reduce needless mortality, Felando says. However, eliminating dolphin deaths is not feasible, he said.

A representative of one of the major tuna canners said his firm was also in opposition to the labeling proposal.

“The U.S. tuna industry is strongly opposed to this bill,” said Erik Bloemendaal, general manager of quality and communications for StarKist Seafood Co. in Long Beach. Dolphin stocks are not threatened nor endangered, he said, adding that under current conditions the mammal is able to adequately reproduce in the eastern tropical Pacific.

Despite industry claims to the contrary, the Dolphin Coalition’s Croft says that as much of 80% of the canned tuna now being sold in this country would qualify for the “Dolphin Safe” label. However, he could not identify any national or major regional brands whose entire line might currently be so designated.

“It is just as important to get through this bill so there will be a mechanism to verify claims on canned tuna. And when it says ‘Dolphin Safe’ then it will be,” said Croft.

The legislation would also extend to foreign packed tuna, which represents a sizable portion of the product sold in this country. There is some dispute over whether foreign fleets would have U.S. observers on board to verify that no dolphins were killed during the tuna fishing season.

“We have pointed out that this bill would not place American fishermen on equal footing with foreign fleets,” said StarKist’s Bloemendaal. “It will not have an effect on foreign fishers nor on any of their sales to Europe, Asia and other international brokers.”

Boxer disagrees and said there are provisions in her legislation to place U.S. observers on foreign fleets whose fish products are sold in this country.

“It’s sad when an industry has to react in such a defensive fashion. And it is just not true to say this is the end of the world for the tuna industry,” she said. “If the U.S. fishermen and Congress can join hands on this issue then this will give them a step ahead of the foreign fleets. We would also be able to claim that we are doing things in the right way.”