Sergi Tudela, head of fisheries at WWF Mediterranean said: “After overwhelming scientific justification and growing political support in past months – with backing from the majority of catch quota holders on both sides of the Atlantic – it is scandalous that governments did not even get the chance to engage in meaningful debate about the international trade ban proposal for Atlantic bluefin tuna.

“The regional fisheries management organization in charge of this fishery - ICCAT - has repeatedly failed to sustainable manage this fishery. ICCAT has so far failed miserably in this duty so every pressure at the highest level must come to bear to ensure it does what it should.”

WWF said it would call on restaurants, retailers, chefs and consumers around the world to stop selling, serving, buying and eating bluefin.

“It is now more important than ever for people to do what the politicians failed to do – stop consuming bluefin tuna,” Dr Tudela said.

Charles Clover

It was an ambush. Fishing nations, led by Libya, ruthlessly voted down proposals to ban international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna at the meeting of 115 parties to the Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species this afternoon.

Delegates from Monaco, the EU and the United States had hoped to keep the proposals being discussed into next week in the hope that compromises could be found. In the event, the debate was short and not at all sweet. Monaco’s proposal for an unqualified trade ban was rejected by 68 votes to 20, with 30 abstentions. Before that, the EU’s highly qualified version of the same proposal was crushed by 72 votes to 43.

The debate began with Monaco’s ambassador, Patrick Van Klaveren, speaking out in favour the proposal to place the Atlantic bluefin on Cites Appendix 1, on the grounds that the tuna had declined to less than 15 per cent of its original stock and UN scientists from two official bodies accepted that the criteria for it to be listed on Appendix 1 had been met.

This was followed by a lacklustre presentation, by the Spanish presidency, in favour of the conditions the EU wanted to place on the proposal. Then, instead of the torrent of support conservationists had hoped for there was a cascade of fishing nations, starting with Canada, speaking out against the proposed ban and in favour of leaving the management of the bluefin with the Atlantic tuna commission, ICCAT, which until recently has failed to set scientifically based quotas or to crack down on illegal fishing.

Speeches in favour of ICCAT continuing to manage the species, which can fetch up to $100,000 for a single specimen on the Japanese market, rolled on – Indonesia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Chile, Japan, Grenada, Korea, Senegal, Morocco.

Tunisia talked of social problems that would be caused if there was a ban, Morocco spoke of 2000 families in an area of no other employment who would have no income. Morocco said the bluefin was a flagship species it was in the interests of all to preserve, but said it was premature to regulate it under Cites.

Only Kenya, Norway and the United States spoke up in favour of a ban, despite advice from both the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation and ICCAT’s own scientific committee that the bluefin deserved a respite from international trade.

By the time the eccentric Libyan delegate got the floor, it was clear where the majority lay. All it took was for Libya to propose a vote on Monaco’s proposal, and the chairman of the meeting, John Donaldson, had to put the proposal to close the debate to the meeting.

It was quite clear from there what would happen. Once the vote to hold a vote had been passed, the votes on the EU’s and Monaco’s vote were both lost.

Patrick Van Klaveren, for Monaco, said magnanimously: “It is not a defeat it is the manifestation of confidence put in ICCAT to solve the problem.” He threatened to come back in 2013 with another proposal to list the bluefin under Appendix 1 if ICCAT failed to take up the challenge to manage the bluefin for recovery.

At the press conference he shook hands with the leader of the Japanese delegation, Mitsunori Miyahara, who had taken part in the defeat of an attempt to place the bluefin on Cites in 1992.

Mr Miyahara, chief counsellor to the Japanese Fisheries Agency, said: “We agree that the bluefin is not in good shape. We have to take any measure for recovery. We have to work harder from now on.”

He said that at last November’s meeting of ICCAT, “finally the system started to work.”
“We are going to wipe out illegal fish from our markets.”

Sue Lieberman of the Pew Environment Trust branded the decision “irresponsible.”
“This meeting has said let’s take science and throw it out the door. There was clearly pressure from fishing industry. This fish is too valuable for its own good.
“Statements made about ICCAT blatantly were false. It’s time to hold ICCAT’s feet to the fire. We will be there every step of the way.”

Charles Clover

Doha. 17.3.10. The Japanese delegation in Doha said it was totally opposed to a ban on international trade in bluefin tuna but it would back a halt to fishing if scientists warned stocks were in danger. “Our position is quite simple, we would like to take conservation measures in the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, not under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species,” said Masanori Miyahara, head of the Japanese delegation.

“We are concerned about the bluefin tuna. We were willing to have the suspension of Atlantic bluefin tuna fishery at ICCAT [last November] but it was the EU that opposed it.” Mr Miyahara, who is chief counsellor to the Japanese Fisheries Agency, said there would be a new stock assessment undertaken by ICCAT this autumn. “As a result we will take necessary measures and if necessary suspension [of fishing for bluefin].”

Mr Miyahara said that Japan has worked hard in the past four years to crack down on illegally caught fish. It had forced tuna penners in North African waters to release 840 tonnes of bluefin that were of questionable origin.

It has also impounded 2300 tons of Maltese and Spanish frozen tuna because it does not have completed documents of origin. Mr Miyahara said Japan had a five-stage inspection system, using video to check the amount of fish in tuna cages. “It is not us, but the exporters and fishers who have to demonstrate compliance,” he said. “We are very serious about bluefin conservation and we are ready to take very serious measures,” he said.

He said that the proposal to list bluefin on Cites Appendix 1 was “unfair” because it would allow the EU to catch 3,000 tons, more than any country currently has under ICCAT, and the United States would be allowed to go on fishing for its own domestic market.

Mr Miyahara said it would be a mistake to think that Japan could not do without bluefin, however. Bluefin represented only 3 per cent of imports. It imports annually 400,000 tonnes of high quality including yellowfin, southern bluefin tuna and bigeye.

Some delegations are picking up feelers that despite Japan’s outright opposition to bluefin being included under the Cites treaty, it might be prepared to compromise on some form of Appendix II listing, which means regulated trade. Mr Miyahara is a veteran of the Japanese delegation which successfully saw off an attempt by Sweden to list the bluefin tuna on Cites Appendix 2 in 1992.

A member of the Swedish delegation who asked to remain anonymous said last night: “Sweden withdrew the proposal in 1992 because ICCAT promised to shape up, which they did not do. This has been demonstrated by Monaco in its 47-page proposal to list bluefin under Cites Appendix 1.”

Charles Clover

Opposition to the listing of sharks on Cites Appendix II and bluefin on Appendix I received a boost in Doha yesterday when it became clear that the Arab League countries would be opposing all marine proposals, including the listing of red coral.

Sources close to the convention said that the League was concerned by the “socio-economic problems” that stopping trade with Japan would cause for fishermen along the North African coast.
Tunisia, in particular, has expressed strong opposition to a Cites Appendix 1 listing of bluefin.

Ghamen Abdulla Mohamed, director of wildlife conservation at Qatar’s Ministry for Environment, refused to comment and said the host nation would make its views known “after discussions.”

Patrick Van Klaveren, the ambassador to Monaco, which has proposed the Appendix 1 listing, said there could be ways of compensating the fishermen, possibly even through the richer members of the Arab League or some environmental fund.

One thing is clear; there is no mechanism for compensating fishermen under ICCAT which is the management regime Japan wants to stick with.

Charles Clover in Doha

March 16, Doha.

I predicted yesterday that Japan would be trying to get the Cites meeting to back an Appendix II listing for the bluefin tuna, which means regulated trade. The Pew Environment Group put out a very clear statement earlier today which shows why Appendix II would mean business as usual for the tuna, ie more gutless management by ICCAT.

Pew’s statement said: “We wanted to let you know that we’re hearing that some nations are thinking about proposing an Appendix II listing for Atlantic bluefin tuna. Please note that this would not change the status quo, and is just an effort to block what is really needed—Appendix I and a trade suspension. The CITES treaty is written so that if the trade of a species listed in Appendix II is governed by another treaty that predates CITES, than all trade management in that species defers to the initial treaty, not CITES.”

“In the case of Atlantic bluefin, whose trade is governed by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), an Appendix II listing keeps the species management in the hands of the treaty organization that has failed to set sustainable catch levels and has no enforcement authority.”

I hope that is clear. Only an Appendix 1 listing will do.

Take note Australia, which thinks perversely that management of the bluefin should be left with ICCAT, an organisation with few of the controls that now govern the fishing of the southern bluefin tuna.
Why side with lower standards than you set yourselves? I think Australia is missing something here.

Charles Clover

The movie that changed the way people think about what’s on their dinner plate makes its TV debut tonight – Tuesday October 20.

The End of the Line film was being screened by More4 at 10.00pm and is the latest stage of its incredible journey.

Among its many other milestones is an unprecedented four week run in London’s West End, a screening at the Sundance Festival and dozens of special screenings at subsequent festivals.

There have also been special screenings for European royalty including Prince Albert of Monaco and the Queen of Spain.

It was on screen as the UK’s first online seafood restaurant guide www.fish2fork.com was launched this week with the backing of some VIP supporters.

Sarah Brown, the Prime Minister’s wife, said on Twitter: “The End of the Line, the brilliant, watchable film on fish is on More4 at 10.00pm tonight and sustainable fish restaurant guide www.fish2fork.com”.

There was a similar message from author, actor and green activist Stephen Fry, who urged his 870,000-strong army of followers to watch the film and to visit the website.

Fish2fork.com aims to rate restaurants not just on the usual criteria of how good their seafood is but perhaps, more importantly, on what impact its capture has on our oceans and marine life.

The online guide has been set up by the same team which turned Charles Clover’s book The End of the Line on over fishing into a hugely powerful film.

Visitors to the site will find information about seafood restaurants across the UK and will be encouraged to ask questions about the fish they are offered when they dine out.

They can then easily upload their own view of the restaurant’s commitment to sustainability onto the website and help give it a simple rating score - blue fish for good and red fish for bad – on a sliding scale.

For its launch the website has reviewed and rated more than 100 restaurants across the UK but is relying on diners to provide their own reviews and help the website grow into an authoritative reference guide.

Within hours of its launch the website was being contacted by fish lovers eager to get involved by nominating restaurants they want to see in the guide.

Fish restaurants were also quick to see the marketing possibilities of being featured on the site and had filled in the www.fish2fork.com questionnaire.

The UK’s first online seafood restaurant guide – www.fish2fork.com – is launched today.

The interactive guide aims to rate restaurants not just on the usual criteria of how good their seafood is but, perhaps more importantly, on what impact its capture has on our oceans and marine life.

Visitors to the site will find information about seafood restaurants across the UK and will be encouraged to ask questions about the fish they are offered when they dine out.

They can then easily upload their own view of the restaurant’s commitment to sustainability onto the website and help give it a simple rating score - blue fish for good and red fish for bad – on a sliding scale.

Fish2fork.com, run by the same people who produced The End of the Line, has reviewed and rated more than 100 restaurants initially but is relying on diners to help the website grow into an authoritative reference guide.

Among those who scored bottom in the guide, denoted by five red fish skeletons, included J Sheekey, the restaurant owned by the company that also owns the Ivy and the Caprice, and Nobu, the Japanese fusion chain. Rick Stein, the TV chef, rated half a red fish skeleton, which indicated he served several “fish to avoid.”

The Loch Fyne chain and the Michelin-starred Hibiscus in London’s West End scored joint highest with three blue fish.

The website’s aim is not to persuade people to stop eating fish – quite the contrary – it wants everybody to continue enjoying seafood. But the world’s fish stocks are under pressure like never before and if future generations are to share the same privilege, old habits have to change.

As fish2fork.com editor Charles Clover, revealed in his book on which The End of the Line film was based, as many as 80 per cent of the world’s fish stocks are fully or over-exploited and some fish species, such as the bluefin tuna or the beluga sturgeon, are now listed as critically endangered.

The cavalier attitude to our oceans and the seafood they contain has to change if the appalling prospect of a world without fish is to be avoided. And diners, by making the right choices about the fish they eat, have a powerful economic weapon they can use in bringing about that all-important change.

Fish2fork.com has been set up specifically to help diners make informed decisions before they visit a seafood restaurant on which strive to provide the most sustainable fish to eat and which serve mostly fish to avoid.

Using the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List and the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) list of species to avoid, the website earlier this summer benchmarked the menus of more than 100 restaurants. They were then contacted and asked to complete a questionnaire so that a rating could be given.

The questions were designed to assess a restaurant’s sourcing policy, for instance, whether it offered wild or farmed fish, whether its shellfish were dredged or whether it offered species of fish which were either endangered or under threat because of over-fishing.

Where a restaurant declined or was unable to complete the questionnaire it was filled in by fish2fork.com staff using its online menu as a source of information.

The survey produced some startling results:

• Almost 90 per cent of restaurants are serving at least one “fish to avoid” species.
• Some Michelin-starred restaurants were amongst the worst offenders and a quarter of those surveyed are serving fish regarded as endangered.
• More than one in three restaurants served three or more species from the “fish to avoid” list.

Charles Clover, the editor of fish2fork.com, said: “Some restaurants still have not grasped that sustainability is now part of the definition of good food. You don’t want to eat a wonderful meal and have nightmares about the species you have pushed a little further towards extinction.

“This new guide shows the wonderful work some chefs and proprietors are doing with fishermen to make sure that they source fish of the highest quality caught in the most selective ways.

“It also shows the awful dark side of gastronomy, chefs who place an ephemeral taste for which they can charge the Earth above the survival of whole species and ecosystems.

“What few people know is that the supermarkets have made huge strides in recent years to get endangered fish off their shelves.

“The trouble is, these species very often remain on the menu at white tablecloth restaurants who haven’t yet had the searchlight of public opinion directed at the dark corners of their menus, where there are some real horror stories.”

Willie Mackenzie, oceans campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said: “As consumers we all have an impact on the oceans every time we eat a forkful of fish.

“We can make a real difference by what we buy, and we need to hold the retailers and restaurateurs to account for their fish sourcing policies. If we want to eat fish in years to come, then we have to radically overhaul the way we are fishing today – and your fork is the front line.”

Sam Wilding, the Marine Conservation Society’s fisheries officer, said: “It is encouraging to see Fish2fork highlighting the issue of seafood sustainability to restaurants and chefs, and giving the concerned consumer a voice.

“MCS provides consumers with free advice on seafood sustainability, through our pocket good fish guides and fishonline.org and is pleased to see our advice incorporated into the Fish2Fork campaign.”

Visitors to fish2fork.com can download the same questionnaire used in the survey to rate their own restaurant. Alternatively, they can ‘rat’ on a restaurant they suspect of malpractice, or ‘pat’ a restaurant they think deserves recognition by sending a quick email.

The website also features a ‘widget’ which will enable visitors to look up and check the conservation status of most species of fish they are likely to encounter in a restaurant.

For more information go to www.fish2fork.com.

The End of the Line supporter Prince Albert of Monaco appeared on Channel 4 News discussing the proposal to add bluefin tuna to CITES - The Convention on International Trade in Endgangered Species.

On 17th September The End Of The Line became only the second film ever to be have a screening at No. 10 Downing Street – a very special event hosted by the Prime Minister’s wife, Sarah Brown.

The specially-invited audience was an eclectic mix of individuals, ranging from people working in the media, to NGOs, restaurateurs, representatives of the fishing industry, and some sixth-form students too.

Indeed Sarah Brown joked that many people were confused as to why they had been invited.

The UK’s Fisheries Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies was there, and both he and Sarah Brown told the assembled crowd just how important and essential they think the film is, and Charles Clover and Executive Producer Chris Gorell-Barnes were also able to say a few words on the issues.

This was a great opportunity, not only for the obligatory photos by the famous door, but also for reaching out to new audiences with the film’s message.

Sarah Brown has been a big supporter of the End Of The Line since attending the screening at the Science Museum earlier this year, and it is with the support of many such individuals that the film has managed to cross over and reach parts other documentaries can’t reach!

As well as the opportunity to see the film, the event was a great forum for the film team, and us fish-hugging NGO-types to talk about the issues in an informal setting with some people who really can help make a difference. The impressive surroundings helped too of course.

It’s rare, for example to get some unfettered access to chat with a government minister, and it’s also great to be able to talk to people fresh from their first viewing of the film about what are the most relevant and pressing things we need to do now.

It would be no exaggeration to say that bluefin was the hot topic on everyone’s lips (and thankfully I’m not referring to the catering).

The urgency of the plight of bluefin is something that we can’t ignore – and it’s something that we must give the UK government some kudos for, as they seem to be taking a very strong international lead on calling for a ban on the international trade in the species.

Thursday night’s screening was a chance for some supporters, notably the glamorous and eager bluefin-defender Greta Scacchi, to get a sense of how they can help at an international level, and for us to forge relationships with some of the people making the decisions, and others keen to help spread the message

And this is, of course, very timely too. Next week will see a crucial meeting when (we hope) EU member states agree to back the European Commission’s proposal for a ban on bluefin trade.

We see in Thursday’s Guardian yet another expose of rampant illegal fishing for bluefin tuna… and we must do whatever we can to make Europe and the rest of the world wake up to the need to take action.

While reviewing the coverage that The End of the Line has received over the past months we came across a number of articles and stories that we hadn’t included in our weekly news round-ups.

To put this right, we have pulled together all the articles that slipped through the net, below.

You can see what the media and the blogosphere have had to say about The End of the Line on our new Media Coverage page.

Back in May Endangered New Jersey blog carried a preview of the film. It said: “The film aims to be more than just a doomsday warning. It offers real, practical solutions that are simple and do-able.”

Total Film reviewed the movie, giving it 3 stars. Jamie Russell said: “[Rupert] Murray, working from Brit journo Charles Clover’s book, accentuates the positive with a closing ‘get involved’ sermon about our eating habits.”

Writing in The Independent in an article on bluefin tuna entitled ‘This is the blue whale of our time‘, Charles Clover said: “The collapse of the bluefin now being predicted is a crisis of Atlantic proportions.”

Also in The Independent Martin Hickman reported on Mitsubishi’s efforts to stockpile bluefin tuna.

The Gazette, a regional paper covering Colchester in Essex, focused on the need for change in fishing legislation.

While an article in The Japan Times showed the reach that the film has had. William Hollingsworth highlighted the contradictions in Nobu’s bluefin tuna policy.

One that we should not have missed was Nobu -no brainer, by our very own Willie MacKenzie of Greenpeace UK, who has been doing tremendous work for The End of the Line.

Caterer Search reported on the efforts by restaurant owner Tom Aikins, who teamed up with the campaign, to change the way professional chefs think about seafood.

He said: “All chefs need to understand where their fish comes from, help with traceability of any fish products, make sure they are not serving endangered species”

The New York Post focused on the storm caused by the film about Nobu, especially the response of celebrities such as Kate Goldsmith and Sienna Miller.

The RSPB, understandably, concentrated on the damage that longline fishing does to seabirds, in its preview of the film.

The Daily Mail covered the move by Pret a Manger to stop using unsustainable tuna.

As did The Sunday Times.

The Hampshire Chronicle carried a lengthy preview of the film, featuring quotes from The End of the Line producer Claire Lewis. She said: “I read Charles Clover’s book and it changed my view of the ocean overnight. I rang him and the rest is history.”

On World Ocean’s Day, the Telegraph ran a preview of the film. As did The Guardian, who also focused on Pret a Manger’s move away from unsustainable seafood.

Greenpeace’s Willie Mackenzie continued to publicise the film, outlining the campaign’s activities in the run up to World Ocean’s Day.

Birdlife International said of the release of the film: “Today, on World Oceans Day, a powerful new film - The End of the Line - highlights the problems of over-fishing.”

In The Times, Ocean’s Correspondent Frank Pope, wrote: “Explanations do not get much more powerful than the film The End of the Line, which looks at the effect of overfishing, and which is being shown today, World Oceans Day, at cinemas nationwide.”

Environment news site Ecorazzi focused their attention on the celebrity response to Nobu’s decision to keep bluefin tuna on the menu.

The celebrity party after the 8th June screenings featured in the London Evening Standard.

Sam Leith, writing in the London Evening Standard, hailed Charles Clover as a ‘hero’. However, it is because of Sam’s love of eating tuna that he is concerned about it’s possible extinction.

The BBC explored a number of the issues that are raised in the film, especially the threat to bluefin tuna. Stephen Dowling quotes Charles Clover as saying: “Bluefin tuna has become the poster boy for the overfishing campaign. It’s on the buffers - it’s really on the slide down now.”

Daniel Kessler of Greenpeace, writing in the Huffington Post, praised the film: “Nobu’s arrogant denial of the reality of our mutual challenge - the continual decline of the health of our oceans - is a serious problem.”

He went on to say: “Greenpeace has already “outed” Nobu on their unsustainable practices (this interaction is featured in the forthcoming documentary The End of the Line, based on the excellent book by Charles Clover).”

Another Greenpeace blogger, Adele, was also very impressed, saying: “I was at the [UK] premiere screening of the film (a documentary based on the book by journalist Charles Clover) here in London, and boy, it took me back. It was like Defending Our Oceans: The Movie.”

Financial news organisation Bloomberg concentrated on the Pret a Manger’s assertion that prices will not go up after their move to sustainable tuna.

Writing in Newsweek, Daniel Stone said: “At current capacity, the world’s fishing fleet could catch four times more fish each year than are actually alive in the oceans.

“This sad fact is the central point of a new documentary released today, End of The Line, an astute, powerful and discomforting look at what we’ve done to the world’s oceans.”

Sylvia Patterson, writing in the Sunday Herald, said that for her, “a world without fish is a world where there’s nowt for tea.”

“The End of the Line has arrived all round, as the just-released film globally acknowledged to be the Inconvenient Truth of the oceans thunders home its staggering facts about ‘the greatest environmental disaster that no-one’s heard of’.”

The London Paper reported on the reasons behind Pret a Manager’s change in tuna sourcing policy: “Metcalfe changed the store’s policy on tuna after seeing The End of the Line, the shocking documentary on the global fishing business.

“He saw the film five months ago and was so disturbed, he arranged a private viewing for 40 of the company’s senior managers at a private cinema in London four days later. ‘I felt I had a responsibility,’ he says. ‘Knowledge is power’.”

The Big Issue in Scotland reported the angry reaction to the film from Scottish fishermen, who said it was “excessively gloomy and over-simplistic”.

There was further coverage of The End of the Line last week - both reviews of the film and related conservation news stories.

The new study by Boris Worm and Ray Hilborn, who both appear in the film, that showed that fish stocks in certain areas had recovered slightly due to conservation measures was widely covered. The impact of the film was included in a number of these reports.

Fork in the Road, the food blog from Village Voice website in New York, highlighted the study, published in Science, saying there was good news and bad news. The bad news is still pretty bad . . . 63% of assessed fish stocks worldwide still require rebuilding.”

Gloucester Times also covers the story, referencing the film, it says: “Management efforts . . . have been effective in reversing declines caused by chronic overfishing.

“The report . . . is no cause for celebration or let-up in the recovery programs, even in the most advanced systems.”

Writing in Salon, Katharine Mieszkowski discusses the current efforts to save bluefin tuna, mentioning the part the film has played in raising the profile of the issue. However, it is referred to as ‘the muckracking documentary, The End of the Line’.

Another issue connected with the film that was in the news was the question of what advice the UK government will issue on how much fish we should be eating.

MPs from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee said in a statement that the government “should consider the wisdom of continuing to advise consumers to eat at least two portions of fish a week at a time when the ability of the marine environment to meet this demand is questionable”.

Meatless in Miami, one of the Miami New Times’s Short Order food blogs, gives the film a mention. Lauren Raskine, says: “Based on the book by UK journalist Charles Clover who has extensively researched [our consumption of seafood, the film] asserts 1.2 billion people will potentially starve and it won’t be pretty, folks.”

The Pathways to Abundant Living blog reviews the film. It says: “The End of the Line is not against all fishing or eating fish. Instead it advocates a responsible attitude towards endangered and over-exploited species of fish

Canadian magazine Common Ground also carries a review The End of the Line. Robert Alstead writes: “Rupert Murray’s team brings memorable footage from around the world to connect the dots between consumer tastes and ocean depletion.

“The film is grimly fascinating and offers prescriptions for better fisheries management.”

Finally for this week, Local Vertical blog reports that Charles Clover’s book The End of the Line has been the inspiration for a song.

Entitled Coma, it is by Kevin Hearn & Thin Buckle, and is taken from their new album Havana Winter, which is available from Kevin Hearn.com. You can listen to it here.

President Sarkozy of France has announced his country’s support for a ban on international trade in endangered bluefin tuna before it disappears forever from the sea and our plates.

His initiative was followed quickly by a similar announcement by Huw Irranca-Davies, the British fisheries minister.

The backing of two major EU countries for a ban on the international bluefin tuna trade has instantly given weight and momentum to the campaign by Monaco - and our film, The End of the Line - to have the bluefin listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) next year.

The United States will now be under pressure to respond. Speaking at the close of a national stakeholder consultation on France’s future sustainable fisheries and maritime policy, President Sarkozy said: “France supports listing bluefin tuna on the CITES convention to ban international trade.”

He added: “Ours is the last generation with the ability to take action before it’s too late – we must protect marine resources now, in order to fish better in future. We owe this to fishermen, and we owe it to future generations.” Continue reading ‘Sarkozy takes the lead on saving the bluefin tuna’

This may be a record. Our independent documentary film has run for four weeks in the West End of London, with four screenings a day, and continues to be picked up by London cinemas, including many which originally turned it down.

It is booked in cinemas around the country until the end of September.

As a writer and not a habitual film-maker, I had no idea how impressive that was, but Christopher Hird, our executive producer, tells me that nobody can remember another UK produced documentary having anything like this success.

Only An Inconvenient Truth had anything like this impact, and it had tens of millions of marketing money behind it that we have not.

What has astonished even us is the way the film has broken out of the usual circle of dedicated followers of the environmental cause and found its way into the consciousness of the public at large.

It has been taken up by the Sun, Hello and Heat magazine, as well as regional and local papers and the entire national press. Continue reading ‘An astonishing month for The End of the Line’

The buzz about the film continues apace, with more articles and reviews about The End of the Line, including coverage from the Washington Post, Reuters and The Guardian.

First up, a sign that the fishing industry is taking notice of The End of the Line, Young’s Seafood, part of the Findus Group, is welcoming the film.

James Turton, group director of sustainability and corporate affairs, says: “This is an impactful, well-made documentary and we welcome its intent to highlight the vital importance of protecting the world’s fish resources and its call for consumers to choose sustainable seafood.”

The Washington Post’s Kim O’Donnel writes about the film on the Mighty Appetite blog. She says: “Several years ago, at one of the first sustainable seafood press conferences I had attended, one of the panelists said something that remains etched in my memory: “The oceans belong to all of us, whether or not we eat fish.”

“EOTL doesn’t just hint at this sentiment; it screams and shouts and urges you to wake up and smell the plankton.” Continue reading ‘Fishing industry is taking notice of The End of the Line’

Seafish and the fishing industry are cod-a-hoop recently, because it seems that cod stocks are doing better.

You may have missed the news, but the story is that the EU’s scientific advice suggests that stocks of North Sea cod have increased five per cent in the last year, and are up a whopping 40 per cent from the average in 2005-2008.

Sounds like great news. And of course any increase in a rampantly-overfished population of animals is to be welcomed. But it needs to be set in context.

Cod stocks are generally at a historic low in the North Sea. Viewing numbers against last year, or five years ago, may indeed show a slight increase, but basic arithmetic will quickly tell you that five or even 40 per cent of ‘hardly-any’ is equal to ‘not-very-much’.

We need to look at the level of cod stocks decades, generations and centuries ago. That’s what we should be aiming for - managing our seas for the recovery and abundance of species rather than scrabbling around amongst the low digits snapping off every green shoot of recovery as soon as it breaks the surface. Charles Clover puts it into context here.

And then there’s the other good news - fishermen are voluntarily taking measures to reduce ‘discards’ (whereby marketable species like cod are chucked away dead, being over quota, under sized, or not very sellable).

This is indeed great news. I for one am delighted that measures like more selective nets are being used, and that areas are being closed to fishing to try and protect cod stocks and reduce discards. This is eminently sensible, and the sort of thing Greenpeace has been campaigning for for years.

Of course we should minimise discards, they benefit no one.

But again, let’s look at the figures in context. As it’s not enough to say we have a great scheme for reducing discards, unless it does the job, is it? And what is the EU scientists’ news on cod discards in the North Sea … why, last year they showed a dramatic increase in discards. Yes, an increase.

More cod were caught and discarded (chucked away, dead and wasted) than were caught and landed. Most of these were immature fish that will never have the chance to breed.

So, by all means let’s applaud those taking measures to reduce fishing capacity, minimise discards, set aside areas free of fishing as marine reserves, and use more selective methods … but North Sea cod are not out of the woods yet.

Clamouring for increased quotas and painting such a rosy picture of recovery does the fishing industry no favours.

• Willie MacKenzie is part of Greenpeace’s Ocean Campaign. This blog post originally appeared on the Greenpeace UK website.