Showing posts with label Oceans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oceans. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 2, 2006

Have Your Lobster and Eat It, Too

By Trevor Corson / Special To The Tab

 

Lobster love is going mainstream: Executives at Whole Foods Market, the largest purveyor of natural and organic foods in the nation, have reevaluated the entire process of lobster acquisition, transport and sale. The company has announced that it will stop selling live lobsters because it cannot ensure that the animals are being treated with compassion.

For tens of thousands of years we knew, firsthand, where our food came from. During the past century, 99.9 percent of that experience has vanished. Lobster is one of the few foods that most Americans can still purchase alive and kicking. Apart from hunting and fishing, it is the last link between our kitchens and the great outdoors.

I belong to a new demographic called ethical eaters. We want our food to have been happy in death. At the same time, we want it so fresh and unprocessed that it still tastes, and nourishes us, like it is full of life. That's why I love buying live lobster. I am happy knowing that the lobster has lived at least six or seven years in the ocean. Most other meat at the store comes from a domesticated animal, and fish increasingly come from farms. Lobster is one of the last true free-range meats.

Some people feel that the entire process of capturing, storing, transporting and cooking lobsters cannot possibly be accomplished in a humane fashion - period.

The fact is that trapping lobsters is as humane as fishing gets. The animals crawl into a wire cage, eat a free lunch and sit around for a while. We know from video studies that many of the lobsters then climb right back out of the trap. We also know from scientific surveys that most lobstermen along the rocky coast from Gloucester to Downeast Maine release a lot of their lobsters back into the ocean - young ones, old ones and ones with eggs - and that those animals continue to thrive and repopulate coastal waters, despite their elevator rides to the surface and their swims back to the bottom. Lobster transport is similarly civilized. Because consumers have traditionally demanded that lobsters be kept alive, distributors already have a strong incentive to treat the animals with care. Nova Scotia-based Clearwater Seafoods, one of the top lobster distributors in North America, has constructed elaborate seawater condominiums at its three plants, tended by the company's own biologists, so that lobsters can rest in cool, stress-free solitude and regain energy before their trek to the consumer.

And storage? It is true that adult lobsters dislike spending much time together in close quarters - unless, of course, a male and female have completed their courtship dances and decide to move in together to mate. But lobsters communicate by smell instead of sound, and studies at the Marine Biological Laboratory on Cape Cod suggest that in crowded conditions, the lobsters' noses get desensitized to stimulation and they calm down and stop bothering one another. The tanks are also kept cold; the lobsters adapt by slowing their metabolism, reducing activity and lowering their food intake, just as they do in the wild, which further reduces stress.

That leaves cooking. It's the thornier problem, and what most upsets people. Unlike fish, [lobsters] can survive out of water long enough to make it to the kitchen still kicking.

In England, scientists have invented a new machine designed to kill lobsters with minimum pain prior to cooking. It is called the CrustaStun, and went into service in the United Kingdom last year. It comes in two sizes. The big one looks something like those zappers they put your suitcase in at the airport. Lobsters ride a conveyor belt into a 110-volt jolt that electrocutes them. The small version looks like a stainless-steel lobster coffin, and executes one animal at a time. Both get a humane stamp of approval.

Shucks Maine Lobster, run by Maine entrepreneur John Hathaway, is one of several companies employing a different sort of device: an 80,000-pound, 16-foot-tall machine that uses technology adapted from U.S. Army research. Hathaway loads a wide vertical cylinder with 200 pounds of live lobster at a time. A steel oval framework slides into place over the cylinder. He presses a button, massive pumps whir, and water inside the cylinder is compressed to a pressure more than five times that of the deepest ocean trenches. Without any heat, the lobsters die and their meat separates from the shell. The lobsters are then hand shucked, vacuum sealed, and the packages re-pressurized to kill pathogens. The result: fresh, raw lobster meat with a refrigerated shelf life of up to 30 days and no additives or preservatives - similar to chicken. Chefs love the product, and supermarkets are currently considering it for retail sale. Whether this system will get a humane stamp of approval remains to be seen.

I welcome the end of boiling lobsters alive. But I also fear the impending loss of live lobster, and with it the end of a beloved New England tradition. I do not want to hand over my last chance to make moral choices about my dinner to automated executioners. So for now, I will continue to do what I have always done. I will put the live lobster on ice for 15 minutes to slow its metabolism and neural activity. Then I will give thanks to the lobster and thrust the point of my knife between its legs and cut down through the head, splitting the front half of its body. The animal will die instantly, and I can boil it without causing further pain. This method, while not for the squeamish, does get a humane stamp of approval.

Adapted from Boiling Point, Boston Magazine, July 13, 2006, with permission

Trevor Corson is the author of "The Secret Life of Lobsters: How Fishermen and Scientists Are Unraveling the Mysteries of Our Favorite Crustacean" (HarperCollins, June 2004). He has posted instructions on the humane way to kill lobsters at secretlifeoflobsters.com.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/tabarchive.asp.

Read More...

Wednesday, May 3, 2006

Something's fishy

By Michelle Portman/Special To The Tab

You might want to get a membership to the New England Aquarium. There are fish there that chances are you'll never see in the wild. Not because they thrive in habitats far away, in exotic places and tropical climes, but because people have fished them to death. Another place you might be able to see these fish is served on a plate garnished with spices, herbs and lemon juice at dozens of popular restaurants. How is it that the fish we love to dine on are dead in the water (seas), yet always available for the right price at our neighborhood eatery?

It is clear that for at least the past decade, fisheries, especially those in New England, have been plagued by tragedy and controversy. Many commercial fish populations, such as cod, flounder and Atlantic salmon, have been culled to such an extent that it is questionable whether they will ever recovery.

Government has tried to step in with policies and regulations aimed at stabilizing and recovering fisheries. Ten years ago, the federal Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Act, also called the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA), was signed into law. It resulted in a myriad of measures to regulate fishing activities- quotas by species, size limits, gear restrictions, seasonal fishing ground closures, etc. Yet these measures are controversial because of their effects on fishermen, the fishing industry and overall marine biodiversity.

A recent national report on ocean policy, funded by the Pew Trust, takes issue with policies promulgated by regional Fisheries Management Councils (8 in number). Too often, council decisions have emphasized short-term commodity production, i.e., focusing on maximizing catch, revenues and employment rather than sustaining natural systems that support wild fish populations and healthy ecosystems. Overall, they rely on scientific uncertainty to justify risk-prone management decisions rather than apply a precautionary approach. Particularly problematic are the adoption of short-sighted single species management techniques that neglect long-term goals for fisheries and ecosystems.

With all the threats to fish - loss of habitat, overfishing, declining ocean water quality and ineffective regulation - how is it that we are finding plenty of fish on the menu of our favorite restaurants? For the most part the answer is: aquaculture.

There are many different modes of aquaculture - for shell fish, for freshwater fish and seafood - making it difficult to generalize regarding its impacts. For most off-shore cultivation, thousands of fish live their short lives in crowded cages sunk below the surface in deep ocean waters. Negative effects involve the concentration of their waste products that causes eutrophication (nutrient overload) in surrounding waters. Also the density at which the fish are kept make them more susceptible to disease and parasites. (To sea lice, for example, a fish farm is an all-you-can-eat buffet.) Pesticides and antibiotics given to the fish soon find their way into the environment with deleterious impacts on marine water quality and habitat.

These substances don't make "farmed fish" any more healthy for the human consumer either. A recent news article on farmed fish in the UK, called Scottish farmed salmon "the most contaminated product on the supermarket shelves".

Another problem is that of escapees. Farm-hatched fish can escape into the wild and dilute the gene pool of healthier, "smarter" wild specimens, potentially impacting the capability of some species to spawn properly, to grow to adulthood and to be resistant to certain parasites and disease.

This past April, the U.S. Senate heard testimony on offshore aquaculture. A bill backed by the Bush administration is being debated that would expand, support and regulate large-scale fish farming in American coastal waters. Supporters argue fish farms would enhance fish production and reduce seasonal variations in availability. Opponents worry they would add cut-rate competition against existing ocean fishers, flooding the market with low-quality, low-price fish.

These debates leave the average fish-lover wondering whether off-shore and deep-sea cages are a sensible alternative to wisely managing our culling of wild ocean fish. Arguably, the solution lies with the consumer. People can refrain from eating species that are threatened. They can create a demand for certain products raised or fished sustainably. Many folks want to do the right thing when buying or ordering fish, but don't know how. Certainly, the different ways fish are raised and/or caught makes things confusing.

A full discussion of the most environmentally-friendly fish to consume is beyond the scope of this article, but why re-invent the wheel? When I buy fish at the market or order in a restaurant, I consult my Seafood Watch guide. This is a little folding card that I carry in my wallet. It is published by the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Regional and national pocket-sized guides can be downloaded from their Internet site: www.mbayaq.org/cr/seafoodwatch.asp. There is plenty of information on this site about how to be a wise fish consumer and plenty more on what's happening to fisheries and fish.

Remember, despite what we see on our menus, all is not well with our regional and global fisheries. For the sake of fish, and our appetites, precaution is advised.

Michelle Portman is a Ph.D. candidate studying marine conservation policy at UMass-Boston and she works as an environmental analyst.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/tabarchive.asp

Read More...

Wednesday, February 1, 2006

The importance of oysters

 

Oysters have been a popular food since ancient times. Roman emperors paid for them by their weight in gold. The Romans were so enthusiastic about these marvelous mollusks that they marched thousands of slaves through rugged terrain all the way to the English Channel to gather them. While oysters have had a reputation as a delicacy for many centuries, we have only more recently begun to appreciate their environmental benefits. Scientific research has shown that oysters are voracious filter feeders. They consume large quantities of algae and excess nutrients - up to 5 liters per hour. They play a major role in maintaining the ecological balance in the waters where they grow.

Take the Chesapeake Bay, for example. Today, the water is often turbid, carrying large amounts of sediment and phytoplankton (microscopic organisms), which limits the biodiversity of the bay. However, if we go back approximately 40 years, <!--[if gte vml 1]>

NNHS Biology students Alissa Becker, left, Peter Sun and Joy Huang, right, at Whole Foods Market with their subject.

<![endif]-->we know that nature provided 3-4 million bushels of oysters annually in the bay, which was in great shape ecologically. These oysters filtered all of the bay’s water in a mere 4 to 5 days. During this filtering process the oysters use their cilia to strain out microscopic plants and to wrap whatever they cannot digest in mucus, which they then transport to the mouth. The mouth then does the job of breaking down the material, which moves to the stomach and is eventually expelled as feces or pseudofeces (material excreted, but not through the gut) that contribute to the sediment of the bay. Oysters consume phytoplankton so rapidly that several large oysters can clear an aquarium filled with green water within hours. When oysters strain out microscopic plants in the bay, they create room for other organisms to survive, thus maintaining the ecological balance that fosters species diversity in the bay.

Sadly, the ecology of Chesapeake Bay is now very unhealthy. Oysters are nearly absent from the bay. They have been reduced to one percent of their population of 40 years ago. This is because enormous quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus (over 300 million pounds) are deposited in Chesapeake Bay each year in the form of man-made fertilizers. These provide a tremendous source of nutrients for phytoplankton and algae. When these phytoplankton and algae are overabundant they gather to form large green masses that block the light that would normally filter to the bottom and allow healthy aquatic vegetation like seaweed and ell grass to grow. The excessive phytoplankton absorbs enormous amounts of oxygen very rapidly in a given location, causing anoxia, which means that no oxygen is left to circulate in the water. The result is devastating; it kills off many animals that require oxygen to live. During the summer, when the temperatures are high and there is little vertical mixing of water in the bay, the warmer water remains afloat because it becomes less dense, while the cooler, denser water remains at the bottom. The water at the bottom can be anoxic for many weeks. This destroys many or even most of the living organisms, such as fish, leaving acres of the bay’

s bottom barren.

How did such a healthy bay change so dramatically in just 40 years? There are many answers to this question, but they all boil down to this: humans have been over-harvesting a most precious natural resource. There is historical evidence that the over-harvesting of Chesapeake Bay goes back 140 years, to about 1865. Oyster harvest dropped precipitously between 1890 and 1905; even so, 12-15 million bushels of oysters were still harvested during that time period. Since 1905, the oyster harvest has declined from 5 million bushels annually to a meager 100,000 bushels in 1993. There is clear evidence that it is the drastic decline in oysters that is responsible for the drastic decline in the water quality of Chesapeake Bay.

Fortunately local governments have recognized the nature and the severity of the problem. Laws have been passed to limit the over-harvesting of oysters. For example, the 1927 10 Percent Shell Tax Law required oyster processors to make 10 percent of their shucked shell available for state use in planting, a method to create new oyster beds. The 1953 55 Percent Shell Tax, increasing the tax on oyster processors by 50 percent, was passed to slow the market demand for oysters. The 1972 Moratorium on New Leases suspended awards of new leases of oyster grounds so that the over-harvested oyster grounds could recover. Although these steps taken by governments were inadequate, they were milestones that acknowledged past mistakes and attempted to rectify them. Such laws, when combined with efforts to raise public awareness of the problem, are ways to help bring back the oysters that are so essential to the heath of the environment.

Oysters are much more than a human delicacy. They perform amazing environmental services, not only in Chesapeake Bay but also in many coastal areas all over the world. We humans should do whatever we can to preserve this delicate and delectable creature that quietly works environmental wonders.

Peter Sun was assisted by NNHS classmates Alissa Becker and Joy Huang in writing this article as part of an Environmental Service Project in Zachary Snow’

s Biology class.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/tabarchive.asp.

Read More...

Wednesday, November 9, 2005

Improving ocean management

One of the most controversial projects of the decade in our region is the wind farm proposed for Nantucket Sound. This project has environmentalists, longtime Cape Cod property owners, politicians, energy experts and concerned citizens throughout the state and the entire country taking sides. Should private companies be given a license to profit from marketable commodities produced on seabed that is public domain? Should the impact to unspoiled ocean vistas outweigh the potential benefits from the production of renewable energy? And should the authority of the federal government trump that of landside states simply because a project barely lies across an arbitrary line of jurisdiction? 

These questions have prompted the state's renewed interest in ocean management. Offshore use projects are becoming more common and varied. Recent technological advances are making new ocean uses possible. Also, many types of projects are becoming increasingly difficult or impossible to site on land. Available land is scarce while limitations as to what can be built where are increasing. For years there has been controversy around offshore oil production in other parts of the country, for example, in California and Florida. In Massachusetts, recent offshore proposals include not only wind projects but wave energy developments, liquefied natural gas pipelines, fiber optic cable lines and sand and gravel mining.

In an effort to develop proactive governance to replace what has traditionally been a "first come, first serve" approach, state administrators convened an Ocean Management Task Force in 2003. Charged with developing a new Ocean Management Plan, the Task Force met approximately 30 times over 10 months, held six public meetings and received more than 300 public comments.

So, what does the Task Force have to show for their efforts? A report called Waves of Change was produced and made available to the public in March 2004. It recommends strengthening state agencies to address environmental, planning and public trust issues in both state and federal waters, establishing an ecosystem-based protocol to improve management of offshore areas, and initiating ocean education and stewardship initiatives.

In the area of governance, the task force recommended strengthening the Ocean Sanctuaries Act and the Public Waterfront Act (also known as Chapter 91) two existing regulatory programs, currently of questionable effectiveness. Earlier this year, Governor Romney filed the Ocean Resources and Conservation Act that would allow the state to assert greater control over its ocean territories and would implement some of the Task Force recommendations aimed at more proactive governance.

As for management tools, the Task Force recommends convening a work group to address the designation of marine protected areas, increasing enforcement of existing environmental laws pertaining to the ocean and waterways, and developing inventories of the uses and resources of the state's marine waters. To manage potential impacts of new projects, the Task Force recommended developing methodologies and standards for the analysis of visual, cultural and aesthetic impacts of projects proposed for state waters.

Some of the most interesting and far-sighted recommendations of the Task Force have to do with improving scientific understanding of our marine environment. These include establishing a marine and fishery scientists group to advise the state, developing an ocean monitoring and research plan, a seafloor mapping program and standards for review of data submitted by project proponents. The Task Force also recommends that the state commit to developing an ocean literacy and stewardship "ethic" among Massachusetts residents, outreach mechanisms and greater dissemination of marine data collected to the public at large.

Certainly, our knowledge of the ocean, marine ecosystems and resources are so lacking that these steps are necessary at a minimum. But, the question remains whether the work of Ocean Management Task Force will contribute to wise proactive conservation of sensitive public resources in the near future. We now know, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the consequences of debating coastal issues ad naseum, postponing conservation measures and neglecting what goes on in the less visible, submerged domains of our environment. Will the conclusions of ocean experts make significant contributions to wiser ocean use, lead to further unfunded mandates or get slogged down while in their infancy and buried in the mud flats long before the tide rises? This remains to be seen.

 To read more on Massachusetts' Ocean Management Initiative see: http://www.mass.gov/czm/oceanmanagement/index.htm.

Michelle Portman is a Ph.D. candidate studying marine conservation policy at UMassBoston and she works as an environmental analyst.

Read More...

A great catch!

By Emily Long and Luke Johnson/ Special To The Tab

New England is certainly linked in peoples' minds with lobsters. On a mid-western college tour, we were informed by our tour guide sporting shorts with little red lobsters that he was from New England. Lobsters are commonly found here in a big boiling pot or on a bib covered in buttery lobster juice, but how much do we really know about them? Do we ever stop to think what kind of lives these crustaceans might live outside of the plate in front of us?

Trevor Corson's "The Secret Life of Lobsters" offers an intellectual awakening on an anecdotal plate. He interweaves stories of lobstermen and scientists, offering a hint of the friction between the two groups, while demonstrating their common love of lobsters. Having spent his childhood summers on Little Cranberry Island, Corson developed an early interest in lobstering and he gained a general appreciation of the village's economic dependence on the lobster industry. Later in his life, he spent two years working full-time aboard a lobster boat and gained a much deeper appreciation of lobstering: "I wanted to be a marine biologist when I grew up, but also a commercial fisherman."

The non-fiction book takes the reader directly into the lobster's world. We travel into the traps at the bottom of the ocean, to a scientist's make-shift lobster town equipped with video cameras. Occasionally, Corson takes us back in time to discuss issues of over-fishing and to speculate about future generations of lobsters and lobstermen. Corson's witty parallels between humans and lobsters make the book especially interesting. In one section he dramatizes the mating rituals of lobsters by making allusions to their human counterparts, as when he described a female molting before mating: "a few minutes later, she fell over on her side, unzipped the back of her shell, and began to wiggle." In another chapter, Corson graphically describes male lobster fights in parallel with descriptions of the battles between lobstermen and scientists regarding lobster conservation.

The book provides insight into lobster politics, discussing how people use lobsters as a resource. Scientists are constantly working for the preservation of lobsters, while fishermen are juggling the preservation of lobsters with the preservation of their livelihood and their families. In the book, you hear these two groups really listening to each other. In one scene, scientists, skeptical of the lobstermen's preservation efforts, witness a lobster haul and are amazed by the large number of lobsters tossed back into the sea. Throughout the book, the two groups are always learning new things about each other, resulting in a new level of mutual respect.

The writing style is laid back and Corson conveys his message in a playful manner. He has an informative voice, but the scientific information and historical references are not overemphasized, so the story narrative flows. He takes basic biological and behavioral facts and shows their complexity. At times it is like a lobster soap opera.

You might say that Corson has a talent for conveying lobster personalities. He describes the drama of lobsters that have been placed into artificial environments with a clarity that keeps you wanting to read more. There were moments when our minds drifted from the page, especially when nautical jargon was involved - yet we yearned to get back to the action underwater!

There's a profound conservation lesson to be learned from this book.

Studying lobsters is a window into our environment. Lobstermen do not set out to catch every lobster they can. They are aware of the impact of their actions on the lobster population so they set standards to control overfishing, standards that exceed those set by scientists and lawmakers. This book enriched our knowledge of lobster fishermen and of the workings of the lobster fishery. As the title implies, there's more to lobsters than most of us know. The author makes us see why scientists and fishermen care about lobsters. If you read this book, you, too, will understand the fascination and intrigue of lobsters.

Emily Long and Luke Johnson are seniors at Newton North High School. They wrote an opinion piece for the TAB last year based on a year-long Biology project. Having discovered that the TAB is a useful link to the community, they will continue contributing to the Environment page because they want to increase public awareness of environmental issues.

Read More...