Earlier this month (03 March 2010) the article: "Draft Abalone and Shrimp Aquaculture Standards Released" - hit the seafood industry press. You can read it at http://fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?monthyear=&day=3&id=35727&l=e&special=&ndb=1%20target= or read it reproduced from FIS WorldNews below.

In essence, the story is the introduction of aquaculture "standards" devised by the WWF (World Wildlife Fund/World Wide Fund for Nature) describing all the negative impacts of traditional shrimp and abalone farming.

At first I was not even going to comment but you know sometimes enough is enough.

I have a friend who says you can work with dumb but you cannot cure stupid.

In 2003, working with Sustainable Resources International (SRI), I wrote a short pamphlet called "Protesters at the Door: NGO Co-Opetition." (reproduced here also under "ISSUES")

I have no idea if even ten people read it or if those who did, understood it. The premise was pretty direct and aimed at anyone with a modicum of common sense and the spine to fight for what they built, who truly cares about the environment and can distinguish between self-serving rhetoric and reality. Politically Correct it was not!

You should read it and take it to heart if you are in any business remotely involved in the use of natural resources. They say "Committees design camels. God designs Arabian horses." If you don't know the joke (or story) send me an E-mail I will send it to you. The article I'm referring to is the latest round of "kumbaya" between environmental groups and the aquaculture industry. In case you missed the "flower power," 1960s, kumbaya is the 1930's Gullah folksong turned into a peace and love anthem by Pete Seeger, Joan Baez, and the Seekers where the lion and the lamb, terrorist and victim are supposed to join hands and group hug. In this case, the song is being sung by competitor predators hoping to dupe not only each other but more importantly: the unsuspecting public. Today, kumbaya has morphed into an icon for hypocrisy or, to quote one critic's appraisal, "a mocking metaphor" for "false moralizing" and "naively optimistic views of the world and human nature."

Aquaculturists hope and believe the environmental community will partner up for their mutual benefit via the new WWF standards. On one level that's exactly what these standards are all about. But the question remains, what exactly is the nature of that "mutual benefit?"

I strongly suggest you read the story on the WWF standards and pay close attention particularly to their emphasis as ascribed to Jose Villalon, WWF's US Aquaculture director and coordinator of the Dialogues from which these standards arose. They are focused on the key negative impacts associated with aquaculture instead of a litany of impacts, which may increase certification costs. The shrimp and abalone standards will address chemical pollution issues including the destruction of ecologically sensitive habitat to create farms, using high amounts of wild fish to feed farmed seafood and community conflicts around altered use of land and water.

These will be the first global shrimp and abalone standards created through an open, transparent process aligned with the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance's guidelines for standard setting.

The process encourages input from a broad and diverse group of people and ensures that ideas will be considered by the full Dialogues.  This is just more NGO and industry bullshit that simply acts as a smokescreen for both sides to hide behind. (And as a consequence help NGO's raise funds to maintain large staffs and expansive programs that act like corporations and to let corporations pretend they have the ethics and morals that the public hopes, believes, wishes (take your pick) NGO's really displayed and put into practice.)

In fact, it is simply a symbiotic business exercise that gets both sides something (though not everything) that they want.

My message to Industry and NGOs alike is quite simple: the entire exercise is moot and unnecessary. The answer to the environmental degradation NGOs rightfully should be monitoring and clamoring to end doesn't need all of his kumbaya nonsense. If you own a shrimp farm and want to run it ethically, then don't destroy the environment. Don't screw over the workers. Dont pollute the product. Do follow sound and moral production practices, even if it costs you less profit. The bottom line is that you don't need NGOs telling you how to run your business. That is like building your home on another person's piece of property. That house is not really yours. To NGOs I urge you to quit acting like prostitutes. Stop making deals for money. You are supposed to be the watchdogs and the bellwethers for bad production practices. You are supposed to be fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves. Quit compromising for money. It makes you look, no, it makes you a whore.

The tension and conflict between a legitimate business trying to maximize profit but still operate within some sort of ethical guidelines; and the anger and indignation of NGOs (who should not be trying to build trust funds and endowments the size of universities' or salaries and benefits equal to those of Wall Street stock brokers) creates the tension and conflict that takes polarized positions and philosophies and creates a synthesis which is a new starting point to begin the battle again.

This tension, this process, this war of ideas and beliefs is "good" for the planet. Anybody out there ever read the good parts of Hegel?

Your "kumbaya" discussions and "insincere attempts to find common ground" hurt the planet, the animals and our very existence.

If you can get along and if you can agree, we are truly "screwed" for you are by definition ethically at opposite ends of the spectrum of life. And that is not a bad thing.

It is like the natives of the movie "Avatar" and the Marines that have come to steal their "unobtanium." There is no way the two are going to get along. Nor should they.

So, the tension, the debate, the struggle allow the planet and its people to hope a balance; or what the Greeks called "homeostasis," can be achieved, (an equilibrium), that is what we as imperfect beings, with very divergent beliefs and value systems can only really pray for in this existence. Please read the 2003 short paper by SRI "Protesters at the Door: NGO Co-Opetition". It may open your eyes. Let me conclude there is no villain here, we are not trying to assign blame, except to the extent that in eliminating the tension, pretending to be able to "just all get along" you are selling the planet and all of us who live here down the proverbial road to hell; and that ought to make you re-examine your behavior just for the sake of your own souls. Let me close with an example: I am not a big fan of the Sea Shepherd or of Paul Watson but, you know what?, he takes no prisoners, makes no compromises and puts the life of his whales above every thing else. He may fund raise off of his actions, he may seek photo ops, hell, it's been said he loves documentaries that make him out the hero, but to date and to my knowledge, does not appear to have sold out. He has not traded the sanctity of the life of a single whale for a corporate dollar. Welcome to natural tension and the history of human progress. As the last line in the story goes "progress is based on disagreeable individuals."

******************************

Draft abalone and shrimp aquaculture standards released

WORLDWIDE Wednesday, March 03, 2010, 16:30 (GMT + 9)

Draft standards designed to minimise the harmful impacts of shrimp and abalone aquaculture on the environment, farm workers and communities were posted on Tuesday for the first of two public comment periods. The drafts are products of the Shrimp Aquaculture Dialogue and the Abalone Aquaculture Dialogue, two roundtables of over 500 people including aquaculture industry leaders, NGOs and scientists.

In addition, the Dialogues tilapia standards are final and the completed pangasius standards are expected in April. The pangasius Dialogue has completed its public comment phase and will hold its final meeting in Vietnam this week.

The 2,000 people involved in the Aquaculture Dialogues [...] have been listening to stakeholders, learning from scientists and tapping into their own expertise so they can develop meaningful and credible standards, said Jose Villalon, managing director of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) US Aquaculture Programme and coordinator of the full set of Dialogues.

All of the Dialogue standards will address the key negative impacts associated with aquaculture instead of a litany of impacts, which may increase certification costs. The shrimp and abalone standards will address chemical pollution issues including the destruction of ecologically sensitive habitat to create farms, using high amounts of wild fish to feed farmed seafood and community conflicts around altered use of land and water.

These will be the first global shrimp and abalone standards created through an open, transparent process aligned with the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliances guidelines for standard setting. The process encourages input from a broad and diverse group of people and ensures that ideas will be considered by the full Dialogues.

Similar processes have been used for some land-based agriculture industries, but not at such an early stage of the industrys development.

Feedback received during the 60-day public comment periods will be used by each Dialogues Global Steering Committee for revision before being posted again for the last comment period. Final shrimp and abalone standards are expected by late 2010.

The revisions also will be based on input received during outreach meetings held worldwide with stakeholders to discuss what types of standards would help positively transform the industry. This includes meetings with small-scale shrimp farmers in India, Vietnam and Thailand; people who live near shrimp farms in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Brazil; government agencies that provide assistance to farmers; and European seafood buyers.

All of the Dialogue standards will be amended periodically to reflect changes in science and technology, and to encourage innovation and permanent improvement. Revisions will be coordinated by the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC), the new entity being developed to manage the standards, and the process will include many of the Dialogue participants.