The New Zealand seafood industry is under a boycott threat according to an article published in the Bangkok Post today.
In the article, Barbara Maas, an endangered species specialist with conservation group NABU International, speaks out about the endangered species and criticises New Zealand’s clean and green image.
“We’ve exhausted all other avenues of making progress,” she told the reporter.
“We’ve repeatedly argued the scientific merits of the case and been ignored, so if it’s all about money, as has become apparent, then we need to change the economic landscape in order to make them reconsider.”
Maas said a seafood boycott would lead to customers questioning the “100 percent pure” branding that New Zealand prides itself on.
“The shame of this is that it will besmirch the environmental reputation of the country and once you start that process it’s difficult to turn it off,” she said.
New Zealand’s seafood exports are worth more than NZ$1.5 billion ($1.2 billion) a year, according to official data, with China, Australia the European Union and United States the largest markets.
Maas said more than 100 conservation groups worldwide have signed up to support the boycott, which she said was set to be imposed within months.
Seafood New Zealand chief executive Tim Pankhurst said the government had already banned trawl and set-net fishing in 6,000 square kilometres (2,300 square miles) of waters and there was no evidence Maui’s dolphins existed outside this area.
“Suggestions that consumers avoid New Zealand seafood to protect Maui’s dolphins are accordingly misplaced,” he said.
A spokeswoman for Conservation Minister Nick Smith said there had been no sightings of Maui’s dolphins in the extended area where the IWC wants a ban imposed.
“If there is a credible sighting of a Maui’s dolphin beyond where we have protections in place, then we’d be happy to initiate a review,” she said.
To read more, see the article here
In my opinion*, it is unlikely that a boycott would be successful without the support of the New Zealand community or the international community, both of whom may not have the conviction to really put pressure on the seafood industry.
The only way law will change is if there is a ‘credible sighting’ which s no easy feat itself considering Maui’s Dolphins are hard to differentiate from the Hector’s dolphin.
A spokesperson from the Department of Conservation says a credible sighting involves 3 key steps.
It needs to be sighted and photogrpahed, the location of the sighting needs to be mapped, and of course you would need to ensure it was a Maui and not a Hector’s.
Of course, the seafood industry have been known to discredit sightings if they are proven to be hector’s dolphins as this species isn’t seen as endangered.
The argument that it is the same species seems to be lost on those who have financial agendas.
So really, the law needs to cover Maui’s dolphins and Hector’s dolphins in order for all sightings to be valid and taken into account.
If you want to report a sighting, you can do so here