Fisheries that ask to go through an MSC assessment work hard to reach the verifiable and science-based standards we set, ensuring that fish stocks are conserved for future generations.”Ĭritics also argue one of the most shocking statistics quoted in the film is wrong. “The positive impact of our programme has been recognised by the United Nations, as being important in helping to support ocean biodiversity. “Some of the known problems that the film highlights – bycatch, overfishing and destruction of marine ecosystems – are precisely the issues the MSC certification process is designed to address,” a spokesperson said. Prof Christina Hicks, an environmental social scientist at Lancaster University who was interviewed for the film, tweeted: “Unnerving to discover your cameo in a film slamming an industry you love and have committed your career to.”Ī spokesperson for the Marine Stewardship Council said that while the film drew attention to “known problems” in the fishing industry, it included “misleading claims” including that there is no such thing as sustainable fishing and that MSC certification was not credible. Phillips said Seaspiracy did a disservice to organisations doing “critical work to protect oceans and marine life”. Dolphin-kill levels have been reduced by more than 95%, preventing the indiscriminate slaughter of more than 100,000 dolphins every year.”
In a statement, Phillips said: “The Dolphin Safe tuna programme is responsible for the largest decline in dolphin deaths by tuna fishing vessels in history. In response to the film, the IMMP said Seaspiracy “falsely claims” that the Dolphin Safe label is a conspiracy to benefit the global fisheries industries.ĭavid Phillips, the director of the IMMP, said the film had chosen to “grossly distort and mischaracterise” the aims of the label. “The film took my statement out of context to suggest that there is no oversight and we don’t know whether dolphins are being killed.
“I answered there are no guarantees in life but that drastically reducing the number of vessels intentionally chasing and netting dolphins as well as other regulations in place, that the number of dolphins that are killed is very low”, he said. In a scene in the film, Palmer, the associate US director of the International Marine Mammal Project (IMMP), which is operated by the Earth Island Institute, was asked if his group could guarantee that no dolphins were ever killed in any tuna fishery anywhere in the world. Representatives of both organisations have accused the film-makers of misleading statements.Īn executive with the international organisation responsible for the Dolphin Safe tuna label, Mark Palmer, has said his comments were taken out of context. George Monbiot, the environmentalist and Guardian columnist, who appears in it, described it on Twitter as “a brilliant exposé of the greatest threat to marine life: fishing”.ĭirected by Ali Tabrizi, a film-maker from Kent, the wide-ranging documentary questions the sustainable seafood movement and looks at the way the Dolphin Safe and Marine Stewardship Council labels may not be able to provide the assurances consumers are looking for. Chris Froome, the seven Grand Tour-winning British cyclist, tweeted that “my mind has been blown” by the film. Launched last week, the 90-minute film is already trending on the platform as one of its Top 10 most watched films and programmes and has been praised by celebrities including Bryan Adams, the vegan Canadian rock star, who urged his followers to watch it and stop eating fish.
0 kommentar(er)
