Credit: Fish Source
By Peggy Parker, Seafoodnews.com/July 21, 2026
The London-based Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) has come under fire for its near-certification of the Western Bering Sea pollock fishery, following a formal objection filed by the At-Sea Processors Association in June and a sharply worded letter from Alaska Department of Fish and Game Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang earlier this month.
“…the MSC’s apparent determination to turn a blind eye to bycatch management, overfishing, habitat impacts, and data transparency and deploy your program’s eco-label to ‘blue wash’ Russian seafood in global markets is unconscionable at best and flat out deceptive at worst,” Vincent-Lang wrote in his July 1 letter to MSC CEO Rupert Howes.
“The MSC’s profound failures in Russia have persisted for far too long,” Vincent-Lang continued. “I urge you in the strongest possible terms to belatedly use your authority to act in relation to the WBS pollock certificate, and to exclude this poorly managed, unsustainable fishery from your program.”
At issue is the recertification of the Russian-managed Western Bering Sea pollock fishery as MSC-certified sustainable. A leader in consumer-facing seafood sustainability certification, MSC uses third-party Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs) to evaluate how well managed commercial fisheries are. CABs do not conduct surveys or run statistical models themselves; instead, they assess applicants based on their use of state-of-the-art data-gathering techniques and reliable statistical models to identify biomass and migration patterns and set rules on harvest levels and timing.
On June 30, the Seattle-based At-Sea Processors Association (APA) — a trade group of 15 vessels operating in the Eastern Bering Sea pollock fishery — submitted an objection citing three general failures: a recklessly inadequate management plan, poorly managed bycatch of Alaska salmon, and an absence of protections for seafloor habitat.
Central to APA’s case is Russia’s revised assessment of Western Bering Sea pollock stock size, which the association says was irrationally inflated based on the summer migration of Eastern Bering Sea pollock through the Russian zone.
“It is egregious for the CAB to continue certifying a fishery that has made these changes. In practical terms, the target harvest rate on the stock has been doubled, and simultaneously the spawning stock biomass limit reference point — the minimum stock size threshold upon which target harvest rates are based — has been reduced by approximately half compared to levels previously viewed as necessary for good management of the stock,” APA wrote in its objection.
APA also contends that two thresholds critical to sustainability are assumed by the CAB to have been met, when neither currently is. It further notes that the CAB’s high scores for Russian pollock management are based on a harvest control rule and stock assessment process that were superseded in 2023.
“While it may still be true that various stock assessment models indicate the stock has been maintained at or above Bmsy levels for a significant period, they also indicate that the stock has been in persistent decline since the new harvest strategy and harvest control rule was implemented, while target reference points have been significantly altered without any biological justification,” APA wrote.
Alaska Chinook and chum salmon bycatch is the next point of contention. APA’s objection describes the ongoing crisis of declining returns in the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers, and details the steps Alaska pollock fleet operators have taken in response — including modifying trawl gear to allow more salmon to escape, developing and implementing a genetic testing program to provide real-time information on the composition of targeted schools, and adopting other operational changes to reduce salmon bycatch. These measures were nonetheless found insufficient by the CAB during APA’s own recent recertification evaluation, resulting in a condition requiring additional Chinook and chum salmon protections and the development of a Client Action Plan.
Against that backdrop, APA described the CAB’s high score for Russia’s salmon bycatch management as “untenable and indefensible.”
Seafloor habitat is the third area of dispute — one Alaska pollock harvesters are well acquainted with from ongoing discussions at the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. The issue centers on updating the definition of “pelagic trawls,” which currently excludes seafloor contact, despite recent analyses showing significant bottom contact in areas where bottom trawls are banned in part to protect the seafloor.
In its objection, APA noted that the CAB evaluating Russia’s fishery acknowledged no monitoring framework to evaluate potential changes in benthic habitat exists and that existing surveys are not designed to assess direct effects from the fishery. APA quoted the CAB report directly:
“There are no move-on rules, VME-specific closures, or integrated mechanisms to assess cumulative habitat effects across fisheries in the Russian Far East.”
“Shockingly, the report also fully acknowledges that ‘no comprehensive habitat mapping or systematic quantitative survey has been conducted in deeper slope and trench zones of the [unit of assessment]. The distribution of these minor and potentially vulnerable habitats remains incompletely documented, and the spatial extent of all habitat types across the managed area is not fully known,'” APA wrote.
APA said the certification “entirely avoids these glaring information deficiencies on habitat and the complete lack of management measures to protect Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems by simply stating that the fishery never contacts the seafloor (except in an ’emergency’).”
In his letter to Howes, Commissioner Vincent-Lang drew a direct contrast between the standards applied to Alaskan fisheries and those applied to Russia.
“[The MSC] consistently holds high-performing and high-information fisheries — especially Alaskan fisheries — to the highest standards. This is precisely because of our world-class management system’s transparency. The opacity and dishonesty of the Russian system, by contrast, is operating to give the WBS pollock fishery a free pass,” Vincent-Lang wrote.
“The WBS pollock fishery has been certified without even the most rudimentary system for identifying and protecting vulnerable seafloor habitat in place. This failure should be an embarrassment for the Marine Stewardship Council,” he added.
Howes is expected to respond this month.//
AKFish.news: Read more about the MSC’s Pay to Play program for certifying fisheries
Client seafood companies that want to showcase the prominent MSC blue label on their brands and packaging pay for a group of independent, third-party certifiers to assess the merits of a fishery initially, and then every five years thereafter. They also pay fees directly to the MSC for use of its label, which has become a function of doing business by seafood providers around the globe, ensuring customers that they are making fish-friendly purchases.
But the Marine Stewardship Council has drawn increasing criticism over the years for certifying fisheries that are harming marine ecosystems and have high rates of bycatch.
