"Pharmed Shrimp" Response to Public Citizen.org article

From: Scott Zimmerman (marineaquaculture@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Apr 20 2005 - 16:21:47 PDT

  • Next message: c_yeung: "RE: HACCP - cooking seafood"

    To Whom it May Concern,

    This is the second round of a continuing debate between myself and the
    Public Citizen.org in regards to the aquaculture industry. If you would like
    transcripts of the previous debate please visit
    http://www.growfish.com.au/content.asp?contentid=3390
    If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact me.

    Sincerely,

    Scott

    P.S- Please forward, my response is below!

    World Bank’s Destructive Policies About Shrimp Farming Endanger Communities
    in Developing Countries
    Public Citizen Releases Final Report in Its ‘Pharmed Shrimp’ Series, Focuses
    on International Finance Institutions’ Role

    WASHINGTON -- For the past 30 years, millions of dollars in development aid
    has been funneled into shrimp farming, with the intent of improving
    impoverished conditions along rural coastal areas in developing countries.
    But in reality, shrimp farming has damaged the very communities for which it
    was meant to be a savior, said Public Citizen today as it released its fifth
    and final report, part of its Pharmed Shrimp series, as the annual World
    Bank/IMF Spring meetings in Washington, D.C., come to a close.

    The latest report, Fishy Currency: How International Finance Institutions
    Fund Shrimp Farms, is available by clicking here. Shrimp aquaculture uses an
    intensive factory-farming model, and most shrimp farms are in Southeast Asia
    and South America, where labor and environmental standards are considerably
    weaker than in the United States.

    Since the 1970s, development banks such as the World Bank, the International
    Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Asian Development Bank have
    dumped money in the form of loans or direct aid into many countries to build
    large aquaculture sites and processing facilities. Early on, funds to
    promote and expand shrimp farming were targeted primarily at Asian countries
    such as India and China, but also to several countries within Latin America,
    particularly Ecuador.

    “After 25 years of investing in shrimp farms, these banks refuse to
    acknowledge that shrimp farming contributes to the export-oriented economic
    model that drives countries into further poverty instead of elevating them,”
    said Andrianna Natsoulas, field director for the shrimp campaign at Public
    Citizen. “This vicious pattern creates larger divides between the rich and
    poor and deprives communities of the right to determine what is best for
    their own lives and livelihoods.”

    For example, Ecuador was an early recipient of international development
    money as well as private investment from foreign investors. Between 1979 and
    1985, shrimp farms grew 20-fold, thanks in part to an increased demand from
    consumers in the United States and Japan and loans from development banks.
    Members of the Ecuadorian government, including the president, were early
    investors in this industry. In total, the World Bank financed $956 million
    in loans to Ecuador between 1980 and 2000, much of which was targeted for
    shrimp aquaculture.

    The World Bank claims that shrimp farming is a good investment because it
    provides food security to native people. However, most of the shrimp is
    exported to first-world consuming countries such as the United States,
    Europe and Japan. This was true of Ecuador. Further, Ecuador’s coast lines
    are now littered with both abandoned and new shrimp farms.

    The report concludes that the immense influx of development money has
    contributed to the decline of many of these countries, rather than improving
    their conditions. With damaged coastlines, many communities are left without
    any opportunity to find work. Coastal ecosystems are not regenerating after
    the massive clearing of mangroves, leaving permanent environmental damage.

    “The development banks and agencies continue to support shrimp farms through
    emergency aid, as was the case in the December 2004 tsunami in Asia. They
    only perpetuate the problem, while coastal communities are relocated inland,
    far from the ocean, upon which they depend,” said Natsoulas. “Public Citizen
    calls on the international finance institutions to stop funding aquaculture
    expansion and maintenance.”

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------0

    To Whom it May Concern,

    Once again the Public Citizen is bashing the aquaculture industry as a
    whole, and once again I will take action to this irresponsible behavior.
    Again, the Public Citizen has unwittingly lumped shrimp monoculture
    practices together with all other forms of aquaculture. By continuing this
    behavior, the Public Citizen has undoubtedly proven that “fear mongering” is
    clearly part of their agenda. Recently the Public Citizen called on
    international finance institutions (i.e, World Bank) to stop funding
    aquaculture expansion and maintenance. This request is unsubstantiated and
    downright silly.

    To make the Public Citizens statements even more ridiculous, they are
    claiming to be a supporter of the People's Food Sovereignty Network (PFSN),
    an operation sponsored by leading political and economic powers such as the
    United States and the European Union. The PFSN is financially supported
    through global institutions such as the World Trade Organization,
    International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The aquaculture technologies
    realized through this funding helps to alleviate hunger, build economies and
    reduce environmental degradation in many countries. By circulating deceptive
    propaganda about the aquaculture industry, the Public Citizen is
    thoughtlessly attacking the funding sources that their partners at PFSN
    support. To ask international finance institutions to stop funding these
    operations would be sabotage. The reality behind this contradiction is that
    the Public Citizen is paying its bills by preaching a loaded activist
    agenda. The Public Citizen, and other operations of the sort, are sadly
    uninformed about the scope of aquaculture and its benefits.

    I am 29 years old, a MSc. aquaculture student, and the owner of an
    aquaculture related website. I believe the world has the right to be
    informed about the types of aquaculture practiced and how they affect us and
    our earth’s ecosystems. You could say I have an agenda to support
    aquaculture. On the contrary, I am not a supporter of shrimp monoculture
    farming practices or any crop production that is unsustainable. In many
    cases, monoculture shrimp farming has destroyed ecosystems and created a
    false sense of economic security. Many farms are upgrading their systems
    with polyculture based agri-aquaculture technologies. Mangrove habitats are
    being restored through these practices. The use of chemicals and antibiotics
    has also been addressed by governments and actions have been taken to reduce
    their use. The aquaculture industry is making great progress by integrating
    renewable sources of energy such as fuel cell, biodiesel, solar, wind and
    hydro (water driven) systems. Innovative environmentally sustainable
    approaches have proven to work and are quickly becoming the standard. If the
    Public Citizen supports “clean, safe and sustainable energy sources; and
    environmental protections”, then it must be aware of these and other
    approaches to crop production. It’s quite obvious that promoting these
    technologies is not part of your agenda.

    The Public Citizen is obviously a very powerful organization. With that
    being said, the public does not need inexperienced organizations to
    encourage phony perspectives. It is now apparent that the Public Citizen is
    bashing the aquaculture industry as part of a biased agenda. If the Public
    Citizen has a beef to pick about the unsustainablity of one type of
    aquaculture, it would be appropriate to begin the argument with a background
    pertaining to the aquaculture industry as a whole. Please discontinue your
    foolish and unjustified attack on the aquaculture industry.

    Sincerely,

    Scott Zimmerman
    Scott E. Zimmerman
    Director/Owner
    MarineAquafarms.com/SeafoodFarms.com-
    "Linking Partners for More Productive Oceans"
    http://www.marineaquafarms.com
    marineaquaculture@hotmail.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 20 2005 - 16:28:26 PDT