ShareThisA key member of a U.S. Senate panel is drafting legislation to plug a hole in government oversight that allows seafood merchants to routinely rip off customers by substituting cheap fish for more expensive fillets.
The effort by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, to reel in such fish fraud comes after a Scripps Television Station Group's investigation found the practice to be pervasive in restaurants in four cities: Kansas City, Mo.; Phoenix; Baltimore and Tampa, Fla.
Snowe said she wants the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which currently inspects only 2 percent of imported seafood, to ratchet up its checks.
"Frankly, this is unacceptable," Snowe, the top Republican on the Senate Commerce subcommittee on oceans and fisheries, said in a statement. "This issue highlights the serious gaps that currently exist within our nation's system for ensuring seafood quality and safety."
Snowe is working with other members of the Senate Commerce committee to develop legislation that will improve seafood labeling, quality assurance and safety. Earlier, at her request, the U.S. Government Accountability Office examined the issue and also found rampant fraud and little oversight.
The senator is also pushing for better government coordination. "We will close the gaps that currently allow our consumers to be misled into buying and consuming lower-value -- and potentially unsafe -- seafood products," she said.
Fish fraud undermines consumer confidence and distorts prices for higher-value fish, Snowe said.
Scripps used DNA testing to find that 23 out of 38 meals served at restaurants in the four U.S. cities were incorrectly marketed as fancier fare. Common substitutions included catfish for grouper and tilapia for red snapper.
Species swapping occurs on several levels, the Scripps investigation found. Some restaurants admitted they intentionally listed the pricier fish on their menus but served the cheaper fillets. In other cases, restaurants blamed distributors for the misrepresentation.
After learning of cheap shellfish being sold as lobster, and similar substitutions for salmon and grouper, Snowe tapped the GAO, the watchdog arm of Congress, in 2007 to investigate.
In February, the GAO recommended that the FDA should work more closely on identifying and preventing the fraud with two other federal agencies: National Marine Fisheries Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, and Customs and Border Protection, which is part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
But budget constraints are hamstringing federal oversight efforts. An FDA spokesman has said fish fraud isn't a top priority, and a NOAA official said he simply didn't have the manpower to conduct fish spot-checks more than once every month or two.
Currently, the fisheries service examines the quality of only a third of fish imports under a voluntary program in which large purchasers, such as supermarkets and restaurant chains, sign up for the tests, said Spencer Garrett, director of the National Seafood Inspection Laboratory in Pascagoula, Miss. Garrett supports mandatory inspections to determine if fish is what it's purported to be.
Snowe may look to the United States' northern neighbor for legislative and regulatory ideas. Canada has received wide praise for its seafood inspection program, which places extra scrutiny on seafood importers that are new or have a poor track record, said Gavin Gibbons, spokesman for the National Fisheries Institute, a Washington-based industry trade group. Canadian authorities also work with the seafood industry there to keep on top of emerging scams.
The most important thing that a fish fraud law should do? Simply require federal authorities to inspect more seafood imports, Gibbons said.
"Any legislation really should mandate that the FDA enforce the laws on the books," Gibbons said. "The mandate to inspect just hasn't been there."
(E-mail Isaac Wolf at wolfi(at)shns.com.)
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.scrippsnews.com)
