Expand Search

Welcome to Sealord

Sealord questions accuracy of WWF’s Nature Positive report

New Zealand’s largest seafood company Sealord is concerned that WWF’s report ‘A Nature Positive Aotearoa’ released today has an inaccurate understanding of the complexities of New Zealand’s commercial fishing industry.

The overarching sentiment of the report outlines the economic benefits of reversing nature loss, by driving actions within our primary sectors including the seafood industry. Sealord agrees with this approach, however positive change is not possible without an accurate picture of the current state, which is lacking in the WWF report.

Sealord’s GM Sustainability Stu Yorston says that Sealord is in full support of the nature positive movement – protecting and restoring more areas of our land, waters and seas.

“Many businesses come to nature after first tackling climate risk. For us it is the other way around – considering nature impacts is absolutely woven into our operating model because without a healthy ocean and sustainable fish populations, we have no business,” he says.

“Unfortunately, the report has a naïve understanding of the commercial fishing sector in New Zealand, therefore many of the recommendations fall short as the assertions behind them are incorrect.”

For instance, the precis to the report notes: “Meeting the GBF targets will require the industry to shift away from indiscriminate practices like bottom trawling…”

General Manager Sustainability - Stu Yorston

Stu says that about 80% of New Zealand’s commercial catch is caught by trawling and it is a highly accurate form of fishing.

“The deepsea fishing fleet has been bottom trawling across the same trawl lines for decades in targeted fishing zones that minimise further seabed impacts in virgin areas. We trawl less than 3% of New Zealand’s ocean territory each year in the same areas where the fish are. It’s the opposite of indiscriminate,” Stu says.

Other concerns with the report include:

  • The references to research regarding bottom trawling creating significant carbon emissions through the disturbance of potential carbon sinks (Sala et al, 2021, Atwood et al, 2024) have been debunked by leading scientists (Epstien et al. 2022, Hiddink et al. 2023, Hilborn at al. 2023).
  • The suggestion to use purse seine nets to catch New Zealand species reflects a misunderstanding of the New Zealand fishing environment and the species that are within our waters. For most species, this is simply not feasible due to the depths fished at, fish behaviour (they are on the bottom), and the inefficiencies of purse seining (requires chase vessels, helicopters etc). It is more relevant for schooling fish such as tuna, which is a limited fishery in New Zealand. Additionally, long line fishing is not an option for most of our largest fisheries like hoki, oreo dory or blue whiting.
  • Fishers do not decide how much of each species may be caught – they cannot choose to overfish. Catch limits are set annually by Fisheries New Zealand using world leading science with a highly precautionary approach.
  • The report describes a future where the Quota Management System (QMS) is responsive to fisheries and ocean data, and protects from overfishing. The inference that the current system does not do these fundamental aspects of fisheries management is incorrect. That is exactly what the QMS does. Like all institutions there are processes that could be updated or improved, but the report fails to address what these are.
  • Throughout the seafood section of the report there are references to issues that are well publicised in the worst global fisheries (e.g. systemic overfishing, abandoned/lost/discarded fishing gear, unconstrained bycatch, chemical use in aquaculture). It is misleading to suggest serious issues that are not the reality in New Zealand fisheries without any critical analysis in support of the assertion.

Back to top