#seafoodfish

     Terms like 'Food' and 'Fraud' are not always heard in the same sentence. The same could also be said about 'Mislabeled' and 'Seafood', and, yet, the topic concerning mislabeled seafood has been raised time and again for a while. From coast to coast, states like Maryland [1] and California [2] have introduced bills against mislabeling seafood as a reaction to something that many would never consider: the fish labelled 'grouper' on your menu might not be grouper at all. In order to overcome the issue of seafood fraud, legislation concerning the safety of seafood has been introduced in Congress [3] to establish national standards for what's brought in, federally, and some have developed codes to ensure that what is on presented for consumption [4] is what the customer has ordered.

       Within the United States, there is a high percentage of seafood that is imported; as high as 92 percent. Of this percentage of imported seafood, a surprising amount-in the past-has been mislabeled, purchased and served across the country without much concern raised about 1) where it originated from, 2) where it was before and during importation to the country and 3) whether or not it is really the correct fish being purchased. That is, until recently. As early as 2007 [5] [6], reports revealing that seafood labels were incorrect called attention to something that has been an issue for centuries: fraudulent labeling of the food we eat. Since then, states have been taking steps to ensure that what was once a rampant issue in the seafood industry can-one day- become a faint memory of accidental involvement.

       From a broad overview, the practice of mislabeling seafood is recognized as misbranding under US law [7] and enforced by the FDA. Historically speaking, as far back as the 13th century, the problem of ensuring that food is properly labelled is neither unique to America nor a novel topic. Assisa panis et cervisiae (The Assize of Bread and Ale) is a medieval law from England enacted to ensure-among other things- the quality of bread and beer sold within the kingdom by Henry III [8]. From a less broad, more specific perspective, by enforcing legislation and coding[4] of seafood it is possible to 1) cut down on the amount of misbranding that occurs at ports and across the country and 2) act toward preventing the very real act of economic fraud on a state level [9]. 

          Furthermore, on a basic-and more personal- nutritional level, some of the greatest concerns regarding the consumption of mislabeled seafood arises with one's health. Essentially, everything that looks like 'Red Snapper', 'Grouper' or 'Monck Fish' is not such. Likewise, the consumption of mislabeled fish leads to issues with consuming-sometimes in high amount-fish not meant to frequent consumption. To add to the issue, it becomes difficult to trace where mislabeled fish comes from. With no parameters set in place to determine what the fish is, there is a decreased percentage of being able to figure out what was in the water.

      The phrase: 'There is a shark in the water', then, seems to be somewhat fitting. With the practice of mislabeled fish entering into the US market and appearing on the plates of Americans both at home and in restaurants, there is danger present. Now that legislation is becoming more frequent up and down the East and West coasts-and hopefully growing-distance can be gained. And, the ever pending danger of being 'bitten' from dangers lurking just beneath the ocean's surface is steadily decreased. That being said, though we may be far from walking in to every grocery store in America and purchasing fresh or frozen fish filet from choices with the heads still attached, progress is happening. Lastly, in regards to legislation on the safety of seafood and enforcing anti-fraud actions as a nation it seems that growing consumer awareness in this area is working toward a more source-aware consumer culture that favors proper, dependable labeling more and economic/supplier financial gains less.

-Mandy Emery