ACCORDING to www.seafish.org, “seafood traceability and labelling regulations ensure that seafood can be tracked through the supply chain and is described accurately to consumers”.
Furthermore, it also says that “seafood traceability is the ability to fully trace a product from the point of sale back to its point of origin. This is required to follow general food law, fisheries control and fish marketing”.
What are the seafood traceability and labelling regulations in the Philippines? Are these being enforced strictly? Are the violators being reported?
If yes, where can we access the information? And who is doing it? Presumably it is either the Department of Agriculture in general, or Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources in particular.
But what about the imported fish products? Who is monitoring those?
It seems that the jury is still out when it comes to whether or not cream dory or pangasius is safe to eat or not. Some say it is, but some say it is not.
Some say that the imported fish from Vietnam is not safe because it is grown in the Mekong Delta where the river is dirty and toxic. In fairness, there are already local farms here that are producing clean fish.
But how do we know which is which? The answer to that question may not yet be clear, but what is clear to me is that a database is needed, a with a system that will use bar codes and or QR codes.
These technologies are now common nowadays, but if anyone still needs help in setting up these systems, just let me know.
***
TILAPIA IS AN INVASIVE SPECIES
The truth may be too hard to swallow, but the truth is, tilapia is an invasive species and is doing harm to the environment in general, and the native fish species in particular.
Tilapia may have been introduced in the Philippines many years ago, but it does not mean that it is already “native” and should already be accepted and tolerated.
As far as I know, there is no awareness among the general population that tilapia is an invasive species. There also appears to be no awareness among the government agencies that it is invasive, and that is why there appears to be no effort to control or eradicate it. In other words, we are simply accepting the reality that it is here, and it is here to stay.
Some might argue that tilapia is now part of our food supply and is therefore part of our food security. On the other hand, I would also argue that tilapia threatens our food security, because it eats the eggs and the fingerlings of our native fish species, thus reducing our actual food production.
To be clear, not all non-native fish are destructive, even if they are all invasive. For example, milkfish may be non-native, but it is generally not destructive, that is why it is very popular as a source of human food.
However, milkfish is considered as an invasive species in other countries, because they compete with native fish for food and habitat.
For whatever it is worth, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources should look into the economics of continuing with tilapia or not. Is it good for the economy or not?/PN
