Seafood Import Bans to Reduce Whale and Dolphin Deaths Under Stronger Marine Mammal Protection Act – Turtle Island Restoration Network

Report on U.S. Seafood Imports and Marine Mammal Protection in Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Economic and Environmental Context

The United States holds a significant position in the global seafood market, impacting international progress toward several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As the world’s largest importer of seafood, U.S. trade policies are critical to achieving SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 14 (Life Below Water).

• Annual Imports: Over $25 billion
• Source Countries: More than 130 nations

A critical issue is the long-standing failure of the U.S. to fully enforce its Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This legislation is designed to ensure that imported seafood is harvested using methods that align with U.S. standards for protecting marine mammals, directly supporting the targets of SDG 14.

Impact on Marine Ecosystems and SDG 14: Life Below Water

Foreign fishing practices that do not meet U.S. standards have a severe negative impact on marine biodiversity, undermining global efforts to achieve SDG 14. The goal aims to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development.

• An estimated 650,000 marine mammals, including whales, dolphins, and seals, are killed annually as bycatch in foreign fishing operations.
• A recent determination by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) identified 240 foreign fisheries that fail to comply with the marine mammal protection standards mandated by the MMPA.

These statistics represent a direct contravention of SDG Target 14.2, which calls for the sustainable management and protection of marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts.

Chronology of Advocacy and Institutional Accountability (SDG 16 & 17)

The effort to enforce the MMPA exemplifies the importance of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). A multi-decade campaign by non-governmental organizations has been necessary to hold government institutions accountable for implementing environmental law.

1. 2008: Turtle Island Restoration Network and the Center for Biological Diversity filed a petition to ban swordfish imports from non-compliant nations, which was largely ignored.
2. 2014: The aforementioned organizations, joined by Oceana, initiated a lawsuit against the U.S. government for its failure to act, resulting in a court-approved settlement to begin enforcement.
3. 2024: A subsequent lawsuit led to a final agreement mandating that the U.S. ban seafood imports from nations that do not adopt equivalent marine mammal protections by January 1, 2026.

This timeline demonstrates a successful partnership (SDG 17) working to strengthen institutional effectiveness and accountability (SDG 16).

Current Challenges and the Path to Responsible Consumption (SDG 12)

Despite progress achieved through legal advocacy, the implementation of these protective measures faces significant opposition. The seafood industry has filed a lawsuit to block the new enforcement rules, presenting a barrier to achieving SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). The MMPA requires foreign fisheries to adopt the same protective standards as U.S. fisheries, which include:

• Modified fishing gear to reduce bycatch
• Acoustic “pingers” to deter marine mammals
• Time-area closures to protect habitats during sensitive periods

The industry’s resistance to these established conservation methods challenges the transition to sustainable supply chains and responsible consumption patterns.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Continued Vigilance

The struggle to enforce the MMPA highlights that achieving meaningful environmental change requires persistent oversight and advocacy. The final agreement represents a significant step toward aligning U.S. import policies with global sustainability commitments. However, industry opposition threatens to reverse this progress. Continued vigilance is essential to ensure that U.S. consumption no longer contributes to the degradation of marine ecosystems, thereby upholding the principles of SDG 12 and SDG 14 and reinforcing the role of strong, accountable institutions as outlined in SDG 16.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights issues that are directly connected to several Sustainable Development Goals. The primary focus on marine life, international trade, and legal frameworks links the content to the following SDGs:

• SDG 14: Life Below Water – This is the most prominent SDG addressed. The entire article revolves around the protection of marine mammals (whales, dolphins, seals) from harmful fishing practices, which is a core component of conserving and sustainably using the oceans and marine resources.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production – The article discusses the role of the United States as the world’s largest importer of seafood. The push to enforce the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) on these imports is a direct effort to ensure that consumption patterns in the U.S. do not contribute to unsustainable and destructive fishing practices abroad, thereby promoting responsible consumption.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals – The article touches upon the implementation of U.S. law (the MMPA) on products imported from over 130 countries. This involves international cooperation and policy coherence, as it requires foreign nations to align their fishing standards with those of the U.S. to access its market. This relates to strengthening the means of implementation and global partnerships for sustainable development.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s discussion of marine mammal protection, sustainable fishing, and international trade regulations, the following specific targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 14 (Life Below Water):
   • Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to achieve healthy and productive oceans. The article’s focus on preventing the death of 650,000 marine mammals annually from entanglement in fishing gear is a direct effort to protect marine ecosystems from the adverse impacts of foreign fishing fleets.
   • Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible. The effort to ban seafood from non-compliant fisheries addresses destructive fishing practices that lead to high levels of bycatch (marine mammals).
   • Target 14.c: Enhance the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources by implementing international law as reflected in UNCLOS. The article is centered on the enforcement of a national law (the MMPA) with international implications, requiring other nations to adopt equivalent protections, which aligns with the principle of using legal frameworks to conserve marine resources.
2. Under SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production):
   • Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. By demanding that imported seafood be sourced from fisheries that do not harm marine mammals, the U.S. is leveraging its market power to promote the sustainable management of marine resources globally.
3. Under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals):
   • Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development. The article describes the struggle to align U.S. trade policy (seafood imports) with its environmental policy (the MMPA). The final agreement to ban imports from non-compliant nations is a move to enhance this policy coherence.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article contains several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicator for SDG 14 Targets: The number of marine mammals killed annually due to entanglement in foreign fishing gear. The article explicitly states this number is an “estimated 650,000 marine mammals.” A reduction in this number would be a direct measure of progress in protecting marine ecosystems.
• Indicator for SDG 14 and SDG 17 Targets: The number of foreign fisheries that comply with U.S. marine mammal standards. The article mentions that “NOAA determined that 240 foreign fisheries do not comply.” Tracking the decrease in the number of non-compliant fisheries over time would serve as a clear indicator of the effectiveness of the MMPA’s enforcement on international partners.
• Indicator for SDG 12 and SDG 17 Targets: The volume and value of seafood imports banned due to non-compliance. The article notes the U.S. imports over “$25 billion worth of products each year.” The value of imports that are halted from non-compliant nations by the January 1, 2026 deadline would indicate the economic leverage being used to enforce sustainable practices.
• Indicator for SDG 14.c and 17.14 Targets: The number of countries that adopt and implement marine mammal protection measures equivalent to U.S. standards. The core requirement of the legal settlement is for “nations that do not adopt equivalent protections for marine mammals” to be subject to import bans. The number of countries that successfully implement these protections is a key policy indicator.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: seaturtles.org