Jul. 24--Chefs and seafood retailers are wading into one of the hottest natural resource issues of the day: fisheries management. 

It's no longer unusual for chefs to refuse to serve a species they thinks to be at risk of extinction or for a retailer to promote seafoods that are abundant and part of a healthy marine ecosystem. 

Most say they're driven by the desire to do right by the environment. Some also say they must listen to their customers' concerns or risk a consumer backlash. 

The nationwide boycott of Chilean seabass is a potent example of the new activism. 

"I have made it a policy of mine never to serve Chilean seabass," said Billy Hahn, executive chef at Jake's Famous Crawfish, a Portland landmark since 1892. "I refuse to sell it." 

Chilean seabass, also known as Patagonian toothfish, came into vogue in the 1990s in U.S. restaurants and fish markets. With rising demand for the firm, oil-rich fish came pirate fishing fleets eager to cash in on its popularity -- even if it meant skirting catch limits and environmental regulations. 

Contrary to what some restaurants and retailers tell their customers, the U.S. government does not consider the Chilean seabass to be endangered. But in some areas, the seabass are being overfished. 

That is potentially a problem because Chilean seabass are a long-lived species -- living as long as 50 years -- and reproduce slowly, said Susan Buchanan, a National Marine Fisheries Service spokeswoman. 

The U.S. government estimates that in 2000, more than 16,000 tons of Chilean seabass were legally caught from an internationally regulated harvest area in the Antarctic Ocean. But more than 32,000 tons may have been taken illegally from those same waters, the fisheries service said. 

Impatient with regulators, the National Environmental Trust began a boycott campaign in February called "Take a Pass on Chilean Seabass." The Washington-based conservation group says more than 530 restaurants have signed on, including several in Oregon. 

A number of restaurants not officially part of the National Environmental Trust boycott also have stopped serving Chilean seabass. And it's not just the white tablecloth crowd. 

Red Lobster, with 660 restaurants in the United States and Canada, dropped Chilean seabass from the menu in the past year because of "sustainability" concerns, said Wendy Spirduso, communications director for the Orlando, Fla.-based chain. 

Some retailers also have pulled Chilean seabass. 

"We've discontinued selling swordfish, Chilean seabass, orange roughy and marlin," said Mark Cockcroft, national seafood buyer for Wild Oats Markets, a chain of 103 stores that includes Nature's markets in Oregon. "We are also taking a real hard look currently at almost all species of shark, though we haven't made a formal statement about that." 

Whole Foods Markets, with 133 stores nationwide, also does not sell Chilean seabass. Justin Moore, seafood team leader for the Portland Whole Foods store, said he directs customers instead to black cod. Not quite as buttery, Moore said, but it comes from what he considers a more stable fishery. 

Throughout June and July, videos playing in Whole Foods' seafood sections also have directed Whole Foods customers to another environmentally preferred fish: Alaska wild salmon. 

Strain on fisheries All of this comes at a time when Americans are consuming more seafood: 15 to 16 pounds a person each year, compared with the 10.3 pounds a person in 1960 and 12.5 pounds a person in 1980, according to the National Fisheries Institute, an industry association. 

At the same time, about half the world's fisheries are being fished to capacity. 

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reports that 47 percent to 50 percent of stocks are "fully exploited," meaning that catches have either reached or are close to maximum limits. Another 15 percent to 18 percent are "overexploited," and 9 percent to 10 percent have been "depleted or are recovering from depletion." 

The seafood industry is less than thrilled about this surge of interest in ocean ecosystems from people who are not scientists. 

Fisheries management is best left to the experts, said Thor Lassen, president of Ocean Trust, a research and conservation foundation partly financed by the fishing industry. "It involves very complicated choices that have to do with the biology of species, their life cycles, how they respond to various changes in the oceans, etc." 

When there's a boycott, Lassen said, "it's not environmentalists or chefs making the sacrifice, it's coastal communities." 

Rod Moore, executive director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association, suggests that activists with an agenda are manipulating chefs and retailers. 

The conservation groups providing information to chefs and retailers and lists of environmentally appropriate seafoods to consumers are the same groups working to affect fisheries management on the political and regulatory level, Moore said. 

That's simply good strategy, said James Leape, deputy director of the conservation program for the David and Lucile Packard Foundation in Los Altos, Calif. 

In 2000 and 2001, the Packard Foundation awarded $26 million in marine fisheries conservation grants. They included support for marine reserves and money for fisheries management reform. More than $7 million was given to projects aimed at educating the general public. 

"One of the principal concerns of the Packard Foundation is the preservation of natural resources, particularly in the oceans, and one of the greatest threats is overfishing," Leape said. "We have seen that raising consumer awareness and concern among restaurants and retailers about a particular fishery can really make a difference." 

Diners educated The Monterey Bay Aquarium used a $2.2 million Packard grant to update an Web site that rates different species of fish for overfishing, habitat damage and other factors. The aquarium also created "Seafood Watch" wallet cards designed to take to restaurants. More than 600,000 of the cards and seafood guides have been distributed since 2000, said Jennifer Dianto, Seafood Watch program manager at the aquarium. 

Chefs and retailers around the country know they must be prepared to deal with customers who arrive with the aquarium's seafood card in hand. But in a business in which 12-hour shifts are the norm, some chefs worry about their lack of time to stay informed about complicated, rapidly changing fisheries management issues. 

Five years ago, students attending the Culinary Institute in Hyde Park, N.Y., rarely engaged in discussions about the environmental pros and cons of certain seafoods. Today it's part of the curriculum. 

"One of the things the Culinary Institute does not do is to support any one view," said Corky Clark, professor of culinary arts. "What we try to do is cause some analytical thinking with our students so they are equipped to go out and gather as much information as they can and make their own decisions." 

Some working chefs say they routinely review conservation group Web sites, government reports and industry sources. 

"For me, it's very difficult to be certain that the information which is given to me is real," said Eric Ripert, chef at Le Bernardin, a four-star seafood restaurant in Manhattan. "I don't know. I don't have enough information to know, for example, if Chilean seabass is really disappearing or if it's political pressure." 

Despite being uncertain of its status, Ripert pulled Chilean seabass. Le Bernardin's menu also informs diners that the restaurant will not serve swordfish to support efforts "to recover the species." 

"I don't wish to be a spokesman for any campaign," Ripert said. "I do it as somebody who has a conscience and is caring." 

Others are more comfortable in the role of activist-chef. 

"It's what makes food interesting to me," said Greg Higgins, chef and co-owner of Higgins Restaurant in Portland. 

In the past few years, Higgins has traveled the country talking to fellow chefs about environmentally preferable seafood. He's even offered blind "salmon tastings" comparing wild with farm-raised species. Conservationists criticize fish farming for the its pollution and the threat farmed fish pose to the wild gene pool. 

Higgins serves neither Chilean seabass nor farmed fish. 

A lot of chefs think they're being "chastised or judged" when their customers bring out seafood cards or ask about the environmental consequences attached to the fish on the menu, Higgins said. He doesn't. 

"I don't think there's any question," he said, "that the more you read about marine biology, the more you realize how big the problems are." 

-----To see more of The Oregonian, or to subscribe the newspaper, go to http://www.oregonian.com 

(c) 2002, The Oregonian, Portland, Ore. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. WFMI, OATS,