The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC)
Date Published:
11/2002
Description:
For many communities of color, low-income communities, tribes, and other indigenous peoples, there are no real alternatives to eating and using fish, aquatic plants, and wildlife. For many members of these groups it is entirely impractical to “switch” to “substitutes” when the fish and other resources on which they rely have become contaminated. There are numerous and often insurmountable obstacles to seeking alternatives (e.g., fishing “elsewhere,” throwing back “undesirable” species of fish, adopting different preparation methods, or substituting beef, chicken or tofu). For some, not fishing and not eating fish are unimaginable for cultural, traditional, or religious reasons. For the fishing peoples of the Pacific Northwest, for example, fish and fishing are necessary for survival as a people – they are vital as a matter of cultural flourishing and self-determination.
When health and environmental agencies respond to contamination and its impacts, they typically employ one or both of two general strategies: risk avoidance, whereby risk-bearers are encouraged or required to change the practices that expose them to contamination (e.g., through fish consumption advisories, directed to those who eat fish) or risk reduction, whereby riskproducers are required to cleanup, reduce, or prevent contamination (e.g., through water quality standards, applied to industrial sources that discharge contaminants into surrounding waters). In either event, agencies rely on assumptions about fish consumption rates, practices, and needs that reflect the circumstances of the general population, but often are not reflective enough of the circumstances of affected communities and tribes. Agencies’ approaches to risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication similarly fall short of taking into account that affected groups consume and use fish, aquatic plants, and wildlife in different cultural, traditional, religious, historical, economic, and legal contexts than the “average American.” These observations have
policy implications that are taken up in the remaining chapters.
Please help us keep our resource pages current by reporting any broken links or outdated information by using the link below: Report Broken Links, Missing Pages, or Accessibility Issues Report form
