Exposed: Aussies duped by fishy seafood cons, study shows

More than one in 10 seafood products on sale in Australia is not what it claims to be, a new study has found. See how you can spot the difference.

Exclusive: Consumers are paying more than they should for seafood because of dodgy labelling — and sometimes inadvertently eating threatened or vulnerable species.

A new study has found more than one in 10 seafood products on sale across Australia is not what it claims to be.

Researchers sampled 672 seafood products for sale in fish markets, restaurants, and supermarkets, and in 11.8 per cent of cases found clear evidence of mislabelling, with the DNA of the product not matching what the packaging, menu or market signage indicated.

Both fresh and packaged products were tested.

Researchers from Minderoo Foundation sampled more than 600 seafood products for sale. Picture: Supplied

The researchers, from Twiggy and Nicola Forrest’s Minderoo Foundation, found 15 per cent of imported seafood was mislabelled, compared to 9 per cent for Australian product, and shark and snapper were the fish most likely to be substituted with another species.

“We found that one in three of the shark products were not the correct species and one in four of the snappers was not what it said on the package,” said lead researcher Dr Chris Wilcox, Director of the Fisheries and Conservation program at the Foundation.

This product was sold as flake in an Victorian restaurant but DNA testing showed it was school shark. Picture: Supplied

This too was sold as flake in a Victorian restaurant, but DNA testing showed it was school shark. Picture: Supplied

Australian seafood retailers were on Thursday selling whole snapper for approximately $22 per kilo, while some of the substitutes were a few dollars less.

The same applied to flake fillets, at $24 per kilo, up to $10 more than some alternatives discovered.

“Consumers should be able to rely on the labels to represent what’s actually in the package. We wouldn’t accept that in other products so we shouldn’t have to accept it in seafood,” Dr Wilcox said.

This product was sold as flake in a Queensland restaurant, but DNA testing showed it was a type of elephant fish; which are not actually sharks. Picture: Supplied

This product was labelled as gummy shark in a NT fish market, but DNA testing showed it was school shark. Picture: Supplied

Emily Harrison, co-author and Oceans Policy Manager at the Foundation, said restaurants had the highest rate of mislabelling in the study, with 18.8 per cent, while the rate at fish markets was 11.3 per cent and in supermarkets it was 4.6 per cent. In a number of cases the DNA sampling showed the fish being sold actually belonged to a threatened or vulnerable species, she added.

Restaurants “don’t legally have to disclose what the species is or where it’s from,” Ms Harrison said, but noted there was generally much greater information about providence offered to diners if they were ordering meat rather than fish.

Australian fish eaters generally assume the “checks and balances have already been done before the point of sale,” Ms Harrison said, but the reality was there a need for better regulation when it came to imported fish.

“Australia has no framework in place when we import our seafood. We capture very minimal information at the border, only product type and weight, and product type is not species type,” she said.

“And given 65 per cent of the seafood we’re consuming is imported … there needs to be a more comprehensive framework in place, from the point of sale, going right back to the border and the point of catch.”

Researchers from Minderoo Foundation sampled 672 seafood products for sale in fish markets, restaurants, and supermarkets and found more than one in ten seafood products on sale across Australia is not what it claims to be. Picture: Supplied

While incidents of mislabelling can be reported to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Ms Harrison said diners with concerns about their seafood should start by asking a few questions of staff.

“You can start to see if the venue have that information present and they can confidently say where [the seafood] comes from,” she said.

“If they can’t answer the basic questions, what it is, where it comes from or how it was caught, it’s really then on the consumers to make an informed decision if they still want to have that product.”

Researchers at Andrew Twiggy Forrest’s Minderoo Foundation found 15 per cent of imported seafood was mislabelled, compared to 9 per cent for Australian product, and shark and snapper were the fish most likely to be substituted with another species.Picture: Colin Murty/The Australian

The research, published in Scientific Reports, comes as that industry consultation closes on new country of origin labelling laws for seafood being considered by the federal government. New country of origin regulations are expected to mandate the accurate labelling of seafood in hospitality settings.

Assistant Trade Minister Tim Ayres said Australians “should be able to easily find out where their food comes from”.

“Making seafood labelling clearer, simpler and mandatory will mean people will know if they are purchasing premium local produce,” he said.

The Seafood Industry Association declined to comment on the findings from the Minderoo Foundation research.

FAST FACTS ON POPULAR AUSTRALIAN FISH

Snapper: It has a firm flesh and turns a pearly white colour upon cooking. It has a buttery and sweet flavour.

Flake: It has a mild flavour, a soft texture and clean white appearance when cooked. It is boneless.

Bream: It has a clean yet rich meaty flavour, without that strong fishy taste.

Barramundi: It has white, medium-firm flesh and, like Snapper, tastes buttery, rich and sweet.