FISHY BUSINESS · Every day in homes, schools, hospitals, restaurants ... Market Reputation.4 As...

Office of the New York StateAttorney General

Barbara D. UnderwoodAttorney General

December 2018

FISHY BUSINESS

REPORT

SEAFOOD FRAUD AND MISLABELING IN NEW YORK STATE SUPERMARKETS

Executive Summary

Something fishy is going on at supermarket seafood counters. Consumers think theyarebuying lemonsole, red snapper,orwild salmon,or anyoneofdozensof seafoodoptions.But too often, they get something else entirely.They unknowingly take home a cheaper, lessenvironmentallysustainable,orlesshealthyfish.It’sabait-and-switch,whichcheatsconsumersandviolatesconsumerprotectionlaws.

Fromlate2017through2018,theNewYorkStateOfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral(“OAG”)undertook thefirstmajorgovernment investigation in theU.S. to target seafood fraudat retailsupermarket chains.OAG purchased seafood based on availability at 155 locations across 29supermarketbrands,targetingseafoodfallingintoninedistinctcategories.AnacademiclaboratorythenidentifiedthespeciesusingDNAtesting.

Theresultsweredisturbing.Keyfindingsinclude:

• Morethanoneinfour(26.92%)seafoodpurchaseswithanidentifiablebarcodewasmislabeled.1About two-thirds of the supermarket brands reviewed had at least oneinstanceofsuspectedmislabeling.

• Asmall subsetof supermarketbrandswas responsible for avastlydisproportionateshareofsuspectedmislabeling.Ofthe12chainswith10ormoresamplestested,fivehad ratesof suspectedmislabeling that exceeded50%.Thesefive are subject to anongoingOAGconsumerfraudinvestigation.

• Whilemislabelingaffectedvirtuallyeverytestedseafoodcategory,therewasrampant mislabelingofcertainspecies.Theresultssuggestthatconsumerswhobuylemonsole,redsnapper,andgrouperaremorelikelytoreceiveanentirelydifferentfish.Similarly,consumerswhoboughtwhatwasadvertisedas“wild”salmonoftenactuallyreceivedfarm-raisedsalmoninstead.Suchconsumershadoftenpaidmoremoney—onaverage34%more—toavoidfarmraisedfish.

• Thesubstitutesweretypicallycheaper,lessdesirablespeciesthanthedesiredspecies.Snapperssoldasredsnapper,forexample,tendedtosellforhalfasmuchwhenproperlylabeledasanothertypeofsnapper.Somesubstitutes(e.g., lanesnapper),hadhighermercurylevelsorcamefromlesssustainablefisheriesthanthedesiredspecies,raisingconsumersafetyandenvironmentalsustainabilityissues.

• Seafood mislabeling occurred across most regions of New York, but was mostwidespread downstate.NewYorkCity had a staggeringmislabeling rate (42.65%),with similarlyhigh rates ofmislabelingonLong Island (40.63%) andonly slightlylowerinWestchesterandRocklandCounties(32.43%).

1ThesectionsbelowprovidekeydetailsonthemethodsOAGusedtotestseafoodpurchasesandidentifymislabeling,andcertainlimitationsassociatedwiththeresults.

Solvingtheseafoodfraudproblemrequiresindustry-widereforms,atallstagesofthesupplychain.Thereportconcludeswithadescriptionofsomeofthebestpracticesalreadyineffectatcertainsupermarkets.

I. Why Do Consumers Choose Seafood?

Everydayinhomes,schools,hospitals,restaurants,andinstitutionsacrossNewYorkStateandaround the country, seafood ison themenu. In2015, the averageAmericanconsumedanestimated15.5poundsoffishandotherseafood.2Highinprotein,lowindietaryfat,andrichinomega-threefattyacids,theFoodandDrugAdministration(“FDA”)recommendsthattheaverageAmericaneat8to12ouncesofavarietyofseafoodeachweek.3

Tosatisfyconsumerdemand,supermarketsandotherseafoodpurveyorsinNewYorkoffer

consumersadiversearrayofseafoodoptions.Theserunthegamutfromlocallysourcedoysters,summerflounder,andmackerellandedinMontaukandotherLongIslandports,totuna,catfish,andkingcrabsflowninfromotherpartsofthecountryorfromacrosstheglobe.

Butnotallseafoodisequallycoveted.Consumerswillpayapremiumpriceforcertainspecies, while deliberately avoiding others. Factors beyond flavor and texture play a role inconsumerchoice,andconsumersmayfavorcertainspeciesthattheycouldnoteasilydistinguishbyappearanceortastealone.Thefollowingseafoodcharacteristicsalsomattertoconsumers:

1. Market Reputation.4 Aswith other retail purchases, consumerswill paymore forseafood that is in high demand and seen as a premium product. Certain types ofseafoodarehouseholdnames,carryingpositivemarketassociationsandfeaturingmorefrequently in recipes.Consumers seekout these highly prized species andwill payhigherpricesforthemthanforlesserknown,lesssought-aftervarieties.Forexample,consumersmayselect“redsnapper”overothertypesofsnapperor“kingsalmon”overothertypesofsalmon.

2NationalMarineFisheriesServiceOfficeofScienceandTechnology,“FisheriesoftheUnitedStates2015,”(September2016),available at https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/commercial/fus/fus15/documents/09_PerCapita2015.pdfat106.3Therecommendationdiffersforcertainpopulations.Formoreinformation,pleaseconsult:https://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm534873.htm.4 See, e.g., ScientificAmerican,“MarketplaceRedSnapperIsCaseofBaitandSwitch,”available athttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/marketplace-red-snapper-i/(notingconsumerpreferenceforredsnapperoverothersnappers).

2. Nutritional and Health Differences.5 Consumers will select particular seafoodspeciesoverothersbecauseofdifferencestheyperceiveintheirsafety,nutrition,andwholesomeness.Forexample,certainconsumerswillavoidseafoodknowntocontainhighlevelsofmethylmercury, lead,orotherheavymetals. Indeed, theFDAadvisespregnantandnursingwomen,andchildren,tolimitconsumptionofsuchspecies.Toassistconsumersseekingtoreducetheirexposuretomercuryandothercontaminants,theFDAandadvocacyorganizations,suchastheEnvironmentalDefenseFund(“EDF”),classifyseafoodtypesbasedontheirheavymetalcontent.Similarly,someconsumersagreetopayhigherpricesforwild-caughtfishtoavoidfarm-raisedvarietiesthatmaybetreatedwithantibiotics,disinfectants,orpesticides.Consumersmayalsoselectwildspeciesduetodifferences in the levelsofprotein, fat,minerals,andothernutrients.Indeed,wildseafoodvarietiesmaybeanentirelydifferentspeciesthanfarmed,asisoftenthecasewithsalmon.

3. Environmental Sustainability Concerns.6 Eco-conscious consumers will selectseafoodspeciesbasedon theirenvironmental sustainability.Certainfishspeciesareoverfished,endangered,orknowntoresult fromenvironmentallyharmfulfishingoraquaculture practices. Environmental organizations have developed seafood guidesandrankingstodirectconsumerstothemostsustainableseafoodoptions.TheSeafoodWatchprogram(“SWP”)oftheMontereyBayAquariumpublishesonepopularguide;theprogramhasdistributedmorethan51millionpocketguidesandsmartphoneapps.Dependingwhereandhowafishspeciesiscaught,theSWPwillidentifyseafoodasthe“BestChoice”forsustainability,asa“GoodAlternative,”orasaspeciesto“Avoid.”7 Othergroups,includingtheEDFandtheSafinaCenter,putoutsimilareco-ratings.

5ConsumerReports,“ChoosetheRightFishToLowerMercuryRiskExposure,”available athttps://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eating-the-wrong-fish-put-you-at-higher-risk-for-mercury-exposure/index.htm.6 See, e.g.,UniversityofConnecticutFoodMarketingPolicyCenter,“ConsumerPreferencesforEcolabeledSeafood:ResultsofaConnecticutSurvey,”available at http://www.fmpc.uconn.edu/research/other/Connecticut%20Final%20Ecolabel%20Report%2012%2020%2004.pdf.7 See MarketingNews,“WillSeafoodIndustryMarketingWinOverConsumers?”(January2015),available at https://www.ama.org/publications/MarketingNews/Pages/swimming-upstream.aspx.

II. How Did Seafood Mislabeling First Come to Public Attention?

Seafood substitution and mislabeling is not a new phenomenon. Academics, non-governmentalorganizations,andregulators throughout theworldhave identifiedhigh levelsofseafoodmislabelingatthewholesaleandretaillevelsworldwide.

Ofparticularnote,beginningin2012,themarineconservationorganizationOceanabeganconductingaseriesofinvestigationsthroughouttheUnitedStatesandCanada.ThegroupusedDNA barcode technology to test seafood purchased from grocery stores and restaurants in ageographicarea,comparingthespecies,aslabeled,tothespeciesasconfirmedbyDNA.8Inthisway,Oceanaidentifiedwidespreadmislabeling.

In2012,forexample,Oceanaanalyzedsamplesfrom81grocerystores,sushibars,andotherrestaurantsinNewYorkCity.9Testingresultsindicatedthatclosetotwooutofeveryfiveseafoodsamplesweremisidentified(39%).Thestudyfoundastaggeringrateofsubstitutionatsushi restaurants (76%), and high rates of substitution at other restaurants (39%) and grocerystores(29%).Mislabelingaffectedvariousfishvarieties,including“white”tuna,redsnapper,otherspecificsnapperspecies,wildsalmonspecies,cod,lemonsole,andgrouper.Ahalf-dozenlesser-knownspeciesweremislabeled“redsnapper,”includingcrimsonsnapper,spottedrosesnapper,andyellowtailsnapper.

The FDA has likewise used DNA barcoding to uncover seafood mislabeling in thesupply chain. During the 2012-2013 fiscal year, for example, the FDA investigated themislabeling of certain historically misidentified species at the wholesale level.10 The FDA’sstudy identified a mislabeling rate of 15%, primarily affecting grouper and snapper species.

OAGidentifiednopreviousstudyfocusingbroadlyonsupermarketchainsinNewYorkState.NorhasprioractionbyU.S.enforcementagenciesandregulatorssurveyedpotentialseafoodfraudattheretaillevel.

8ThetestingdescribedinthisreportalsoreliedonDNAbarcodetechnology,asdescribedingreaterdetailinsectionVIbelow.9 See OceanaReports,“WidespreadSeafoodFraudFoundinNewYorkCity,”(December2012),available at https://oceana.org/reports/widespread-seafood-fraud-found-new-york-city.10 See U.S.Food&DrugAdministration,“SummaryofFDA’ssamplingeffortsforseafoodspecieslabelinginFY12-13,”available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/Seafood/UCM419983.pdf.

III. What Leads to Mislabeling?

Mislabelinghasavarietyofcauses, including intentional fraud,negligence,andsimpleerror.11Whilescientificidentificationmethods,likeDNAbarcoding,canconfirmtheidentityofthespecies,theydonotshedlightonthereasonforasubstitution.

Intentional Fraud. Thewidepricedisparitiesbetweendifferentfish speciesmean thatsubstitutingacheaperormoreobscurespeciesforamoreexpensiveorbetterknownonecanallowthesellertosellatahigherprice–ortopricethefishlowerthanacompetitorsellingtheauthenticproduct.Incasesofmislabeling,thetendencyofthesubstitutefishtobeacheaperspeciessuggeststhatintentionalmisconductinthesupplychainmayplayarole.

Negligence. Sellers at the wholesale or retail level may lack effective protocols foridentifying thefish theyare selling, fordifferentiatingbetweendistinct species comingwithinasinglebroadercategory(e.g.,fordistinguishing“red”snapperfromothersnapperspecies),foradequatelytrainingstaff,forlabelingsignageandpackaging,orforvettingthefishsourcebeforemarketingseafoodtoconsumers.Withoutreasonableprocedures,somemislabelingisinevitable.

Mistake/Error.Misidentificationissometimespossiblewherereasonableproceduresareinplace,especiallywherespecieshaveasimilarappearanceandareindigenoustothesamewaters.Sucherrorscaninitiallyoccuratanypointinthesupplychain,includingontheboat,bythedistributor,oratthefishcounter(e.g.,packingthewrongfish).

Forboththeconsumerandtheretailer,distinguishingbetweensimilar-appearingspeciesaccuratelycanbeespeciallychallengingiftheseafoodissoldinparts(e.g.,fillets),ratherthanaswholefish.Intentionalfraud,negligence,orerrorsearlierinthesupplychain—atthedockorbyadistributor—canresultinmislabelingatthepointofsaletotheultimateconsumer.

11 See, e.g.,OceanaReports,“OceanaStudyRevealsSeafoodFraudNationwide,”(February2013),availableathttps://oceana.org/reports/oceana-study-reveals-seafood-fraud-nationwide;OceanandCoastalLawJournal,“NotJustFlounderingAround:APost-RegulatoryFrameworktoAddressSeafoodSubstitution,”(May2017)availableathttps://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1355&context=oclj.

IV. What Are the Legal Duties of Supermarkets and Other Retailers?

Most consumers are not seafood experts. They interact with the global seafood chainexclusively at itsfinal step: their neighborhood seafood counter or restaurant.To a far greaterdegreethanformanyotherfoodproducts,consumersdependontherepresentationsretailersmakeabout the seafood for sale.One study found thatmore thanhalf (55%)of seafoodbuyers relydirectlyontheirretailer’sexplanationoftheirseafoodpurchases.12

SupermarketsandotherretailoutletsinNewYorkarelegallyrequiredtomarkettheseafoodtheyaresellingaccurately,mostnotablybytheFederalFood,DrugandCosmeticActandtheNewYorkStateAgricultureandMarketsLaw.13Thesaleofmislabeledseafoodmayalsoviolatefederalandstateconsumerprotectionlaws,whichprohibitfraudulentanddeceptivebusinesspracticesoradvertising.14Theselawsholdsellersofseafoodandotherretailproductsstrictlyliablefortheaccuracyoftheirmarketingrepresentations.Ultimately,retailersareresponsibleforestablishingthemeasuresreasonablyneededtoensurethattheseafoodtheysellislabeledaccurately–andaresubjecttocivilliabilityorevencriminalpenaltieswhentheyfailtodoso.

Consumersselectseafoodforarangeofcharacteristics,includingthegeographicoriginoftheseafoodandthemethodofcaptureorfarming.Butthemostfundamentalcharacteristicofseafoodisitsspecies.TheFDAadministersacomprehensive“GuidetoAcceptableMarketNamesforSeafoodSoldinInterstateCommerce,”commonlyknownasthe“SeafoodList.”Thislistsetsout“whatFDAconsiderstobeacceptablemarketnamesforseafoodsoldininterstatecommerce.”

“Marketnames”refertothenamesthatsupermarketsandotherretailerscanlegallyusetomarketseafoodspeciesininterstatecommerce.TheSeafoodListalsoprovidesthe“commonname”thatscientistsuseasshorthandforthespecies–andwhichcanalsobeusedincommerce–itsformalscientificname,andthenamesthataspeciesmaybeknownbyinagivenlocality,alsocalledthe“vernacular”names.Giventhe“exceptionalnumberandvarietyofspecies,”theFDAadvisesthatusingacceptablemarketnamestoidentifyseafoodisessential.15

TheFDAhasalsoissuedfurtherCompliancePolicyGuidestoassistinevaluatingwhetherparticular seafood is mislabeled (or “misbranded”).16 Under these Compliance Policy Guides,labelingafishusingnames“otherthanthoselistedascommonorusualnamesinthe‘market’or‘common’columnsoftheSeafoodListmaymisbrandtheproduct.”17Forexample,theFDAhasaspecificCompliancePolicyGuiderelatedto“redsnapper,”whichprovidesthat“[t]helabelingorsaleofanyfishotherthanLutjanus campechanusas‘redsnapper’constitutesamisbranding

12 See AlaskaSeafoodMarketingInstitute,“ThePoweroftheAlaskaSeafoodBrand,”(2017),available at https://www.alaskaseafood.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/1-030-Power-of-the-Brand-2017.pdf.13 SeeNewYorkStateAgricultureandMarketsLaw§201.14 SeeNewYorkGeneralBusinessLaw§§349,350;NewYorkExecutiveLaw§63(12).15 https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/ucm113260.htm.16 SeeFDACPG§§540.750,540.475.17 SeeFDACPG§540.750.

inviolationoftheFederalFood,DrugandCosmeticAct.”18TheFDAenactedthisguidanceinresponsetothevalueconsumersplacedonredsnapper,itslimitedavailability,andthenumerousattemptstosubstituteitwithalessvaluablefish.19

This report relies on theFDA’sSeafoodList, alongwith the judgment of theNationalOceanicandAtmosphericAdministration(“NOAA”),forwhatconstitutesanacceptablemarketnameforagivenspecies.20Forpurposesofthisreport,fishsoldunderanamenotrecognizedbythesefederalauthoritiesasacommonnameoracceptablemarketnameforthatspeciesisdeemed“mislabeled.”

V. How Did OAG Determine If Seafood Was Mislabeled?

NomajorregulatoryorenforcementactionintheUnitedStateshascenteredontheseafoodofferingsat chain supermarkets.Reviewingprior research,OAG identifiedseafoodspecies forpurchasethathadahistoryofsubstitution.Onthatbasis,theinvestigationtargetedthefollowingcategories:

1. Redsnapper2. Snapper(varietiesotherthan“red”)3. Grouper4. Cod5. Wildsalmon(inclusiveofchum,Coho,sockeye,andking)6. Halibut7. Lemonsole8. Sole(varietiesotherthan“lemon”)9. Stripedbass10.Whitetuna21

18 SeeFDACPG§540.475.19 Id.20Theremaybeexceptionswhereasellermaylegallysellthespeciesunderadifferentname,aslongasitisnotinaccurateormisleading.21Althoughpaststudiesfoundthatsushirestaurantsdubbedcertainseafood“white”tuna,nosupermarketintheOAG’sinvestigationsoldseafoodunderthatname.Inanyevent,theFDA’sSeafoodListdoesnotrecognize“white”tunaasanacceptablemarketnameforanyspecies.

Duringthesecondhalfof2017andthefirsthalfof2018,OAGinvestigatorspurchasedtheidentifiedcategoriesoffish,basedonavailability,from155individualsupermarketlocationsacrossNewYorkState, representing29supermarketbrands.Thesebrands (whichare listed inAppendixA)22spannedsixbroadgeographicregions:

1. AlbanythroughMid-HudsonValley;2. Buffalo;3. Nassau&SuffolkCounties;4. NewYorkCity;5. Syracuse&Utica;and6. Westchester&RocklandCounties.

OAGsurveyedabroadanddiversecross-sectionof supermarkets inNewYork.Wherepractical,OAGpurchasedsamplesoffish(the“Samples”)frommultiplesupermarketsoperatingunder the same name,23 often across several days. Because OAG made purchases based onavailability, however, there was significant variability in the number of purchases made inparticularregionsandfromparticularbrands.Themixofpurchasesthereforewasnotastatisticallyrepresentativesamplesofseafoodavailablestatewide.

Investigators recordedhow the supermarkets identified andpriced thefish for sale andphotographedtherelevantstoresignage,packaging,andreceipts.TopreparetheSamplesfortestingandpreventcross-contamination,OAGdevelopedasamplepreparationprotocolinconsultationwiththeOceanGenomeLegacyCenter(“OGLC”),anonprofitmarineresearchlaboratory.Undertheprotocol, investigatorscutasmallspecimenof thefleshofeachSampleandusedtweezerstoplaceitintoapre-numberedtesttube.Investigatorsthensealedthetesttube,whichwaspre-filledwithafixative.AftersealingtheSampleinthetesttube,investigatorsdiscardeddisposablesupplies(gloves,razors,plates)andcompletelycleanedtheirworkspaceandanynon-disposabletools.

UponaccumulatingasufficientnumberofpreparedSamples,OAGsentabatchof testtubestotheOGLClabforspeciesidentification.OAGgavethelaboratorynoadvanceindicationofhowthefishwaslabeledinthesupermarket.

22ThebrandsonAppendixArepresentasampleofsupermarketsoperatinginNewYorkState.Theabsenceofasupermarketfromthelistisnoindicationofwhetherornotitaccuratelymarketsitsseafood.Certainchainsthatsellaselectionoffreshseafoodwerenonethelessomittedbecausetheydidnotstocktheparticularseafoodcategoriestargetedwhenpurchaseswereplannedorattempted.23Notably,certainsupermarketsthatoperateunderagivenbrandnamearecentrally-owned,whileothersoperateasfranchisesorthroughalternativeownershipstructures.

VI. What Method Was Used to Identify the Species?

DNAtestinghasbeenreliablyusedtoidentifyfishspeciesbycomparingsamplestoasetofvalidatedbarcodes.Thismethodhasbeenwidelyusedandacceptedasameansofauthenticatingseafood species by regulators and the scientific community. The FDAmaintains a repositoryofFDA-validatedopen-sourceDNAbarcodesforvariousseafoodspeciescalled theReferenceStandardSequenceLibrary forSeafood Identification (“RSSL”).24 For commercial species notcataloguedintheRSSL,therearelibrariesofscientificallyreliablebarcodesavailablefromotherregulatorsandpeer-reviewedscientificsources.

OGLC, a part of Northeastern University, collaborates with the Smithsonian, NOAA,and other major marine research institutions. OGLC served as OAG’s scientific advisor andcarriedoutalllaboratorytestingoftheSamples.UsingascientificallyvalidatedDNAbarcodingprotocol,OGLC tested the samples against available reference standards. In thefirst instance,OGLCreliedonavailableFDAreferencestandards.ForthesubsetofcommercialspecieswithnoFDAreferencestandard(e.g.,Nileperch),OGLCreliedonotherscientificallyreliablepublicreferences.25ConsistentwithFDAstandards,OGLCrequireda500DNAbase-pairmatchbeforeconfirmingthespecies.OGLCfurtherexcludedSampleswith“lowsequencequality,”i.e.,wherenoreliablespeciesbarcodecouldbeidentified.

OAGappliedtheFDAapproach,whichtreatsSampleswithupto2%divergencefromthereferencestandardtobeamatch.26Underthisapproach,certaindistinct,geneticallysimilarspeciescannot be distinguished from each other. For example, “red snapper” samples are consideredcorrectlylabeledevenwheretestresultsaremoresuggestiveoftheclosegeneticrelativePacificsnapper.With the foregoingqualifications, this reportfindsSamples tobe “mislabeled”whereOGLCtestingidentifiedadefinitivebarcodeassociatedwithadifferentspeciesthantheseafoodasmarketed.

24 See ReferenceStandardSequenceLibraryforSeafoodIdentification(RSSL),available at https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/DNASeafoodIdentification/ucm238880.htm.25Toidentifyscientificallyreliablepublicreferences,OGLCreliedontheBarcodeofLifeDataSystems(alsoknownasBOLD)andGenBank,thegeneticsequencedatabaseadministeredbytheNationalInstitutesofHealth.26 SeeDNA-basedSeafoodIdentification,available at https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/DNASeafoodIdentification/ucm237391.htm.

VII. What Were the Overall Testing Results?

Testingrevealeda troublinglyhighrateofsuspectedmislabelingoverall thataffectedabroadcross-sectionofsupermarketsinNewYork.Asreflectedbelow,theproblemwasparticularlyacuteforcertainseafoodspeciesandcategories,incertainareas,andatcertainsupermarketchains.

Testingrevealed:

1. A Sky-High Mislabeling Rate. MorethanoneineveryfourSamples(26.92%,or77outof286totalSamples)withanidentifiablebarcodefailedtocomebackasamatchforthemarketnameofthespeciesaslabeled.

Chart 1.

2. Suspected Mislabeling Involving Virtually Every Type of Seafood Investigated. Testingfound substitutions for nearly every target species or category purchased in theinvestigation.Theloneexceptionwasstripedbass.27

3. An Especially High Rate of Suspected Mislabeling for Certain Seafood Species. Theinvestigationfoundrampantmislabelingincertainspecies,includinglemonsole(14outof16or87.5%),redsnapper(31out46or67%),grouper(5outof8or62.5%),chinook/kingsalmon(5outof16or31.25%),and“wild”salmon(8outof29or27.59%),whichcanlegallyrefertoseveralspecies.Afewspecieswererarelymislabeled,includingcod(2outof49or4.08%),sockeyesalmon(2outof50or4%),andstripedbass(0outof3or0%).

27Duetolimitedavailability,onlythreeSamplesofstripedbasswerepurchased.Testingconfirmedthatallthreewerecorrectlylabeled.

Chart 2.

4. Rates of Mislabeling Vary Across Different Regions of New York State.NewYorkCitysupermarkets had the highest rate of suspectedmislabeling (42.65%), followed byNassau/Suffolk (40.63%), andWestchester/Rockland (32.43%).The 42.65% rate ofmislabelinginNewYorkCityareasupermarketsfor2017-2018exceedsthe29%rateidentifiedinOceana’s2012study.NomislabelingwasfoundinBuffalosupermarkets.Notably, the mislabeling rates reflect averages, and a relatively small number ofsupermarkets (discussed in Item6below)aredisproportionately responsible for thehighermislabelingratesdownstate.

Chart 3.

5. Certain Supermarket Brands Had Especially High Levels of Suspected Mislabeling. Nearlytwo-thirds(19outof29or65.52%)ofsupermarketbrandsinthestudysoldatleastoneSamplesuspectedofmislabeling.Butthirteenoutofthe29supermarketbrandsintheinvestigationhadratesofsuspectedmislabelingof25%orhigher.Fiveof the12supermarketbrandsfromwhichOAGpurchased10ormoreSampleshadratesofsuspectedmislabelingexceeding50%.TheseincludedFoodBazaar(52.63%),Foodtown (55.17%), Stew Leonard’s (53.85%), Uncle Giuseppe’s (55.56%), andWesternBeef(66.67%).OAGdirectedenforcementletterstothesefivechains,whicharesubjecttofurtherinvestigation.

Themislabelingofseafoodspecieshasseriousconsequencesforconsumers,theseafoodmarketplace,and theenvironment.Asmorefullydetailed in thenextsection, the investigationreachedthefollowingbroadfindings:

1. Cheaper Species Were Often Mislabeled as More Expensive Species. Inmost instanceswhereOAGhadpricingdataforthesubstitutespecies,thesubstitutesoldformorewhenmislabeled as a more coveted species than when properly labeled. This included, forexample,farmedsalmonsoldaswild,andyellowtailfloundersoldaslemonsole.

2. Mislabeled Substitutes Often Undersold Competitors Selling the Real Thing. Whileoverchargingcustomers,supermarketstendedtoofferthemislabeledfishforlessthantheaveragepriceforthedesiredspecies.Thisundercutsresponsiblecompetitorssellingthe

genuineproduct,andunderminesthemarketasawhole.

3. Species Shunned for Health Reasons Were Sold as Preferred Species.Incertaininstances,thesubstitutespecieswasknowntohavehigherlevelsofmercuryandotherheavymetalsthanthelabeledspecies,includinglanesnappersoldasredsnapperandAtlanticsalmonsoldaskingsalmon.Similarly,manyselectwildseafoodtoavoidtheantibioticsandotherchemicalssometimesusedonfarmedseafood.Yetinmanycases,“wild”seafoodSamplestestedasfarmedspecies.

4. Environmentally Harmful Seafood Options Were Passed Off as More Sustainable Species.Manyconsumersdesiretobuyspeciesthatarelessenvironmentallyharmful.Yetinmanyinstances,thesubstitutesareconsideredlesseco-friendlythantheintendedspecies.Thisincludedsnowygroupersoldasredgrouper,lanesnappersoldasredsnapper,andyellowtailfloundersoldaslemonsole.

VIII. What Types of Seafood Were Most Commonly Mislabeled?

Asmorefullyexploredbelow,threeofthemostfrequentlymislabeledseafoodcategorieswere(1)wildsalmon;(2)lemonsole;and(3)redsnapper.28Eachsectionprovidescomparisonpointsbetweentheintendedspeciesandthesubstitutespeciesacrossvariousdimensions,focusingon attributeswhere certain substitute specieswould be less preferable to consumers.Notably,OAGdidnotconductarobustmarketpricingsurvey;conclusionsrelatedtopricingareillustrative andderivedfromthelimitednumberofpurchasesOAGmadeinthecourseofitsinvestigation.

1. Wild Salmon

Salmonisthesecond-mostpopulartypeofseafoodsoldintheUnitedStates.29Whilethepercentageofwild-caughtsalmonfluctuatesyear-to-year,in2011,itconstitutedaboutone-thirdoftotalsalmonsoldintheUnitedStates.30Wildsalmonproperlyencompassesseveraldistinctwild-caught species, including chinook/king (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka),Coho(Oncorhynchus kisutch),andchum(Oncorhynchus keta).Atlanticsalmon(Salmo salar)—oneoftheworld’smostpopularfarmedfishspecies—isendangeredinthewildandisnotcommerciallysoldintheUnitedStates.Therefore,SamplesofAtlanticsalmonsoldas“wild”aremislabeled.

28Althoughothertypesofsnapperandgrouperalsohadhighmislabelingrates,thereportdoesnotdelveasdeeplyintothosecategoriesduetothemorelimitedavailabilityoftherelevantspecieswhenmakingpurchases.29ScienceofFood(NaturePartnerJournal)“Safelymeetingglobalsalmondemand,”Availableathttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-018-0025-5.30NOAA,“2011Top10FavoriteSeafoodsintheUnitedStates,”Available at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/2011-top-10-favorite-seafoods-united-states.

Testing showed that eight of the 29Samples labeled simply as “wild” salmonwithoutidentifyingaparticularwildspecies(27.59%)weremislabeled.ThesubstitutespeciesincludedAtlanticsalmon(Salmo salar)andrainbowtrout(Oncorhynchus mykiss),whichisnotatypeofsalmonatall.Theremaining21Samples(72.41%)weresalmonspeciescommerciallyfishedinthewild.Thisanalysistreatsthosespeciesascorrectlylabeled“wild.”31

Seafoodspecificallylabeledaschinook/kingsalmonhadanevenhighermislabelingrate(31.25%).Otherspecifiedsalmonspecies,Cohoandsockeye,hadlowermislabelingrates.

Chart 4.

NearlyallmislabeledsalmonSamplestestedasfarmedAtlanticsalmonorrainbowtrout.Intwoinstances,however,Cohosalmonwasmislabeledassockeye.

Table 1.

Species of Fish Substituted for Wild Species of SalmonScientific Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name

1 Oncorhynchus kisutch CohoSalmon Salmon,CohoorSilverorMediumRed(MislabeledasSockeyeSalmon)

2 Oncorhynchus mykiss RainbowTrout Trout,RainboworSteelhead

3 Salmo salar AtlanticSalmon Salmon

31DNAbarcodingcannotdistinguishbetweenwild-caughtandfarmedfishofthesamespecies.Becausecertainwildcaughtvarietiesarealsofarm-raised,includingchinook/king(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)andCohosalmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch),thetotalmislabelingfigureslikelyunderestimatethedegreeofmislabelingof“wild”salmon.

PRICING: WHEN FARMED ATLANTIC SALMON IS MISLABELED AS WILD SALMON, CONSUMERS PAY INFLATED PRICES.

Fish sold as “wild” salmon (without identifying a particularwild species) command ahigherpricethanfarmedsalmon.OAGinvestigatorsboughtseafoodlabeledasAtlanticsalmon, farmed salmon, or simply as salmon for an average price$11.34 per pound.32 Whenfarmedsalmonwasmislabeledaswildsalmon,however,theaveragepricespikedby34%,to$15.24perpound.ItspikedevenhigherforSamplessoldasspecific,highlycoveted varieties of wild salmon. For example, Samples mislabeled as chinook/kingsalmonsoldforanaveragepriceperpoundof$20.99.Thatprice,however,stillundercutcompetitors,whocharged$24.71perpoundonaverageforauthenticchinook/kingsalmon.Suchmislabelingharmsconsumers–whooverpayforcheaperspecies–andcompetitors–whocannotcompetelegitimatelyatthoseprices.

32AlthoughAtlanticsalmonwasnotatargetedspecies,OAGinvestigatorspurchased15samplesofcorrectlylabeledAtlanticsalmoninthecourseoftheinvestigation,andwhichserveasacomparison.

Chart 5.

HEALTH: WHEN ATLANTIC SALMON IS MISLABELED AS WILD SALMON, CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE A FARMED SPECIES WITH A POTENTIAL FOR CHEMICAL RESIDUE AND WITH A DIFFERENT NUTRITIONAL PROFILE.

CertainconsumerswillavoidAtlanticsalmonandfarmedrainbowtroutbasedexclusivelyon concerns about the antibiotics or other chemicals sometimes used in industrialaquaculture.Wildand farmed salmonalsohavedifferentnutritional characteristics thatmayberelevanttoconsumers.Theyhavedifferentlevelsofheavymetals,andwildsalmontendstobeleanerandmaycontainlowerlevelsoftheomega-3fattyaciddocosahexaenoicacid(DHA).33

SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN RAINBOW TROUT AND FARMED SALMON ARE MISLABELED AS WILD SALMON, CONSUMERS MAY GET LESS ECO-FRIENDLY SPECIES.

Farmingofbothsalmonandrainbowtrout,thecommonsubstitutesforwildsalmon,raiseconcerns about effluent pollution and chemical use. SeafoodWatch designates specificspecies of wild salmon—sockeye and chum—as either a “GoodAlternative” or “BestChoice,”whileurgingconsumersto“Avoid”certainfarmedvarieties.

2. Lemon Sole

Lemon sole is an acceptable market name for Microstomus kitt, a popular Europeanflatfish.IntheUnitedStates,lemonsoleisalsoanacceptablemarketnameforblackbackflounder(Pseudopleuronectes americanus),afish foundon theAtlanticseaboardof theUnitedStates.34 TwoSamples(12.5%)outofthe16labeledaslemonsoletestedasthisspecies.Theremaining14(87.5%)weremislabeled,failingtotestaseitherofthespeciesproperlysoldaslemonsoleintheU.S.

33 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935116311811?via%3Dihub.34 See NOAANortheastMultispeciesSpeciesListforWinterFlounder,available at https://www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/nero/fishermen/images/multispecies/pages/winter%20flounder.html.

Chart 6.

Ingeneral,supermarketssoldarangeofwhite-fleshedfishspecies–flounders,flukes,andsoles–aslemonsole.OneSamplelabeledaslemonsoletestedasswai(Pangasius hypophthalmus),acheap,typicallyfarmedfishspeciesformerlyknownintheUnitedStatesas“Vietnamesecatfish.”35

Table 2.

Species of Fish Substituted for Lemon Sole(Microstomus kitt orPseudopleuronectes americanus)

Scientific Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name

1 Glyptocephalus cynoglossus WitchFlounder GraySoleorSoleorFlounder

2 Hippoglossoides platessoides AmericanPlaice PlaiceorFlounder

3 Hippoglossoides robustus BeringFlounder Flounder4 Limanda aspera YellowfinSole SoleorFlounder5 Limanda ferruginea YellowtailFlounder FlounderorSole

6 Pangasius hypophthalmus Swai SwaiorSutchiorStripedPangasiusorTra

7 Paralichthys dentatus SummerFlounder FlounderorFluke

8 Paralichthys lethostigma SouthernFlounder FlounderorFluke

9 Pleuronectes platessus EuropeanPlaice PlaiceorFlounder

35 Cf. 21U.S.C.§321d(restrictingthenamecatfishtofishclassifiedwithinthefamilyIctaluridae).

PRICING: MISLABELING CHEAPER FISH AS LEMON SOLE HARMS CONSUMERS AND LEGITIMATE COMPETITORS.

Fish sold as lemon sole command a higher price than substitutes like flounder or solewhen sold under acceptable market names. For example, the five Samples properlylabeledasyellowtailfloundersold foranaveragepriceof$11.39perpound.The threeSamplesofyellowtailfloundermislabeledaslemonsole,however,hadanaveragepriceof$13.99perpound.Bycontrast,thesalespriceofthetwocorrectlylabeledSamplesoflemonsoleaveraged$22.49 perpound.Theapparentresultisthatmislabelinglemonsolesimultaneouslyharmsconsumers–whooverpayforacheaperspecies–and legitimatecompetitors–whoareundercutbyfraudulentbusinesspractices.

Chart 7.

HEALTH: WHEN FARMED FISH IS MISLABELED AS LEMON SOLE, CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE LESS HEALTHY SUBSTITUTES.

Certain consumers intentionally selectwild, rather than farm-raised species for variousreasons, includingdue tonutritionaldifferencesor toavoideatingseafood treatedwithantibiotics,pesticides,orotherchemicals.Whilelemonsoleiswildcaught,oneSamplelabeledaslemonsoleturnedouttobeswai,afishtypicallyfarmedinVietnamandassociatedwithhighlevelsofaquaculturalchemicaluse.36

Chart 8.

SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN OTHER FISH ARE MISLABELED AS LEMON SOLE, CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE SPECIES THAT ARE LESS ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE.

Environmentalorganizationsgive themorecommonAmericanlemonsolespecies,alsoknown as blackback flounder,middling-to-poor sustainability ratings, including due tosuspectedoverfishing and thepotential to catch endangered species at the same time.37 Certain species mislabeled as lemon sole, however, do even worse. For example, theMonterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch Program designated blackback flounder a“GoodAlternative”when caught in theNorthwestAtlantic, specifically in theGulf ofMaine.Meanwhile,SeafoodWatchurgedconsumers to“Avoid” thecommonsubstituteof yellowtail flounder when caught in the very same waters. SeafoodWatch likewiseurgedeco-consciousconsumersto“avoid”swaiduetothechemicalsusedinfarmingandassociatedeffluentpollution.

36MontereyBayAquariumSeafoodWatch,“Pangasius,”Available at https://www.seafoodwatch.org/-/m/sfw/pdf/reports/c/mba_seafoodwatch_catfish_vietnam_report.pdf.37MontereyBayAquariumSeafoodWatch,“Flounder:Blackback,”Available at http://www.seafoodwatch.org/seafood-recommendations/groups/flounder?type=blackback&o=471592711.

3. Red Snapper

RedSnapperisthecommonnameofLutjanus campechanus,ahighly-prizedfishindigenoustotheNorthAtlantic.AsspelledoutinanFDACompliancePolicyGuide,theonlyfishspeciesthatcancarrythenameredsnapperisLutjanus campechanus.Becauseofhistoricoverfishing,thefishissubjecttoafisheriesmanagementplanandisoftenrelativelyexpensive.Yetoutof46Sampleslabeled“redsnapper,”31(67%)purchasesfrom10supermarketchainsfailedtotestasLutjanus campechanus.DNAbarcoding confirmed the correct species inonly15out of 46 red snapperSamples(33%).

Testing suggests that supermarketsmislabeled at least 12 other species as red snapper.

Thesesubstituteswereoftenothersnappertypes,includingsomenotindigenoustotheAtlanticOcean, e.g., thePacific caughtTwinspotSnapper (Lutjanus bohar).38Golden redfish (Sebastes norvegicus),whichmaybesoldasoceanperch,wasanothersubstitute.

Table 3.

Species of Fish Substituted for Red Snapper(Lutjanus campechanus)

Scientific Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name1 Lutjanus bohar TwinspotSnapper Snapper

2 Lutjanus erythropterus CrimsonSnapper Snapper

3 Lutjanus guttatus SpottedRoseSnapper Snapper

4 Lutjanus malabaricus MalabarSnapper Snapper

5 Lutjanus synagris LaneSnapper Snapper

6 Lutjanus vivanus SilkSnapper Snapper

7 Ocyurus chrysurus YellowtailSnapper Snapper

8 Pinjalo pinjalo Pinjalo Snapper

9 Pristipomoides multidens GoldbandedJobfish JobfishorSnapper

10 Pristipomoides typus SharptoothJobfish JobfishorSnapper

11 Rhomboplites aurorubens VermillionSnapper Snapper

12 Sebastes norvegicus GoldenRedfish OceanPerch

38 See Russell,B.,Smith-Vaniz,W.F.,Lawrence,A.,Carpenter,K.E.&Myers,R.,“Lutjanus bohar.The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species,”(2016),available at http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/194363/0.

WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER, CONSUMERS PAY INFLATED PRICES.

Testingrevealedthatothersnapperswerepassedoffasredsnapper.Theaveragemarketprice for thoseother snappers,whencorrectly labeled,wassignificantly lower than redsnapper.Asillustratedinthechartbelow,thefifteencorrectlylabeledredsnapperSamplesaveraged $17.59 per pound.39 By contrast, the 13 correctly labeled Samples of othersnappersaveraged$8.29perpound.40SnapperSampleswhenmislabeledasredsnapperaveraged$10.38perpound–withcustomerspayingmorethanforwhenthesamespecieswascorrectlylabeled.

Chart 9.

39PricingnumbersreflecttheparticularSamplesavailableandpurchasedinthecourseofOAG’sinvestigation.OAGdidnotconductamarketpricingsurvey.40ThenineSamplesaccuratelysoldasa“snapper,”not“redsnapper,”representfivedistinctsnappervariants:Lutjanus guttatus/SpottedRoseSnapper,Lutjanus malabaricus/MalabarSnapper,Lutjanus synagris/LaneSnapper,Ocyurus chrysurus/YellowtailSnapper,andPinjalo pinjalo/Pinjalo.Asreflectedonthechartabove,eachofthesespecieshasattimesalsobeenusedasasubstitute.

HEALTH: WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER, CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE FISH WITH HIGHER MERCURY LEVELS.

EDFratesredsnapperashavinga“moderate”levelofmercurycontamination,whichissimilartomostofthesubstitutesidentified.EDFfound,however,thatonesubstitute,lanesnapperhas“elevated”mercurylevels.

SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER, CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE LESS ECO-FRIENDLY SPECIES.

Eco-consciousconsumerswouldselectredsnapperovermanyoftheidentifiedsubstitutes.TheEDFratedredsnapperas“OK.”Twooftheidentifiedsubstitutes–silksnapperandpinjalo– receivedEDF’s “Worst” eco-Rating.TheMontereyAquariumSeafoodWatchprogram identifies red snapper from the Gulf ofMexico as a “GoodAlternative.” Bycontrast,theSeafoodWatchprogramurgesbuyersto“Avoid”oneofthesubstitutes–lanesnapper–whencaughtintheGulfofMexico.

IX. How Can Supermarkets Combat the Seafood Fraud Epidemic?

Aswithallpurchases,consumersshouldrecognize:ifthepriceofseafoodseemstoogoodtobetrue,thatmaybeasignthattheyarenotgettingwhattheypaidfor.Theyshouldalsoexpecttheirsupermarketstoprovidepreciselabelingoftheseafoodtheysellanddescribetheirseafoodqualityandsustainabilitypractices.Theultimateresponsibilityforaccuratelymarketingseafood,however,fallssquarelyontheretailersthemselves.

While there are other broken links in the seafood supply chain, supermarkets (andrestaurants) represent the final line of defense before a phony fish ends up as family dinner.Fortunately,therearebasicstepsretailerscantaketoguaranteethattheyarebeingstraightwithseafood consumers. Many already are. OAG reviewed the best seafood practices across thesupermarketindustry,includingtheprotocolsineffectatresponsiblesupermarkets,mostnotablytheHannafordchain(whichhasalargenumberofstoresinUpstateNewYork,alargeseafoodselection,andno instancesofsuspectedmislabeling),or recommendedby theFoodMarketingInstitute,anindustryassociation.41

Thesuccessofaseafoodqualitycontrolprogramdependsonamulti-stepprogramthatincorporates suppliers, supermarketmanagement, and seafooddepartment employees. Seafooddepartmentbestpracticesinclude:

1. Supplier Validation.

a. Vet the history and accreditations of all seafood suppliers. This should includeindependently confirming third-party accreditation, contacting other customers,and,wherepossible,visitingthesupplier’sfacilities.

b. Require seafood suppliers to sign a pledge committing to clear, accurate, andpreciseproductlabelingandoutsideauditing(seeitem4).Theagreementshouldsetoutexplicitconsequences,includingtermination,forfailingtodeliverproductsmeetingtherequiredspecifications.

c. Foreachproduct,prepareadetailedspecificationsheetandsubmitittothesupplier.Inaddition toother requirements, this specificationsheet should incorporate thescientificandcommonnameofthespeciesaswellasitsacceptablemarketname.

d. Requireconsistentlabelingacrossallproductdocumentation,includingpurchaseorders,shippinglabels,andinvoices.

2. Training and Store Policies.

a. Educateemployeesinvolvedintheseafoodprogramoftheirresponsibilitytofollowproceduresdesignedtoensurecustomerreceivetheproductmarketed.

b. Train staff and furnishmanuals on standard seafood identification and labeling41FoodMarketingInstitute,“BestPracticesonHowtoMitigatetheRiskofSeafoodFraud,”(2017),available at https://www.fmi.org/docs/default-source/industry-topics-doc/seafood-fraud-final.pdf?sfvrsn=23527b6e_2.

procedures(e.g.,ensurethatstoresignageisconsistentwithinvoicesandshippinglabels).

c. RequirefamiliaritywiththeFDA’sSeafoodListandthedistinguishingcharacteristicsoftheseafoodspeciescommonlysoldinthestore.

d. Verifythattheseafooddeliveredexactlymatchesthedetailedspecificationsheetfurnishedtothesupplier.

3. Seafood Labeling and Signage.

a. Useaconsistentformatforallseafoodsignsandlabels,usingthenamingguidelinesontheFDASeafoodList.

b. Ensurethatthespeciesaslabeledinthestorematchesthespeciesasrepresentedbythesupplier,andfullyresolveanydiscrepancies.

c. Inadditiontospeciesname,describethecapturemethod(e.g.,line-caught),origin(e.g.,GulfofMaine),andwhethertheseafoodwaspreviouslyfrozen.

d. Postsignagesuchthatitisfullyvisiblenexttotherelevantproduct.e. Checkandupdatesignageandlabelingregularly.

4. Traceability and Auditing.

a. Establishatraceabilityprotocolinconcertwithsupplierstoenablethetrackingofseafoodbacktoitssource.

b. Conductdirectand/orthird-partyauditingofsupplierfacilities,and,wherepossible,theultimateseafoodsource,includingthroughtheuseofDNAtesting.

c. Auditsupermarketlocationsperiodicallytomonitoradherencetoseafood-relatedprocedures,includingspottestingtoconfirmseafoodidentity.

5. Customer Education.

a. Describe the attributes of different types of seafood in store, including thesignificanceoforiginandmethodofcapture.

b. Provide consumers with accurate information about other aspects of seafood,includingsustainabilityandperceivedhealthdifferences.

c. Makeinformationrelatingtothesupermarket’sseafoodauthenticityandtraceabilityprogramavailabletocustomers,includinginstoreandontheweb.

This Report was prepared by Senior Advisor and Special Counsel to the Attorney General Simon Brandler of the Executive Division, Special Counsel Mary Alestra of the Consumer Frauds & Protection Bureau, and paralegal Christine Reynolds also of the Consumer Frauds & Protection Bureau. Its preparation was supervised by Bureau Chief Jane Azia, Executive Deputy Attorney General Manisha M. Sheth, Chief of Staff & Deputy Attorney General Brian Mahanna, and Chief Deputy Attorney General Janet Sabel.

Page A1

APPENDIX – A

1. Adams FairacreFarms2. BestMarket3. BrooklynHarvest4. C-Town5. Dash’s6. DeCicco’s7. Fairway8. FoodBazaar9. FoodEmporium10.Foodtown11.GourmetGarage12.Hannaford13.KeyFood14.KingKullen15.MetFood16.MortonWilliams17.PriceChopper18.PriceChopper(Market32)19.PriceRite20.ShopRite21.StewLeonard’s22.Stop&Shop23.TheFreshMarket24.Tops25.Uncle Giuseppe’s26.Walmart27.Wegmans28.WesternBeef29.WholeFoods

Appendix - A

Page B1

Appendix - B

Page B2

Appendix - B - Continued

Page B3


Page B4


Page B5


Page B6


Page B7


Page B8


Page B9


Page B10


Page B11


Page B12


Page B13


Office of the New York State Attorney General | www.ag.ny.gov | 1-800-771-7755

FISHY BUSINESS · Every day in homes, schools, hospitals, restaurants ... Market Reputation.4 As...

Documents

Transcript of FISHY BUSINESS · Every day in homes, schools, hospitals, restaurants ... Market Reputation.4 As...