This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Energy Flow, Environment & the Ethical Implications of Aquatic Meat Production
Preliminary Draft and Outline calling for contributions to the second report of ECCAP Working Group 13
Ethics and Climate Change in Asia and the Pacific (ECCAP) Project, RUSHSAP, UNESCO, Bangkok Preliminary Contributors in alphabetical order: Gerard Foley, Robert Kanaly (*), Lea Ivy O. Manzanero (*) (27 August 2011)
Please email to: Dr. R. Kanaly (Email: email@example.com); Ms. Lea Ivy Manzanero (Email: firstname.lastname@example.org) Dr. Darryl Macer (Email: email@example.com) * Co-chairs
Preface This report will follow the first publication of WG13: Energy Flow, Environment and Ethical Implications for Meat Production (Robert A. Kanaly, Lea Ivy O. Manzanero, Gerard Foley, Sivanandam Panneerselvam and Darryl Macer; RUSHSAP, UNESCO Bangkok, 2010), which focused on industrial style agriculture with land animals. This second report will examine similar issues from the expanding use of aquaculture. Submissions of case studies from different communities are requested, along with general contributions to the relevant sections listed below.
ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions Draft Outline
I. Background information on aquaculture in general and intensive aquatic meat production. II. Intensive aquatic meat production as it relates to harvesting wild stocks (including intensification in open sea capture fisheries). III. Past and future trends in global consumption and production of aquatic meat. IV. Forces that are driving increases in demand for aquatic meat. V. General explanation of energy flows and economics in aquatic meat production. VI. Impacts of climate change on intensive aquatic meat production and vice versa VII. Discussion that highlights some of the major sectors of intensive aquatic meat production, including inputs and outputs in each sector and negative cost externalizations. Issues that may be explored in regard to negative cost externalization include: 1. Coastal and deep sea pollution, ecosystem deterioration, mangrove destruction. 2. Fate and consequences of the production of multi-antibiotic-resistant bacteria through the heavy use of pharmaceuticals. 3. Effects of escaped farmed fish from enclosures: interbreeding with the natural populations, eating or displacing them including issues of genetic modification. 4. The relationship of aquatic meat production to avian influenza and the potential for causing regional and global infectious disease pandemics. 5. As is the case for intensive land-based meat production, there are disease issues that are a direct result of growing animals in high density, severely crowded conditions where the animals are already under a high amount of stress: (a) Sea lice infestation (b) Infectious salmon anemia virus (c) Bacterial kidney disease (d) Vibrio salmonicida (e) Enteric septicemia (f) Salmon rickettsial disease (g) Vibrio species in penaeid aquaculture (which contributed to collapse in aquaculture industry) 6. Protein consumption versus production: Large finfish must eat many smaller fish for every kilogram of finfish. 7. Socioeconomics. 8. Retail aquatic meat labeling and product traceability 9. Contamination of aquatic meat with heavy metals. 10. Contamination of aquatic meat with persistent organic pollutants. 11. Hormone administration. 12. Fish feed production and application from intensive land-animal meat production
ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions systems - Rendered meat and bone meal (MBM). 13. Prions 14. Considering issues related to radiosotopes in the aquatic meat food chain 15. Lack of testing and/or release of data to the public. …
VII. Ethical worldviews and their influence on the decisions related to the consumption of intensively produced aquatic meat. VIII. Experiences and/or case studies from countries that use/have used such systems. IX. Current policy and regulatory frameworks and policy options.
while salmonids in Europe and South America. tilapia. Background information on aquaculture in general and intensive aquatic meat production. Thailand and Denmark.7 million tonnes.4 million tonnes and Bangladesh at 1 million tonnes (FAO. crustaceans and aquatic plants. 2007). 2007) and is also one of the fastest growing food production sectors in the world (Fishsite. Indonesia at 1. The volume of production in aquaculture doubled with 1.545. Prawns and shrimps. 2008). ASEAN is a globally important aquaculture region (Worldfish and Primex. . catfish.5 million tonnes. In 2008. feeding. 2007) China is by far the main exporting country followed by Norway. Species utilized in aquaculture production include carp for China and the rest of Asia. supplying more than 50 per cent of aquatic food consumption by 2015 (Bostock et al.220. protection from predators.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 4 I. 2009). Aquaculture produces one third of all fish with almost half of all fish eaten (FAO. Developing countries play a major role in such exports. Farming implies some form of intervention in the rearing process to enhance production. bivalves and salmonids dominate North American production (Worldfish and Primex. 2008). Aquaculture differs from capture fisheries by having some control of the natural environment such as stocking. mussels and mud crabs (Scylla spp)contributing substantially either by volume or value (FAO. India produced 3. 2011). such as regular stocking. Annual growth rate is at 6.407.9 million tonnes in 2003 to 52. 2008). mollusks. Viet Nam at 2. milkfish. and water management (BFAR-PHILMINAQ.456 metric tonnes in 2001 to 2. Aquaculture is defined by FAO (2007) as the farming of aquatic organisms.2 percent from 38. crustaceans and mollusks at 32.967 metric tonnes in 2010 (BAS. Philippine aquaculture statistics indicate that at least 18 species are currently being utilized with only 6 commodity groups or species namely seaweeds. FAO reported that aquaculture reached 142 million tonnes. 2007) with China generating 62 percent of world aquaculture production of fish. penaeid shrimps (primarily the black tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon. Aquaculture production in the Philippines reached 2.7 million tones (FAO. 2007). etc.5 million tones. including fish. Aquaculture grew faster than any other food-producing sector and if sustained. 2010). feeding.698 metric tonnes in 2008 (BAS. will continue to augment capture ﬁsheries production in response to global demand. 2008). undated). with the top nine exporters accounting for two-thirds of the developing country total by value (FAO.8 million tonnes (FAO.5 million tonnes in 2008 while total global capture production on the other hand stayed very steady at about 89. Thailand at 1.
(3) Effects of escaped farmed species from enclosures and potential for interbreeding with the natural populations. nonfood species such as ornamental fish and baitfish. 2007. Azad et al. Ecosystem deterioration may occur through the application and subsequent release of large amounts of chemical pollutants through IAM production processes. trout. the industry is continuously examining the potential production of other aquatic species (Harvey. mollusks such as clams. externalities are third-party effects arising from the production and consumption of goods and services for which no appropriate compensation is made. At the same time.. 2007. Examples include finfish such as catfish. and frogs. 2008. Mayor and Solan.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 5 II. 1998). and others such as alligators. salmon. Barbier and Cox. 2009. environmental policy and the degrees of enforcement and compliance among many other factors. Paez-Osuna et al. abalone. location. 2003. Rosenberg. 1996. (7) Contamination of aquatic meat with hormone and pharmaceutical residues.. 2002. Stokstad. and/or eating or displacing them. Stokstad. Cao et al. (5) The consequences of using fish feeds derived from wild-caught species.antibiotic-resistant microorganisms through heavy application of pharmaceuticals. Negative externalities occur when production and/or consumption impose external costs on third parties outside of the market for which no appropriate compensation is made. . Some of the potential risks and negative externalities of IAM production under consideration are: (1) Ecosystem deterioration. turtles. Bendell. mussels. (6) Contamination of aquatic meat with heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants. 2001. and tilapia. A well-documented negative externality of IAM production is ecosystem deterioration.. scallops and oysters. Intensive aquatic meat production as it relates to harvesting wild stocks (including intensification in open sea capture fisheries) IAM production can be defined as the high density production of aquatic animals in a controlled environment for all or parts of their lifecycles. Many forms of ecosystem deterioration as a result of IAM production have been reported over the last 30 years in many different regions around the world including from both developed and developing countries (Dierberg and Kiattisimkul. 2007. coastal and deep sea pollution and mangrove destruction. (2) Consequences of the production of antibiotic-resistant and multi. 2011). (8) Potential consequences of using rendered meat and bone meal (MBM) in fish feeds originating from intensive land-animal meat production systems and (9) the potential effects of IAM production practices on native species. carp. Externalities may cause market distortions if the price mechanisms do not take into account the social costs and benefits of production and consumption. In economic terms. IAM production methods result in various negative externalizations and they may take different forms depending upon the type of production. 2008. (4) The relationship of IAM production to avian influenza and the potential for causing regional and global infectious disease pandemics. 2011) and the extents and types of deterioration are dependent upon many factors. through the production of large amounts of untreated biological waste materials or by direct and indirect effects on native species as a result of IAM production practices for example (Graslund and Bengtsson. Rosenberg.
IV. FAO projections indicate that total annual global fish harvesting. Demand for fish in line with other protein foods will increase especially in parts of East and South Asia in which there is strong preference and majority of this extra demand will be met by aquaculture (Garcia and Rosenberg. 2010). In 2008. 2008). worldwide aquatic meat production. ﬁsh has an important advantage compared to livestock in terms of food conversion efficiency since fish relatively score well in the way they convert a higher percentage of the food they eat into consumable protein. often times called aquaculture. 2006). and included in this assessment is the fact that aquatic meat production may account for greater than 70% of the total increase (FAO. Forces that are driving increases in demand for aquatic meat a) Market demands Increasing prosperity and urbanization are the key factors driving demand for animal protein. Additionally. including ﬁsh. 2010). By 2008. 2008). This efficiency is attributed to the low energy required to maintain a high body temperature. Sapkota et al. exceeded 50 million tons and this represented a more than tripling of production when compared to 1990. Ethical concerns may play an increasing role in affecting the production and consumption of livestock products (Thorton. the proportional contribution of aquatic meat production to total food fisheries output increased from approximately 4% in 1970 to almost 43% in 2008. . In this respect. undated).. 2011. Compared with livestock which needs extensive skeleton. The global biogeography of aquatic resources has ensured long-standing and varied patterns of consumption and trade throughout history (Young & Muir 2002a) while the recent globalization has been characterized by a decline in the costs of cross-border trade in farm and other products by reductions in governmental distortions to agricultural production. consumption and trade (Anderson. fish provides more portions available as food. Past and future trends in global consumption and production of aquatic meat.. Major producer countries such as China and Vietnam will continue their drive towards export to European and North American markets. Another factor is the relative price of other protein sources and increased awareness of health beneﬁts. it takes 3 kg of grain to produce 1 kg of meat. Current trends indicate that the majority of the increase in global production to 2030 will come from South and Southeast Asia where India. 2001). rangeland and organic waste (FAO. On the average. is expected to increase from 129 million tons in 2000 to over 170 million tons by 2015. Asian countries accounted for greater than 90% of total global production (Sapkota et al. China accounted for greater than 70% of total worldwide aquatic meat production and overall. given that part of the production is based on other sources of feed. 2007). including wild and farmed species. b) Ethical concern The ASEAN demand for meat is increasing which is already having impacts on the environment (Worldfish and Primex. Indonesia and Thailand projected to become larger producers (Fishsite.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 6 III.
ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions c) Environmental sustainability 7 Aquaculture has some advantages over other types of animal source food production for human consumption. serving to recharge groundwater reserves (Worldfish and Primex. 2007). A. Dependence on raw (trash) fish and fish meal Feed for aquaculture is a major bottleneck due to the limitations to the available oil and fish for aquaculture feed (FAO. 2007). 2010) and with this. V. greater consideration of the impact of fishing at the ecosystem level. More than 10 years ago Naylor et al. These materials are generally derived from . ﬁsh have a lower potential to cause eutrophication than pork or beef (Worldfish and Primex. Inland aquaculture ponds are drained and ﬁlled on a periodic basis but the water is often a form of water storage and seepage losses from ponds represent an ecosystem service. Evidence also suggests that aquaculture contributes less to global emissions of nitrogen and phosphorus than production of pork and beef (FAO. Environmental Impact While producing food. 2007). will be an important part of improving fisheries management (Pikitch et al. On average. and not only on individual species. Aquaculture production is market-driven (Muir. employment. coastal aquaculture makes use of sea water rather than fresh. This outcome is one of various negative externalities that arise as a result of intensive aquatic meat (IAM) production practices. (2000) reported that although aquatic meat production may be considered as a means to relieve pressure on ocean fisheries. 2007). 2. disease resistance and reducing environmental impact (Thorton. many developed countries will see a continuing trend in which livestock breeding focuses on other attributes in addition to production and productivity. General explanation of energy flows and economics in aquatic meat production. 20070). the effects of some intensive production models have opposite effects and this is due to the requirements for massive amounts of wild caught species that are used in the fish feeds for intensively-produced carnivorous species. Central to these concerns are the demands that aquaculture places on biophysical resources and the demands placed on the environment from wastes (Worldfish and Primex. Globally inland pond culture is the predominant production system and contributes the greatest impact (Worldfish and Primex. Aquaculture use of water is variable and can. 2007). 2004) VI. such as product quality. 2007). Concerns of overﬁshing of marine ecosystems also arise with a growing demand for ﬁshmeal and ﬁsh oil from capture ﬁsheries. 2002). more than 80 per cent of stocks are overexploited or depleted (European Commission. For example. in fact be lower than other animal production systems (Worldfish and Primex. increasing animal welfare. In European Community waters. Impacts of intensive aquatic meat production 1. fisheries can also generate a significant level of environmental impact on target and non-target resources as well as on sensitive habitats (NRC. 2008). In the future. livelihood and wealth. 2005).
for reasons including their protein concentration. Reliance on high protein. and 71 per cent of the fish meal. There is an extreme dependence of cultured fish on wild-caught fish. 2000) there is also increased pressure from conservation groups and consumer interests to limit industrial fishing for meal and oil. 2010) 3) Socio-economic Impact Though many agencies understand aquaculture to contribute to development aims. 2007). palatability. was consumed in aquaculture practices (Tacon & Metian. made from the freshest fish and processed at low temperatures. global production of farmed carnivorous fishes and crustacean. and shrimp (FAO. It takes 10 to 22 kg of feed to produce 1 kg of tuna and takes 5-12 kg of feed to produce 1 kg of finfish such as grouper.000 tons are wasted for bangus culture (BFAR-PHILMINAQ. ultimately come from wild stocks. quality in terms of essential amino acid balance and digestibility. fishmeal-based feed for carnivorous species often requires many pounds of wild fish to produce one pound of edible aquaculture product. leading to faster growth and lower FCRs (kilograms of food required per kilogram produced) (Pike & Barlow 2003). aquaculture will continue to consume the majority of fish meal and oil produced but this will not be sufficient to meet ever-increasing demands for aquafeed ingredients (Bostock et al. undated) and 2 to 4kg of wild fish using dry diets. Fishmeals have long been the protein source of choice. approximately 90 per cent of the fish oil available worldwide.000 tons of wildfish/feeds are wasted in tilapia pens.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 8 shoaling marine pelagic species such as anchovy and sand eels. freedom from toxin and/or anti-nutritional factors which is a common problem with feedstuffs of plant origin and their competitive cost per unit of protein (Hardy & Tacon 2002). World production remains fairly constant (6–7 mt/yr) in the face of rapidly increasing use in aquaculture. About 160. its marginal value per unit of fishmeal. It has been estimated that aquaculture now uses some 20% of current world fishmeal production. 2008) Marine fishes appear to require high levels of mainly marine lipids. cages. were fed with 1. While the aquaculture sector competes on global markets with other livestock producers. sea bass and sea bream. 1998. and ponds while more than 180. with the majority of world production originating in South America. which are essential ingredients of feeds. particularly for salmon. It has also moved towards using higher grades of meal. Tacon & Barg (1998) estimated that in 1995. Unless alternative higher value markets develop. just over 3 mt. Fish oil and fish meal. 2009). some 40 000 to 50 000 ha of sea area are required for feed supply and waste processing (Folke & Kautsky 1992. It has been estimated that for every hectare of intensive salmon production.5 mt of fishmeal. or more critically fish oil. snapper. has tended to be greater and it has remained a highly competitive purchaser and may ensure acceptable levels of future market access to raw materials (Barlow & Pike 1997). and seabass using wet fish diets (WWF. Highlighted in part by ecological critiques of the development of modern intensive aquaculture (Naylor et al. public sector investment has often supported export production and foreign currency . In 2008. as these offer improved protein digestibility and palatability. 1996). equivalent to some 5 mt of small pelagic fishes. Studies have shown that one-third of all wild-caught fish is used to make feed for aquaculture.
and industrial/commercial establishments in the Philippines (Primavera. has flowed into more obviously profitable areas of aquaculture especially in shrimp and marine fish and often at some cost to local resources and environments (Gujja & Finger-Stich 1996. Environmental impacts of aquaculture 1) Biological. 2007). Heavy investment. 2005). shellfish.000 hectares of mangroves were converted to give way to fish and shrimp ponds. and may lead to antibiotic resistance. Friction from the nets can alter the residence time of water in a bay. In intensive aquaculture. and industrial and commercial establishments (BFAR-PHILMINAQ. and impacts on genetics and biodiversity. pens. 3 00. increased deposition of organic wastes such as uneaten food. 2010). nitrates and phosphates in receiving waters. and excreta increases biochemical oxygen demand. waste food. agriculture. salt beds. both local and international. presence of antifoulants used in boats and nets.000 hectares of mangroves have been converted to fish ponds. 1995). c) Physical impacts range from the aesthetics to altering critical habitats such as wetlands and mangroves. chemical and physical impacts of aquaculture on the environment a) Biological impacts of aquaculture may include fecal discharge of fish. Primavera 1997). and associated moorings prevent efficient water exchange and changing the current patterns caused by friction to the water currents. In the Philippines. and seaweeds (although minimal chemical used for seaweed culture) which can harm wildlife and the environment. Sometimes these structures can also cause obstruction to navigation routes and migration paths of different species of fish. agriculture. industrial wastes and medications and treatments for fish. more than 300. Alteration of physical environment happens when nets of cages.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 9 earnings for justified structural adjustment and for targeted potential beneficiaries but do not always benefited poorer groups (Muir. faeces. 2) Habitat loss and modification Aquaculture affects sensitive coastal environments either by conversion like in the case of mangroves. seagrass and benthic substrates where fish pens and cages are located. b) Chemical impacts include oxygen depletion and eutrophication which are caused by the production of nutrient-loaded effluents. Fishery dependent communities may face increased vulnerability in terms of less stable livelihoods and loss of already insecure entitlements (Garcia and Rosenberg. salt beds. 3) Spread of pests and diseases . or habitat alteration such as in coral reef.
Natural climatic oscillations. and capture for broodstock or rearing. Since goods travel great distances. Nowadays. particularly in freshwater systems such as Nile tilapia which is a major farmed freshwater fish and most of the lesser farmed freshwater species including bighead carp. The introduction of species or strains into productive habitats for aquaculture. 30 million tonnes of household waste is generated annually and there is now a pressure on brand owners and producers both governments and consumers to curb the level of waste generated from packaging products. Production and sale of packaging has implications in terms of competitiveness . their sensitivity to that change. Exotic species may also have adverse effects on aquaculture and wild species. According to the „Waste and Resources Action Programme‟ (WRAP of UK). they are usually made durable to protect the product. 2007). Diseases and parasites from outside the farm can easily be introduced by transporting fry/fingerlings from other parts of the country and by importing fish from abroad with proper quarantine procedures. 40 percent of this waste eventually ends in landfill. or for culture-based fisheries can have significant implications for biodiversity (Beveridge et al. 2007). have always affected fisheries as well as their management performance. The Philippine aquaculture relies on alien species. packaging has an important role in the marketing of the product and in conveying information required by law to the consumers. The impact of global climate change on ocean capture fisheries will be important for the availability. either through introduction of new diseases or competition with native species (BFAR-PHILMINAQ. C. 2010). Another role of packaging is to respond to customer‟s convenience by minimizing the amount of effort required to prepare and serve food such as oven-safe trays.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 10 Intensive aquaculture potentially has several adverse effects on wild species. Impacts of climate change in intensive aquatic meat production The vulnerability of fishers and fishing systems to climate change would be determined by three factors: their exposure to a specific change. including disease transmission. B. common carp and freshwater aquarium species which are actually alien species (BFAR-PHILMINAQ. VI. In the UK. for stock enhancement. distribution and resilience of resources as well as for the sector structure and performance. 2010) VI. particularly those at medium (decadal) scale. African catfish. Impacts of intensive aquatic meat production in climate change Impact of aquaculture packaging and labeling materials in climate change The global supply chain developed together with the development of packaging and enabled the transfer of products even to far-flung areas. escape. operational costs (in production and marketing) and sales prices. Climate change impacts will likely be as varied as the changes themselves and will be felt through changes in fishing opportunities (resources available and entitlements). 1994). with increased risks of damage or loss of infrastructure and housing (Garcia and Rosenberg. boil in the bag and microwaveable packaging which allow customers to cook an entire meal without virtually any preparation. and their ability to respond to impacts or take advantage of opportunities (Garcia and Rosenberg.
(Barnes. It is an indicator that current use of plastics is not sustainable. Trading standards depots have the power to prosecute companies that use excessive packaging (Hickman. Yet over a third of current production is used to make items of packaging. 2010). 2009). Discussion that highlights some of the major sectors of intensive aquatic meat production.and macro-plastics have accumulated in the highest densities in the Northern Hemisphere. including inputs and outputs in each sector and negative cost . which can readily be moulded into a variety of products that find use in a wide range of applications. Hickman (2007) added that existing regulations were too weak in EU due to the Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations of 2003 wherein large amounts of packaging is allowed if there is consumer acceptance or it is judged necessary for marketing. Remote island shores and in the continental shelf seabed have lower densities and lowest densities in the deep sea and Southern Ocean (Barnes. logistics and overall production costs. via packaging and other short-lived applications of plastic. Plastics are inexpensive. However. and finite capacity for disposal of waste to landfill.. According to Hopewell et al. in enclosed seas and at water convergences or fronts. VII. but also with regard to fuel. but is likely to be far longer in deep sea and non-surface polar environments. The government will set the ideal weight for different classes of packaging to prevent waste of resources and transportation pollution and to increase the target for the recycling of packaging from the current 60 per cent. lightweight and durable materials. As a consequence. 2007). (2010) around 4 per cent of world oil production is used as a feedstock to make plastics and a similar amount is used as energy in the process. which are then rapidly discarded. is used as feedstock for plastics and a further 3–4% is expended to provide energy for their manufacture (Hopewell et al. in 2009 also added that plastic debris poses considerable threat distributing non-native and potentially harmful organisms and degrading to microplastics that may subsequently be ingested and the environmental consequences of such microscopic debris are still poorly understood. Some of the wastes come from food wastage which better packaging can help address.. et al. Given our declining reserves of fossil fuels. adjacent to urban centers. et al. Barnes. this linear use of hydrocarbons. 2009). 2009). the production of plastics has increased markedly over the last 60 years.. et al. Mega. Another issue associated with plastic involves physical problems for wildlife resulting from ingestion or entanglement in plastic. 2009) mentioned that the longevity of plastic is estimated to be hundreds to thousands of years. current levels of their usage and disposal generate several environmental problems. Around 4 per cent of world oil and gas production. Lots of discarded end-of-life plastics are accumulating as debris in landfills and in natural habitats worldwide. is simply not sustainable.. the leaching of chemicals from plastic products and the potential for plastics to transfer chemicals to wildlife and humans (Thompson et al. not only in terms of raw materials used. a non-renewable resource. A lot of disposable items of packaging or other short-lived products produced each year are made up of plastic which are discarded within a year of manufacture.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 11 for the manufacturer since weight reductions made that do not compromise the structural strength of the packaging also reduce costs. Usage of plastic is increasing and annual production is likely to exceed 300 million tonnes by 2010 (Thompson et al.
1) Philippines In relation to national and international trade through CODEX. and others. To continue to expand their market at a pace beyond just the rate of population growth. environmental contaminants. Another concern of aquaculture industry is maintaining ecological integrity to ensure that environmental degradation does not lead to decrease in production and retail consumer through awareness such as from certiﬁcation schemes and purchasing preferences. Food Safety is defined by Codex Alimentarius as the assurance that food will not cause harm to the consumer when it is prepared and/or eaten according to its intended use. fisheries and animal foods and food products in order to strengthen market confidence in agricultural.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 12 externalizations. it must be free from hazards to health. Food safety standards Global concern on feed and food safety and quality led to the establishment of Codes of Good Practices. and education programs as important part of good husbandry as well as aquaculture practices. Intensification in meat production has already been reported to have negative externalities in the environment and intensification in capture fisheries and aquaculture is another area that needs careful attention. Administrative Order No. virus. Government response to assuring food safety standards focus on implementing regulations for mandatory compliance of companies. categorized as biological hazards which may come from pathogenic bacteria. Quality Assurance Programs. Some government of countries become signatories in WTO and adopted CODEX Alimentarius. worms and others. parasites. and others. including aquaculture producers will have to develop ways of making their products more appealing to consumers to gain a larger share of total protein consumption (Aquaculture Outlook Report. Issues that may be explored in regard to negative cost externalization include: Responses of key players in aquaculture production The emerging increase in aquaculture production is also coupled with the increasing demand from consumers for safe aquaculture products produced in a sustainable and ethical manner Science and technology together with an environmentally sensitive and ethical set of policies and procedures which meet demands of consumer safety need careful consideration in order to address the intensification of aquaculture production. Government agencies from all over the world which bear the responsibility of looking after the environment by means of regulatory standards and protecting the consumers poses a challenge amid the backdrop of intensifying aquaculture production. animal and fisheries foods and product exports. the seafood industry. For food to be safe. chemical hazards such as natural toxins. Herd Health Surveillance Programs. metal fragments. agricultural chemicals. food additives. to consolidate trace level analysis of residues in all . and physical hazards such as presence of stones. 2004). 13 Series of 2009 Designates FDC of the NFA as the official Laboratory of the DA for the analysis of contaminants in agricultural. bone shards.
No. The BFAR Fish Health Section is involved in disease control and food safety through its residue monitoring program. animal. Harlingen Shrimp Farms. Salbutamol. 61 and 90. Presence and residues of banned veterinary and beta-agonist drugs in meat. Ltd. the Fish Health Section of BFAR is recognized as having the capability for the monitoring of feeds. mutagenic and genotoxic properties. 2. BFAR implements regular activities to identify/ban certain substances proven harmful to fish health (GAIN Report. Under this. (Texas) and SyAqua USA (Kentucky) to ensure that the feed supplies are safe and food are compliant with Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs). Inc. Series of 1990. and to ensure strengthening of food safety and food security policies. eggs have been detected. Shrimp Improvement Systems. The administrative order states that the brood stock must come only from the eight brood stock facilities in the United States that are known to have the capacity to produce brood stock that are specific pathogen-free or specific pathogen-resistant. Inc. water or other means considering that thee safety profile of these products have not been established. fisheries foods and food products in one single laboratory. milk. Molokai Sea Farms International (Hawaii). However.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 13 agricultural. in China. 2003. Also. Moreover the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) also implements inspection system for import and export of fishery/aquatic products and fish processing establishments consistent with international standards to ensure product quality and safety. considering that it is valued as an antibiotic for life-threatening infections in humans. analyzed and identified. all GE plant varieties must be evaluated by a third party panel of Philippine scientists for food. and DA-DOH AO. beta-agonist drugs such as but not limited to Clenbuterol. while Carbadox. use of these are banned in food animals such as livestock. Rainbow Hawaii Farms (Hawaii). (Hawaii). veterinary drugs. poultry and aquaculture production whether through feeds or water or other means. Tributalin and Pirbuterol which are being used as tocolytic agents for humans but used as lean meat-enhancing agents in animals promoting reduction in body fats are banned for use in food animals whether through feeds. lanquinox and Nitrofurans have been recognized as mutagenic and carcinogenic drugs possessing genotoxic potentials. (Hawaii). achievements have also . Together with the Department of Health (DOH). The use of Cloramphenicol in food animals may lead to residue build up in animal tissues which may lead to aplastic anemia and/or resistance when ingested by humans. In a Memorandum of Agreement executed by BFAR and the BAI. (Florida). and biologics in aquaculture. The Department of Agriculture (DA) in 2001 banned the importation and culture of live shrimp and prawns in the country to protect the local shrimp industry from contamination by the Taura virus that had nearly wiped out shrimp farms in various parts of Asia. 2007) Among the banned substances per DA-DOH Administrative Orders No. Shrimp Production Hawaii. The eight brood stock facilities are High Health Aquaculture. Any commodity or food containing an unapproved variety regardless of country of origin will be prohibited from entering the Philippines. series of 2000 include antibiotics such as chlocramphenicol and nitruforans due to its carcinogenic. fishery products. In relation to GMOs. feed and environmental safety prior to entering the Philippines. Inc. Kona Bay Marine Resources (Hawaii). the Rules and Regulations for the Importation and Release into the Environment of Plants and Plant Products Derived from the Use of Modern Biotechnology (AO8) was signed into law in 2003 and became effective on July 1.
The second system of . At present there are two parallel systems for the approval and control of pesticides in the United Kingdom. 2007) 2) US The safety of food and drugs in fish and fish products is regulated by FDA while meat and poultry and egg products which are regulated by USDA (FAO. China's animal cloning techniques are now among the most advanced in the world (Chen et al. Manufacturing. The first system operates under the Control of Pesticides Regulations (COPR. processing. The FDA HACCP program focuses on food safety hazards associated with fish species and processes. The Seafood Inspection Program does not replace FDA inspections. The seal is used only to demonstrate that quality of the product meets applicable food standards. The Fish Health Regulations (1997) applies to Great Britain and implement Council Directive prohibiting the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products unless certain requirements relating to their health status are met. 3) UK The Food Safety Act of 1990 covers Great Britain and also provides the framework for all food legislation. and identify the conditions that must be controlled for each type of fish. and providing assurances for products in compliance with food safety regulations.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 14 been made in animal biotechnology R&D. 1997). goats. managed by NOAA. and have the capability of producing medicinal proteins from transgenic animals. These regulations implement the objectives of the Food and Environment Protection Act (1985). China is leading the research on transgenic fishes and the technology is ready for large-scale commercial production. Chinese scientists have successfully cloned carp.. packing. the Food Standards Act (1999) and the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA). In 2000. A voluntary fee-for-service Seafood Inspection Program. The Food Standards Agency Scotland (FSAS) also established in 2000 handles issues in Scotland involving food quality and food safety. The federal HACCP plan must list the food safety hazards associated with fish species and processes that are likely to occur. NOAA authorizes the use of official federal seals (such as U. Grade A) to production facilities that are compliant with applicable food standards. However. ensures food safety by offering inspection services to the seafood industry. The Regulations are made under the Food Safety Act and the European Communities Act (1972). veterinary biologics are regulated by APHIS's Center for Veterinary Biologics according to statutory guidelines in the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act. 2008). or holding fish for consumption in the United States of America is also governed by FDA. cattle and rats. Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) All seafood processors must comply with FDA Fish and Fishery Products HACCP regulation. was established to protect the public's health and consumer interests in relation to food. or exempt a seafood processor from regular FDA inspections. including fish and shellfish and also the regulation of animal feeding stuffs.S. This system of control is at a national level and applies to agricultural and non-agricultural use of pesticides.
Coastal and deep sea pollution. It is however. ecosystem deterioration. 1971). Salmonicida (Aoki et al. and therefore harder to assess. not surprising. and also to their usage in industrial-scale animal meat production facilities. as in animal production. Anti-microbial resistance Antibiotics/antimicrobials may be defined as drugs of either natural/synthetic origin that have the ability to kill or to inhibit the growth of microorganisms. it is more difficult to measure. Although aquaculture has to date received less attention. 2. this resistance stems from the misuse and abuse of antibiotics.. 1985). Fate and consequences of the production of multi-antibiotic-resistant bacteria through the heavy use of pharmaceuticals. Aeromonas hydrophila (Akashi et al. When they are over-exposed to antibiotics. in itself. therefore one of the main concerns is that of gene transfer. they are allowed the evolutionary space to adapt and develop resistance to them. mangrove destruction. It has been shown in many investigations that the particular genes conferring resistance in organisms can be extremely similar (Kruse et al. 1986) .” While the use of antimicrobials and the associated anti-microbial resistance are well recognized as a growing concern in public health worldwide. including Yersinia rukeri (DeGrandis et al. “Antibiotic resistance as a phenomenon is. However. animals and plants. newly worrying because it is accumulating and accelerating. Antibiotic-resistance as a result of drug use in aquaculture has already been associated with several strains of bacteria. antibiotics are agents that are sufficiently non-toxic to the host and used as chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of infectious diseases of humans. the impact of their use in aquaculture. One of the main factors for this new prevalence of disease is that disease-causing micro-organisms are developing a tolerance for antibiotics. These micro-organisms undergo rapid and prolific growth. The intensive application of antimicrobials in aquaculture.. The quality and quantity of data available for the use of antimicrobials in aquaculture is limited. Rhodes et al. A. For the most part. In addition there is a lack of regulation and guidance on their use in many developing countries. 1994..ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 15 legislation has been introduced to enable the development of a common market for pest control products across all EU member states in Europe. and few countries have definite records. 2000). this area may yet prove to be an important factor in antimicrobial resistance. The trend of increasing resistance against antimicrobials can be attributed in large part to human medicine. allowing them to adapt to their environment very quickly. while the worlds tools for combating it decrease in power and number. Nor is it new. This phenomenon is termed “antibiotic-resistance”. The threat of antibiotic resistance is summarized in this quote from the Institute of Medicine. can lead to selective genetic pressure. 1. The role of antibiotics has been one of the greatest contributors to health in modern medicine. there has been both a resurgence of older infectious diseases and an emergence of new diseases over the last couple of decades. According to FAO..
Therefore. In another study.. it was found that approximately 80% displayed antimicrobial resistance.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 16 and V. By administering the drugs at sub-therapeutic levels and over prolonged periods of time. or stepwise via different bacterial hosts (horizontal gene transfer). Just like other areas of food production. diarrhea and various skin conditions. this creates a situation whereby potential health risks are increasingly of concern. The environmental impact of anti-microbial use in aquaculture has received less assessment than other areas of animal food production thus far. Salmonicida (Husevag et al. it was investigated how easily resistance genes could be transferred from a fish pathogen to human Escherichia coli on a cutting board where salmon was prepared at room temperature. Again. and that this may serve as an important potential reservoir for increasing anti-microbial resistance in human medicine. increasing the likelihood of resistance. the trend of using antimicrobials as growth promoters in food production is of great concern as they often bypass veterinary prescription and regulation. or by using medicated feed. Taking 13 different samples of ready-to-eat shrimp from 4 countries. following the harvest of one fish batch. 2005). 2000).. the potential for pathogens developing resistance increases within the fish species. Of those bacteria. in a stream that received effluent run-off from a trout aquaculture facility. This may lead to bio-accumulation. 1991). Some of the more common bacterial infections found in aquaculture include blood septicemia.. generally the pens/tanks are not drained which then exposes the new fish batch to residual anti-microbials. this would serve as a potential reservoir of resistance genes that could be horizontally transferred to human bacteria. With the increasing expansion of aquaculture. There is then the possibility that genes conferring resistance in aquatic pathogens could transfer over to human pathogens directly. the fact that ready-to-eat shrimp does not require cooking increases the likelihood of introducing these resistant strains into the micro-flora of the human gut. an investigation into the prevalence of anti-microbial resistance in ready-to-eat shrimp was performed (Duran et al. 1994). it was found that resistance to a certain anti-microbial (a quinolone) was increased 10-fold (Guardabassi et al. can disseminate into the environment and ultimately lead to human exposure. The most common routes of antibiotic administration in aquaculture are either by directly adding the drugs to water. This example went on to show the extent of transferability of resistance from aquatic bacteria to human bacteria. The bacteria responsible for these infections are very closely related to their human equivalents. In a report by FAO (FAO. As an example of this impact. Although the current trend of large-scale fish production is in closed pens and tanks.. over 160 species of bacteria were isolated and identified. 1997). the improved distribution networks and transportation systems for bringing fish to market both nationally and internationally have also vastly improved. They found that the frequency of gene transfer between bacteria was almost identical to that seen in growth media in laboratories. concern was expressed over the use of natural waters in aquaculture (such as fjords) and the potential impact of drug use on the environment at large. In one experiment (Kruse et al. open-sea aquaculture is increasing and therefore the potential impact on the environment will also increase. This type of drug administration points towards whole batches of fish being treated at once. Furthermore. It is common that the same anti-microbials used in human medicine are also used in aquaculture. such as ormethoprim and oxytetracycline. Also. .
regulate and maintain a full strategy for the responsible use of drugs in aquaculture in order to protect human health. Whether these new policies will be transformed into actionable practice remains to be seen however. in another FAO report (Hernandez et al. their workers and the natural ecosystem at large. this would result in a more positive effect not only on human health as a whole. With a more controlled and guided use of antibiotics in aquaculture. It was also noted that more than 13 different types of antibiotic were used.. Protein consumption versus production: Large finfish must eat many smaller fish for every kilogram of finfish. Aquaculture is an industry that is undergoing rapid growth in many parts of the world. severely crowded conditions where the animals are already under a high amount of stress: (a) Sea lice infestation (b) Infectious salmon anemia virus (c) Bacterial kidney disease (d) Vibrio salmonicida (e) Enteric septicemia (f) Salmon rickettsial disease (g) Vibrio species in penaeid aquaculture (which contributed to collapse in aquaculture industry) 6. one may look to a study performed by Graslund et al (2004). research indicates that between 70% and 80% of certain drugs used in aquaculture ends up in the environment.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 17 Furthermore. 74% of farmers in shrimp production used these drug agents. eating or displacing them including issues of genetic modification. the issue of antimicrobial resistance cannot be put to one side. there is an increasing need to develop. 5. and with the intensive use of antimicrobials the phenomenon of antibiotic resistance is also growing and gaining more attention. and recently has been garnering more attention. Effects of escaped farmed fish from enclosures: interbreeding with the natural populations. . 2004) As an example of the lack of regulation and guidance on antibiotic use in IAM production. food-labelling and over-thecounter availability of antibiotics used in aquaculture. there are disease issues that are a direct result of growing animals in high density. As with other areas.. 2005). and in some cases were used on a daily basis in prophylaxis. The relationship of aquatic meat production to avian influenza and the potential for causing regional and global infectious disease pandemics. Here it was reported that of the large amounts of antibiotics used in Thai aquaculture as a whole. 4. Authors of a survey into the dissemination of antibiotics in areas surrounding shrimp aquaculture farms in Vietnam found that much higher concentrations of the drugs were present and concluded that they posed a potential ecological hazard (Le et al. For example new policy has been introduced in India regarding the administration. such as terrestrial animal food production and human medicine. More stringent regulation policy and practice is required in this area of food production. As is the case for intensive land-based meat production. Although there is a growing trend towards the use of vaccines over antibiotics in parts of the world (particularly Europe and Latin America). but also the individual facilities. 3.
8435 or the Agriculture Fisheries and Modernization Act the Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Standards (BAFPS) was established in 1997 in order to formulate and enforce standards of quality in the processing. List of ingredients used in the product (in decreasing order of proportion). drugs. purity and quality of processed foods. drugs and cosmetics made available to the public. b) Net contents and drained weight. d) Lot identification. where the major concerns are adulteration and mislabeling of food products. preservation. 8. presence of allergens. 88-B (1994) should include: a) Name of the food. importation. Labeling Requirements in the Philippines according to BFAD AO No. BAFPS serves as the National Enquiry Point for Codex Alimentarius and other food safety and standards regulatory bodies. Labeling laws in relation to food safety 1) Philippines The state shall enforce compulsory labeling and fair packaging to enable consumer to obtain accurate information as to the nature. ingredients. The Republic Act No. flavorings and preservatives used. proper handling. c) Name and address of manufacturer/packer or distributor. It also oversees the control of the manufacture and sale of processed foods. 175 (EO 175) to ensure the safety. 3720 or the Food. It is responsible for the surveillance of imported food products at legal ports of entry. BAFPS also provides assistance in establishing the scientific basis for food safety.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 18 7. packaging. diagnostic reagents. Under the Food Act. quality and quantity of the contents of consumer products and to facilitate his comparison of the value of such product. exportation. the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) was created under the DOH Executive Order No. cosmetics and hazardous household substances. Under Republic Act No. efficacy. labeling. including country of origin for imported products and name and the address of Philippine importer/distributor. Drug and Cosmetics Act 1963 was enacted to ensure the safety and purity of foods. . medical devices. Socioeconomics. Retail aquatic meat labeling and product traceability Labeling Labels in packaging have important roles in the marketing of the product such as the name of manufacturer and product as well as weight or volume and pertinent information required by law to the consumer such as nutritional information. trade standards and codes of practice and harmonizes them with internationally accepted standards and practices. including additives. distribution and advertising of fresh and primary agricultural and fisheries products.
Farm Bill 2000 Public Law 107-171 . The following information should appear on the packaging and on the accompanying documents: the country of origin written out in full. Fish infested with parasites. 2) U. and BFAR Inspection stamp mark. coli 10 to 100/gram. and g) Shigella and Vibrio cholerae absent. regulations for packaged foods will almost always assure compliance with Philippine regulations. All fish and fishery/aquatic products imported into the Philippines intended for distribution and further processing must be accompanied by an International Health Certificate issued by the authorized or competent regulatory agency from the country of origin which met the following criteria: a) Fish and fishery/aquatic products which meet the quality of fresh fish prior to freezing and be graded accordingly to size. feed and environmental safety prior to entering the Philippines.S. there is however no labeling for biotechnology or organic products required by the Philippine government. Under AO8.A. the Fisheries Code Administrative Order 195 allow fresh/chilled/frozen fish and fishery/aquatic when certified as necessary by the Secretary of Agriculture as well as to achieve food security taking into consideration public welfare and safety. oils. all GE plant varieties (“regulated article”) must be evaluated by a third party panel of Philippine scientists for food. GMOs The Rules and Regulations for the Importation and Release into the Environment of Plants and Plant Products Derived from the Use of Modern Biotechnology (AO8) took effect on July 1. Compliance with Codex and/or U. fuels or any hazardous substances.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 19 Codex Alimentarius and USFDA regulations serve as the Philippine BFAD‟s main reference guidelines for policy pertaining to good manufacturing practices and suitability of packaging materials for food use. In relation to importation. c) Frozen fishery products must be kept and maintained at -18°C or lower during transport. Frozen fishery/aquatic products imported in bulk intended for further processing are not covered by this requirement. Currently. e) Total viable count 10/gram E. address of supplier. must be removed from the batch.S. b) Fishery products must be handled and processed hygienically in processing plants and/or freezer vessels. 2003. All importation must satisfy the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) standards as provided under Section 67 of RA 8550. Fishery/aquatic products must be packed under hygienic condition to prevent contamination from lubricants.. Any commodity or food containing an unapproved variety regardless of country of origin will be prohibited from entering the Philippines. d) Fish and fishery/aquatic products must be subject to visual inspection for parasite check. f) Salmonella absent in 25 gram sample. species of fish/fishery products weight and content.
fish and shellfish must be identified as either wild or farm-raised.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 20 This law directs the U. production method and catch area of . A processed food item is defined as seafood products that have changed in character through specific processing or has combined with another covered commodity or other substantive food component. smoked salmon. from fish farmers and harvesters through processors and wholesalers. retailers affected by the rule are chiefly supermarkets. clams. scallops. The rule defines “covered commodities” as wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish. steaks.S. Businesses affected by this rule are retail food stores and their suppliers. and breaded catfish fillets (USDA. The rule also covers shellfish and mollusks such as shrimp. there will be more farmed fish with substantially reduced levels of contaminants relative to wild or conventionally produced fish. the marks are: US Grade A. In addition. either in part or in full. Under the Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Lot Inspection Mark. and any other seafood flesh. there is a program requiring the analysis and management of critical processing variables that impact upon the healthiness and safety of seafood products. nuggets. The rule also defines food service establishments to include food service facilities within retail stores. HACCP is a mandatory program for seafood processors under the U. This basically would be seafood sales through restaurants and similar establishments.S. Thus. Processed Under Federal Inspection (PUFI). An example would be a deli in a retail store that sells ready-to-eat foods to be consumed either on or off the retailer‟s premises. retailers to provide country-of-origin labels (COOL) for red meats (beef. The purpose of the requirements is to provide consumers with greater information when purchasing seafood. including fillets. the rule covers fish such as salmon. fish and shellfish. make provision on the markets in fishery and aquaculture products and implement rules governing informing consumers about fishery and aquaculture products. As a result of the proposed step-wise reduction of oil in feed as well as the sourcing of oil from fisheries with the lowest levels of contaminants and treating oil to remove contaminants (supported by 2107(a)(6) – periodic residue testing). tuna. and mussels. Food service establishments are exempt from the requirements of the law. which extend to Scotland only. fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables. lamb.S. and other species whether they are farmraised trout from Idaho or wild harvest cod from Iceland. undated). Department of Agriculture to develop regulations that would require U. Products that are exempt from the rule are those defined as ingredients in a processed food item. crawfish. oysters. HACCP principles are also employed to certify products. of a finished retail food product. Retail Mark and HACCP Mark. retailers required to provide country of origin and method of production information are those defined as retailers under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. Council Regulation (EC) 104/2000 imposes inter alia requirements regarding the provision of information about the commercial designation. There are numerous examples of processed items such as canned tuna. Food and Drug Administration and with additional authority for seafood processors. and most fish markets would be exempt. Thus. 3) EU The Fish Labeling (Scotland) Regulations (2003). An ingredient is a component. For US standards. cod. fish stews. and peanuts. Under the law. trout. and pork).
monitoring of effects on the environment and on health as well as the implementation of the appropriate risk management measures including withdrawal of products Mislabeling case In Ireland and UK. Scottish research institutions supporting the industry continue to develop their knowledge and any proposal to use transgenic fish would require the consent of the Scottish Ministers. The Council Regulation has as its objective the facilitation of accurate labeling. The amendment in 2004 covered the areas of genetically modified food and animal feed. cod is the most popular imported whitefish consumed and demand remains high even though local Atlantic cod stocks have largely been depleted. The use of GMOs plays no part in Scottish commercial aquaculture production yet. 2008). The Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) (Scotland Regulations of 2002 implements the Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the council on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms. undated). and the second application is the use of GMO technologies more specifically. The first is the use of GMO vegetable products in fish feed and the use of GMOs in medicines and pharmaceuticals.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 21 certain fishery and aquaculture products offered for retail sale to the final consumer (FAO. The Animal and Animal Products (Examination for residues and Maximum Residue Limits (1997) applies to aquaculture animals and establishes community procedures for fixing maximum limits for veterinary drug residues in foodstuffs of animal origin. . transgenics in breeding fish for commercial aquaculture use. Another more subtle form of mislabeling is when cod products were mislabeled to specifically match a demand for more sustainable seafood choices according to Dr Mariani (Fishsite. If granted. or which have been administered with. possession or administration to animals of specified unauthorized substances. approval would be based on the advice of the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) and would also take into account advice from other relevant agencies such as the FSA and Scottish Natural Heritage. animals intended for human consumption which contain. prohibit the possession. specified unauthorized substances GMOs There are presently two main areas of potential application of GMO technologies in aquaculture. However. The Regulations prohibit the sale. breaded or battered cod products which were actually less expensive fish species substituted for cod and sold to consumers at premium price. ACRE is a statutory advisory committee appointed under the Environmental Protection Act to provide advice to the government regarding the release and marketing of genetically modified organisms. slaughter or processing the meat of. The application of genetic techniques may be expected to play some role in the future. There were mislabeled smoked.
shellfish or crustaceans originate is becoming more important. production and processing of the shrimp to be monitored and recorded. It has developed standards for sustainable fishing and seafood traceability and also affirms that MSC-labeled seafood comes from sustainable fishery and can be traced back. wholesaler or foodservice outlet will have to be processed under strict safety regulations and under the traditional HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) criteria. knowing where the fish. Other countries and authorities are out to start setting full fish and seafood inspection and control procedures that employ traditional traceability measures and audited quality assurance systems such as the ministry of fisheries in Viet Nam which has a National Fisheries Quality Assurance and Veterinary Directorate (NAFIQAVED). the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) works with partners to transform the world's seafood markets on a sustainable basis. processor and feed manufacturer. The government authorities also lay down strict food safety criteria for the import of fish and . the fish being prepared for the retailer. The Council Regulation provides a framework for the traceability of products consisting of or containing genetically modified organisms and food and feed produced from genetically modified organisms. Mostly. However. Thailand's Department of Fisheries also has developed a Fish Inspection and Control System and the entire processing industry is monitored under the General Principle on Food Hygiene and Good Manufacturing Practices under HACCP systems. Safety assurance left to individual countries while industries set their own transparent standards to develop their own strategies. in Scotland. Thailand‟s DOF has a computerized traceability system for shrimp which allows every step of raising. national authorities from various countries set out regulations that will cover the fish and seafood when it enters into a processing plant. The system is open to the shrimp farmer and harvester. On the same line. the fish and shellfish industries had been lagging behind. with most dating back to the outbreak of BSE in the UK in the mid '90s. the Genetically Modified Organisms (Traceability and Labeling) (Scotland) Regulations of 2004 make provision for the execution and enforcement of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the traceability and labeling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms. Comparing with meat industry which had quality assurance and traceability systems for a long time. Traceability is used more as a marketing tool rather than a designation of quality and safety. However. monitoring of effects on the environment and on health as well as the implementation of the appropriate risk management measures including withdrawal of products. consumers want assurance that the products they are eating are safe. its certification process is not traceable and food safety is not assured since certification is more for environmental and ecological assurance. As with most food processing establishments. according to Chris Harris. Senior Editor for TheFishSite. The Council Regulation has as its objective the facilitation of accurate labeling. Traceability has been burdened with difficulties since most fish in the past comes from the wild. As news of problems with fish diseases in some fish farms becomes more publicly known.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 22 Traceability With the intensification of aquaculture and stiff competition.
but do not necessarily constitute full assurance and traceability certification. can be notably more damaging to the environment. Only recently has the idea of organic aquaculture been taken seriously on a global scale. such as certain types of prawn or salmon farming. It might also allow access to markets to which products from certified fisheries previously did not have access. whereas others. The farming method can affect seafood's sustainability. By being aware of the issues involved and knowing what the labels means. the lot code can only immediately trace the date of production and not the production batch b) Inadequate production records in relation to documentation and personnel training needs c) Inadequate dispatch record since many companies do not tract the lot code of deliveries to customers so in the event of recall it would be difficult to zero in on specific areas that would have been affected d) Illegible markings because with frozen goods lot labels used are not always waterproof e) No written protocol for recall procedure which poses a challenge since the food safety problems of the food industry can occur at any stage of the food chain and at any of the steps during the processing of the product Eco-labeling in fisheries products For most food products a label will give a fairly accurate account of how it was produced. the United States of America (USA) and Japan.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 23 seafood products. in turn this gives the consumer the insight to choose those that are sourced in an ethically appropriate manner. Seafood eco-labeling may not only apply to fisheries. who has the real power to change. Challenges associated with traceability a) Faulty assignment of lot code since most companies. such as growing mussels on suspended ropes.g. This might lead to things such as a price premium for the eco-labeled product and/or increased market shares. A significant portion of seafood exports are coming from the developing world and are being exported to three major markets: the European Union (EU). When offered a choice between an ecolabeled product and a non-eco-labeled product. Aquaculture had a delayed introduction to this race. But for all the effort of organizations and supermarkets. the farmers and the trawlers at the end of the day it is the consumer. Some methods are low impact. choosing which supermarkets to shop at and what products to buy. seafood from sustainable fisheries). The MCS has since created a supermarket league in the UK to praise those supermarkets that do the most to support ethical fish companies and add pressure on those that don't. there is still no globally recognized organic model but the sustainable seafood movement is active in the USA and the EU . some consumers might prefer the ecolabeled product (e. The goal of eco-labeling is to harness the power of the market to achieve environmental goals according to Roheim and Sutenen (2006). but may also apply to aquaculture. For all the organic labels on the market.
to influence demand for seafood in an effort to affect ultimately management of either fisheries or aquaculture of a variety of species. these movements are initiated and run by environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs). 2006). The point is to improve the environment. There has been a reduction in hooks that have been discarded and a reduction in albatross mortality in the Patagonian toothfish fishery of South Georgia. . Australia and New Zealand. The MSC recently posted an environmental benefits conducted by Marine Resources Assessment Group (MRAG) (Agnew et al. So companies are now requiring increased traceability in the supply chain and demanding that boats provide proof that they caught their fish in a legal and sustainable manner. consumer guides to sustainable seafood (such as wallet cards). chefs and the supply chain. it is a minimization of supply risk because if fisheries continued to be overfished. From this. via consumers. Retail sales. MSC-labeled products are sold in more than 25 countries worldwide (MSC. Generally. Among the tools being used are: boycotts. there have been some issues related to purchase of illegally-caught fish which made its way into the supply chain of well respected processors and brands (Leigh and Evans. Price premiums are what most people focus on as the measure by which they wish to quantify success of certification. to create sustainable fisheries if they do not already exist or to reward those that do exist. 2006).ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 24 and in the small markets of Canada. in US dollar terms. Eco-labeling is also about providing market incentives to improve fisheries that do not currently meet the standards such as the case of the Alaska pollock and had increased market access into markets that it did not have previously. The sustainable seafood movement uses the market.. If we look specifically at the MSC. 2006). How ethical is eco-labeling and who benefits? a) Corporation What is motivating major corporations to sign up to procuring sustainable seafood? What are some of the things that are driving these companies to supply eco-labeled products. and labeling. to US$236 million. 2007). or at least private non-profit organizations. In Europe. showed a 76 percent increase between 2004/2005 and 2005/2006. it can be seen that there is a market arising from the participation of these companies or corporations and they would not want to be left out. most particularly MSC-labeled products from MSC-certified fisheries? On their side of the fence. This study looked at the environmental benefits generated from certification of fisheries. is the incentives created by losing high-value markets to the Alaskans post-certification (Rogers. A detailed analysis of the costs and benefits of each approach appears in Roheim and Sutinen (2006). Results show that there has been a reduction in seal mortality as a result of the assessments in the case of the Western Australian rock lobster fishery. The entry of the Russian Pollock fishery into pre-assessment which would require making changes to their fishery management institutions and policies to improve their practices. b) Environment The purpose of eco-labeling is not to just provide a market benefit but it is intended to provide an environmental benefit. the company would not have anything to supply to their customers.
and more informed. However. help consumers make informed choices and improve customer satisfaction. The market may then encourage producers to adopt higher welfare production practices. fish have not been receiving much attention on welfare grounds. in the context of farm animal welfare. People cannot make purchasing decisions which maximize the benefit they might derive from their expenditure if they are not provided with adequate information to make a rational choice. some consumers have turned to fish produced by farming. things are now set to change after a torrent of research concluded that fish have the same feelings of pain and suffering as birds and animals do. the absence of a „welfare label‟ may lead to an uninformed or unintended choice by the concerned consumer. Thus.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 25 c) Animal Welfare Compared to the livestock sector. Consumers are increasingly concerned about the characteristics of the products that they purchase and. prohibitively high for them to locate and purchase the products that they would like. the purchasing decision. At the present time there is a scarcity of appropriate information for consumers concerning the animal welfare attributes and consumers wishing to purchase products with high animal welfare attributes face a difficult and time-consuming task in sourcing these products. . nutritional value. but there are still large and often misunderstood repercussions for fish farms both inland and offshore. Some questions which consumers try to answer include: “Is the species threatened or endangered?” “Where was the fish caught?” “How was the fish caught?” “Is it the right time of the year to buy this fish?” If consumers are provided with adequate information to enable them to act on their animal welfare preferences and purchase the animal welfare attributes that they desire. and help producers to better understand the market and their customers and so potentially benefit the whole of society. appearance. In response to ocean problems. in many cases. The better. The satisfaction that consumers derive from a food product depends on its different attributes such as taste. increasing numbers are looking to buy those with a stated welfare provenance (FAWC. 2006). On the contrary. Ocean mammals also suffer in the event of trawler fishing operations. Consumers make purchasing decisions based on the information they have about the attributes or characteristics of alternative products that they might buy. the greater the benefit derived from the purchase. producers will have a powerful incentive to produce welfare friendly products and retailers to source them. Welfare encompasses the animal‟s health and general physical condition. so dolphin and turtle friendly labels have been applied to fish caught with advanced nets. its psychological state and its ability to cope with any adverse effects of the environment in which it is kept. the „transaction costs‟ for such consumers are. The provision of appropriate information can therefore help improve market efficiency. Markets also cannot function efficiently without enough information available to both buyers and sellers. convenience and animal welfare provenance. thus improving the welfare of farm animals.
public health. Information is then available to guide subsequent purchases. etc. the market potential for organic aquaculture seems to be promising in Europe as well as in the U. b) Experience characteristics are mostly those that are not evident prior to purchase but are discovered during consumption.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 26 The European Commission. biological safety. They count strongly in the preferences. ones that the consumer can discover. i. Quality characteristics of food which fall into the class of credence are characteristics as the products‟ environmental provenance. While many consumers may be indifferent to these particular attributes. In order to meet this preference. to others they are real and important elements. location of origin and the animal welfare standards under which it was produced. The EC proposal on animal welfare and trade in agriculture (2000) viewed animal welfare as being at the crossroads of economic. Special Eurobarometer 229 on “Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals” (June 2005) classified product characteristics into three broad groups depending on how consumers get to know about them: a) Search characteristics are those that are largely self-evident. There is a strong consensus regarding the benefits of recognizing high animal welfare standards and communicating them to consumers. ethical.e. accurate. Within this context appropriate labeling. certified and dependable. and in a form that is accessible. They can only form the basis of choice if labeling in some form is used. This represents an important achievement for animal welfare: an agreement on global animal transport and slaughter. Organic Labeling . specifically attached to the food product. understandable. and on killing animals for disease control. Whilst the existing WTO Agreements provide a basis on which some of the issues related to animal welfare can be discussed. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) 2 is establishing guidelines on international welfare standards. c) Credence characteristics cover animal welfare origin. the EU has pressed for animal welfare to be addressed globally in a consistent manner within the WTO framework. the 167 members of the OIE adopted guidelines on sea and air transport of animals. could facilitate the wish of consumers to make an informed choice as regards the animal welfare provenance of food products. information about those characteristics should be evident prior to purchase. animal health.S. whether domestically produced or imported. meaningful. According to a United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) report. In May 2005. and is fundamental component of the satisfaction gained from consumption. verify and validate against personal preferences before purchase. it gives the organic product market power and the potential to increase the value of its product and of the industry as a whole. The same concerns are now arising in the aquaculture industry. When sustainable practices are acknowledged such as organic aquaculture farming. . The damaging and unethical aspects of intensification in livestock influence the rise of the organic movement as a public response. on slaughter of animals for human consumption. food production and legal issues. compulsory or voluntary. production method. best-before dates.
use any genetically modified organism. national. Certified organic fish meal and fish oil would be expected to become increasingly available in the future as the certified organic aquaculture industry grows (NOSB.” “suffering reduced reproductive capacity.S. or represented as “organic” must contain (by weight or fluid volume. proposed organic aquaculture standards (2008) is on fish feed which recognizes he nutritional needs of aquatic animals for fish meal and fish oil but looks at other feed alternatives which have potential of becoming certified organic. or f. Another provision on fish meal or fish oil is that it should not be sourced from any fishery classified by relevant state/provincial. Aquatic animals (and their products) that have been fed wild caught sustainable fish meal or oil as a feed supplement pursuant and that are used as ingredients. All fish meal and fish oil must be monitored for heavy metal levels and persistent organic pollutants including persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs) and mercury. labeled.S. lead. One of the aspects included in the U. incorporate or introduce any type of antibiotic or hormone in feeds. use feedstuffs extracted with synthetic solvents not approved . labeled. c. or the environment. Federal Food. d. b) Products sold. arsenic and tin. the water supply. cadmium.” “depleted. use feed. Standards in Organic Labeling a) Products sold. as a feed ingredient.” “overfished. b. Any remaining product ingredients must be organically produced. the commercial availability of such alternatives is currently an open question. excluding water and salt) not less than 95 percent organically produced raw or processed agricultural products. or product thereof. . provide feed supplements or additives in amounts above those needed for adequate nutrition and health maintenance of the species at its specific stage of life.” “harvested outside precautionary limits. and Cosmetic Act. excluding water and salt) 100 percent organically produced ingredients. feed by-products from mammalian or poultry slaughter products to aquatic animals. feed additives. or represented as “organic” A raw or processed agricultural product sold.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 27 1) Organic Labeling in U. or represented as “100 percent organic” A raw or processed agricultural product sold. The producer of organic aquatic animals shall not: a. or represented as “100 percent organic” must contain (by weight or fluid volume.” “overfishing is occurring.S. and feed supplements in violation of the U. labeled. or must be nonagricultural substances or non-organically produced agricultural products. e. must indicate (Fed sustainably-sourced wild fish) next to the name of the fish. Drug.” or at significant risk of those conditions within the next recruitment cycle. unless not commercially available in organic form.” “over-exploited. or international fisheries authorities as “at risk of reduced reproductive capacity. 2008). However. or any organism produced by any other excluded method. labeled.
Adaptation periods for EU give organic fish farms until 2013 to meet the criteria in certain cases spelled out by the Regulation. The new rules apply on a progressive basis such that 80 per cent of juveniles can still be non-organic in 2010 and 50 per cent in 2013. 10. Contamination of aquatic meat with heavy metals. It is this resistance that is believed to have been the main contributing factor to the BSE outbreak in cattle in the UK. Prions are defined as proteinaceous infectious particles. Any new organic farm will have to comply with the European specifications immediately. The existence of a common standard based on minimum criteria will help improve the identification of organic aquaculture animals and minimize costs of multiple audits for exports and at the same time guarantee the production of wholesome and high quality foods while reducing to a minimum the impact on the aquatic environment. To guarantee that organic fish farms remain as close to nature as possible. The ban will also affect the production of sturgeon in Spain and France as well as tilapia. the Regulation prohibits the use of hormones and has a major impact on certain farms which previously used hormonal induction for fish reproduction. This is the case for carp produced mainly in Hungary. however. fish farm operators have three years to develop a reproduction process that meets the new criteria (2).Rendered meat and bone meal (MBM). It is not until 2015 that all juveniles will have to be organic. Contamination of aquatic meat with persistent organic pollutants. 12. Among these diseases are included Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease (CJD) in humans. a fish found in a number of organic fish farms in the Netherlands. Fish feed production and application from intensive land-animal meat production systems . “Scrapie” in sheep. This was enforced on 1 July 2010 and a logo of the „Euro-leaf‟ is affixed to pre-packaged organic aquaculture products produced in the EU.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 28 2) Common standards for organic aquaculture on EU Certification in the Member States used to be based on private standards or national specification and only Denmark and France have national laws on organic aquaculture. Ireland drafted legislation in 2007 but left it dormant pending adoption of the European text. Czech Republic and Poland. mollusks. The new regulation on organic aquaculture animal which covers fish. 1991). Under this single logo. 9. It was found that scrapie prions from sheep which were subsequently fed to cattle in meat-and-bone meal were not . Hormone administration. it is possible to market pre-packaged organic aquaculture products throughout the EU internal market. As compared with bacterial or viral infectious agents. Here too. 1998. Slovakia. 11. and Bovine Spongiform Encephalitis (BSE) in Cattle. Danner. prions have an unusually high resistance to thermal and chemical inactivation (Casolari. 13. and they are known to be the causative agent of fatal neurodegenerative diseases in both humans and animals. and crustaceans and seaweed production imposes minimum criteria to be used in all countries of the European Union. Prions Prions are considered a special class of infectious agent.
2002). 1997. but is particularly scant with regard to fish. 2006. Miesbauer et al. The available literature on prion-related disease is still growing... In addition. offal from terrestrial sources is also sometimes used in fishmeal including those of bovine and porcine origin. Although there has not been any reported instance of prion-related disease in fish to date. 2006). constituted from the likes of fish and animal offal. the feeding practices associated with large-scale aquaculture. Taking this into consideration then.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 29 inactivated through the as-then-standard physical and chemical treatments (Nathanson et al. this could lead to amplification/bioaccumulation in aquaculture species. Madison et al. should be carefully considered. and from cattle to humans. 14. segments of spinal cord and eyes.. Considering issues related to radiosotopes in the aquatic meat food chain 15. The feeding practices used in IAM production are similar to that of animal practice.. Oidtmann et al. However prion-related disease has already been shown to cross from sheep to cattle. as with other industrial-size animal production facilities.. In many cases fishmeal. 2003. The species barrier between humans and fish is substantial however and in one study it was reported that the transmissible risk of prions to humans via fish was negligible (Ingrosso et al. GAO. however they are in far higher concentrations in tissue belonging to the central nervous system (Smith et al. Prions can be found in all body tissue of dead animals. 2005. “trash” fish (fish of no real commercial value) are re-fed to fish in production facilities. 1997). These SRM‟s are now prohibited from use in animal feed in the EC and the USA. although there is lack of such regulation in other parts of the world.. … . 2003). there are fish molecules homologous to animal prions which have been found in various species (Gibbs et al. Considering that prion proteins are extremely stable and not easily degraded or denatured.. Lack of testing and/or release of data to the public. These parts of the animal are termed SRM‟s (Specified Risk Materials) and include brain.
Ethical issues in aquaculture intensification 1) Competition between food for human consumption and feeds/fish meal for fish The majority of aquaculture production is currently from extensive and semi-intensive systems. 2002) 2) Exploitation of other species for use in fishmeal The use of „trash ﬁsh‟ which are usually small pelagic species in shrimp and carnivorous ﬁsh production is considered problematic because it exploits other marine resources and contributed to increase in capture ﬁsheries. will place increased demand on both crop-based and ﬁshmeal resources Feed is predominantly crop based. Rising consumer health awareness has also increased competition for fish oils from other users such as new „high n-3‟ margarines or as encapsulated human health food products but increased concerns have arisen for the potential contamination of marine food chains. 2010) However. Lindstrom et al. thus reducing the need to rely on ﬁshmeal and ﬁsh oils. coupled with growth in the current systems. Increased demand for crop-based feeds will intensify competition with crops grown for human consumption. even trash fish is eaten. Better use of the high quality ﬁshmeal and ﬁsh oil supplies may be made by restricting their inclusion in the diet to only those periods when they are essential. of which dioxins and PCBs are particularly noted (Jacobs et al. However. Development of alternative sources of high quality feed from plants or microorganisms may offer another method of solving the problem. 3) Competition between feeds for animals and feed for fish Feeds for other animals vs. or by use only as ﬁnishing diets to improve the nutritional value of the product for the consumer. The process in aquaculture transforms ﬁsh protein from low to high value for human consumption (Bostock et al. Ethical worldviews and their influence on the decisions related to the consumption of intensively produced aquatic meat. and the development of pre-treatment methods that increase the digestibility and nutrient availability of the food source. the efficiency of this is both an ecological issue and one of social justice since consumers who can afford farmed salmon and shrimp may effectively outcompete rural poor for this ﬁsh resource.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 30 VII. 2002. Reducing the ﬁshmeal and ﬁsh oil component in aquaculture feeds is a high priority for intensive and semi-intensive systems. While some argue that trash fish is not suitable for human consumption. feeds for fish: Aquaculture will increasingly compete with other animal production sectors for use of feedstuff crops and agricultural by-products. Future research may yield new feeding technologies and management systems that optimize the conversion of feeds into aquatic animal biomass. in less developed countries such as the Philippines. the inevitable increase in intensiﬁcation. particularly with fat-soluble molecules. Some recommendations for addressing this issue include the increased use of locally sourced agricultural by-products such as oil cakes and rice bran. The sector will continue to secure access only if it can afford the going rate and if the .
Welfare encompasses the animal‟s health and general physical condition. other species farmed in aquaculture may have specific composition of their nutritional and changing their diets may undermine the health and well-being of these animals. Some of the ethical questions on animal welfare include: a) Do farmed aquaculture species have the same rights compared to animals humans considered as pets if they are considered as sentient beings? What type of distinction should humans use in terms of classifying animals? b) Are the conditions in aquaculture production in which they are subjected supportive of their welfare? c) Do species used as trash fish or components of feeds for other aquaculture farmed fish deserve have less intrinsic value? d) As sentient beings.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 31 role of aquaculture in food security and economic development is sufficiently recognized to motivate an enabling policy environment. animals‟ capacity to sense and feel). Another issue is the “triploidisation” of organic aquaculture animals wherein females are sterilized. How can consumers make a conscious choice of buying products that are farmed in a sustainable way? . which by extension provides strong support for the notion of animal sentience (i. whereas others. do farmed aquaculture species and captured fish in the wild have a right to life? Or a right not to undergo triploidisation or ablation? VIII. . IX. „Triploidisation was allowed in France and used widely in organic farms that produce large trout for smoking according to the Interbranch Technical Committee on Aquaculture Products (Comité interprofessionnel des produits de l‟aquaculture (CIPA). such as certain types of prawn or salmon farming. Current policy and regulatory frameworks and policy options. Terrestrial animal and plant-based feeds do not provide the marine-based fatty acids that marine animals need to thrive and that also result in the fatty acid profile. While some species of aquatic animals may appear to thrive on terrestrial plant sources of feed. which in turn has provided the basis for EU and UK legislation that enshrines the concept of animal sentience in law (Lawrence 2009). can be notably more damaging to the environment. such as growing mussels on suspended ropes. Some methods are low impact. Experiences and/or case studies from countries that use/have used such systems. 4) Method or farming and capture fisheries The farming method can affect seafood's sustainability. its psychological state and its ability to cope with any adverse effects of the environment in which it is kept. 5) Animal welfare Research into animal behaviour has provided evidence of animals‟ motivations and their mental capacities.e.
22:716–717. M. 1979 . Manage.0170) [Accessed July 27. Rome. 59-63 Cao. I. Economic and demographic factors affecting mangrove loss in the coastal provinces of Thailand..Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.2008. 14–16. Pollut. Quezon City. Characterization of transferable R-plasmids from Aeromonas hydrophila. 138 p. K.. 2011] Bureau of Agriculture Statistics (BAS). L. Diana. 1985. D. Rome. Grundzüge einer Risikobetrachtung.K. 1960-2050. I. 31:351-357. 80 p Bostock. Lin. R. Barlow. A. L. Ambio. S.. Telfer.J. A. Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)-PHILMINAQ Project. 614-619 DeGrandis. 24. Soc.. Die Pharmazeutische Indistrie 53.. Wang.. A. W. B (2010) 365. Casolari. Lorenzen. 2009. Jauncey. 1994 Aquaculture and biodiversity. and R. Übertragung spongiformer Encephalopathien durch Arzneimittel..A. Ambio 23. 2003-2005. 2897-2912 doi: 10. Soc. S. Watanabe. L.. Int. Yang. Food Microbiology 15. Trans. 1098/rstb.2010. Agriculture: global status and trend Phil. Akashi. G. Microbiol. Cox.. R. J. Yang. K. T.. K.. Beveridge. Trans. & Pitcher.1098/rstb. Jensen. G. Environ. Sea ducks and aquaculture: the cadmium connection. Galgani. Environmental impact of aquaculture and countermeasures to aquaculture pollution in China. Phil. D. R. Z. E. 2007.. M. T. 2010. 1985-1998 doi: 10. 2007. 14:452-462. Ross. 1997 Future world fish supplies should be enough for farm needs. B (2010) 365. Diliman.. B (2010) 364. Bureau of Agriculture Statistics. Coastal aquaculture development in Bangladesh: unsustainable and sustainable experiences. D. 1971. 2011. J.0170 [Accessed July 27. Yuan. Richards.. Quezon City. Beddington.1098/rstb. Sci. Peatman. 52:649–655. 2009 Estimating the worldwide extent of illegal fishing. Xiong and J. A. and C.0205 [Accessed July 27. F. Environ. Soc. 1991. . 27:938–942. Ecotoxicology.K. G. Barbier. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. L. I. Philippines. Aoki. Managing aquaculture and its impacts: a guidebook for local governments. Heat resistance of prions and food processing. Pramod. T. Bull. and T.2010. Equasa. Y.. K. R. B. Phil. and R. T. Antimicrob. 2007. 1986. 2011] Aquaculture 2006. Aoki. Soc. Ross. (doi:10. M.C. Watson. Appl. Handisyde.2010. 1998. T. Stevenson. and M. A.. Soc.. 497–502 BFAR-PHILMINAQ. K..1098/rstb. 3007-3021 doi:10. Undated. W. C. Little. Pearce. McAndrew. Azad. Res. J..1996. Jpn. Detection of R-factors in naturally occurring Aeromonas salmonicida strains. Danner. Barnes. & Barlaz. J.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 32 References Agnew. & Kelly. Trans. & Pike. C. Globalization‟s effects on world agricultural trade. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. R. S. 2002. Agents Chemother. 1– 8. Trans. PLoS ONE 4. Sci. S. Int. R. 44:800-809. Kimura. et al. 2009. R. 20:474-478. L. Anderson. 2010 Aquaculture: global status and trends. 2897–2912. J..0131 [accessed July 23.. Fisheries statistics of the Philippines. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns and R plasmid-mediated resistance of the fish pathogen Yersinia ruckeri. and T. Italy. Thompson. Phil. 2011] Bendell. Fish. B (2010) 365.. Gatward. Fish Farm. Corner. N. M.K... 2011] Bostock.
A. N. Appl. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Manage.0171. Maeda. Italy. T. Mad Cow Disease: Improvements in the Animal Feed Ban and Other Regulatory Areas Would Strengthen U. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. C.pdf [accessed 18 July 2011].Review [Accessed July 27.items/d02183.46:81-90. Garcia. 12p. F.. Environ. and their potential impact on the environment-a review. Dalsgaard. Holmstrom K. London Furushita. Increase in the prevalence of oxolinic acid resistant Acinetobacter spp observed in a stream receiving the effluent from freshwater trout farm following the treatment of oxolinic scid medicated feed. Food security and marine capture fisheries: characteristics.. Foresight. Suppl. R. Chemicals and biological products used in South East Asian shrimp farming. 69: 5336-5342. & Kautsky. Report of a joint FAO/NACA/WHO study group on Food Safety Issues Associated with Products from Aquaculture. Rosenberg. Raffatellu. impacts and implications of shrimp aquaculture in Thailand. 2007. Volume 68. 2869-2880 doi:10. Brussels. 2001. 2011. DC:General Accounting Office. . Number 11.. K. Available: http://www. Policy statement from the European Commission. 5. GAIN Report Global Agricultural Information Network. M. 2007 Fishing opportunities for 2008.. Similarity of tertracycline resistance genes isolated from fish farm bacteria to those from clinical isolates. FAO.gao. 2007. Y. 883. Total Environ. J.1098/rstb. Geneva. Rome. & A. November 2005. Folke. Douglas L. 1997. Graslund S. 1992 Aquaculture with its environment: prospects for sustainability. 146-147. Shiba.S. The future of food and farming. 5. Takahashi. drivers and future perspectives. 2395-2401(7). USDA Foreign Agricultural Service. WHO technical report series no. Sci. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department.A. trends. B (2010) 365. and B. 2005. S. 1997. and Olsen.. Ready-to-Eat Shrimp as an International Vehicle of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria. E. Com (2007) 295 final. 2003. Bengtsson. T. S. E. Aquaculture development. 5–24. 2000.M. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. and Ohta. Soc. Wahlstrom A. Ocean Coast. Torii. M. Gianna M. A.Yahata. GAO. 2003. Technical guidelines for responsible fisheries 5. Washington. Issues. 280:93-131. and W. Microbiol. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2006.. Journal of Food Protection. M. Prevention Efforts. T. Aquaculture. Environ. Rome. Marshall. Hasegawa. 20: 649-666.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 33 Dierberg. 2011. Bolis CL. E.gov/new. FAO. The Government Office for Science. 188: 205-218. Kiattisimkul. FAO/NACA/WHO. Phil. 2002. Mngmt 17. GAO-02-183. Normal isoform of amyloid protein (PrP) in brains of spawning salmon. DuráN. Mol Psychiatry 2.. Kaneoka. (in press) FAO Working Paper SCS/76/WP/24. Rome. European Commission. Guardabassi.. Use of wild fish as feed in aquaculture. 1996. Graslund. M. 2010.. Marine Pollution Bulletin 2003. 2000. A field survey of chemicals and biological products used in shrimp farming. Final Project Report. WHO.. Trans. 2011] Gibbs CJ Jr. L.2010. pp.
Doi:10. 2005.2004. C. A report of the Risk Management Agency from the Economic Research Service. Res. Leigh and Evans. J. 2005. H. Jacobs. 2006. Appl. 21. P. 1998. Le TS. No. Trans. Residues of selected antibiotics in water and mud from shrimp ponds in mangrove areas in Vietnam.com/articles/721/ecolabelling-of-fisheries-productsassessment-of-its-benefits [Accessed July 23. Baier M. Patel S. Iriti M. 2008 Applied animal behaviour science: past. & Finger-Stich. Gough KC. Figueras A. Winklhofer KF. 115. and M. D. Bevivino S.1098/rstb. Lawrence. J. James RF. Cardone F. Harvey. Smastuen Haug. Valle AZ. USDA. E. Rome. 1994. Lunestad.. Enger.. 2006. Liu Q. Transfer of multiresistance plasmids between bacteria of diverse origin in natural micro-environments. Lu M. Solan. M. Munekage Y. Environment 38. 218-224. L. Chemosphere 47. Oidtmann B.thefishsite. & Dybing. Scrapie infectivity is quickly cleared in tissues of orallyinfected farmed fish. Samuelsen. Ingrosso L. B. Ecolabelling of Fisheries Products: Assessment of its Benefits. Appl. Vetrugno V. Sci. A. J Immunol Meth 306. Prion protein-related proteins from zebrafish are complex glycosylated and contain a glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor. 111:635-642. BMC Vet Res 2. A.Soc. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. Faoro F. B. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 341. H. 202-210. Microbiol.1572 [Accessed July 27.. 14:631–650. B. Nicolaysen. Novoa B. Sbriccoli M. Behav. Proposed organic aquaculture standards: fish feed and related management issues. present and future prospects. 2011. Managing to harvest? Perspectives on the potential of aquaculture. Whitelam GC. 2008. Oidtmann B. 139–146 Maddison BC. 191-218. 2002 Investigation of polychlorinated dibenzo-pdioxins. Mar Pollut Bull 2004. Mayor. 2011] National Organic Standards Board Livestock Committee (NOSB). Anim. G. Responsible use of antibiotics in aquaculture. FAO. T.. Generation and characterization of monoclonal antibodies to Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) prion protein.. Tatzelt J. Chemosphere 47. R. 12–15. 2011] Lindstrom. 2002 Comparability of world-wide analytical data of PCDDs. T. Sørum.F. J. 469. 183–191. J. Riemer C. D. Ferrario. http://www.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 34 Gujja. 1991.49:922-9. B. B. 1–24.. Johannessen. O. Conlon HE. 2005. PCDFs and non-ortho PCBs in samples of chicken. Complex interactions mediate the effects of fish farming on benthic chemistry within a region of Scotland. 1996 What price prawn? Shrimp aquaculture‟s impact in Asia. Hernandez Serrano. 60:4015-4021. Environ. Italy. Fish Dis.. September 28. Kruse. Simultaneous occurrence of Vibrio salmonicida and antibioticresistant bacteria in sediments at abandoned aquaculture sites. Ciappellano S. and O. J. Aranguren R. Muir. Phil. Pocchiari M. B (2005) 360. An analysis of the feasibility of providing federal multiple-peril crop insurance to aquaculture. Husevag. 2006. Baier M. Miesbauer M. P. Bamme T. 2008 . dibenzo-p-furans and selected coplanar biphenyls in Scottish farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). & Byrne. butter and salmon. The Fishsite. 2004. Environ.
. Flores-Verdugo. Troell.1996 Energy and resource constraints on intensive agricultural production. The price of lice. and M. R. 2003. Kautsky. E. C. A.intrafish. and Pickup.. Identification of cDNAs from Japanese pufferfish (Fugu rubripes) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) coding for homologues to tetrapod prion proteins. 2008 Smith. A. J. 2011] Rosenberg.81:123– 130. Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies.21:99–123 Naylor. 815–827. Smith. Wilesmith. G. 1997 .pdf [Accessed July 23. et al. Ruiz-Fernandez. American Journal of Epidemiology 145. R.. A.. Hoffman R. 2011] Roheim and Sutinen. http://www.1098222) Primavera. and A. 1997 Socio-economic impacts of shrimp farming. Trans. Hiney. 959-969. Soc. 2003 Impact of fish farming on fish stocks. Shrimp aquaculture development and the environment in the Gulf of California eco-region. J.0170 Phil. 2003.. Fish Farmer 26. A.pdf [Accessed July 23. G.no/multimedia/archive/00018/pdf20070606_18407a. 14–16. H. 2000. H. 451:23-24. 303-309. 2002 The effects of trawling and dredging on seaﬂoor habitat. I. Paez-Osuna. 2897-2912 Oidtmann B. (doi:10. Rogers. Bull WHO. J. J. Primavera. Beveridge. 2007. Nature. L.. Washington. R. Sapkota. C. 2007. N. Appl Environ Microbiol 66. Distribution of oxytetracycline resistance plasmids between aeromonads in hospitals and aquaculture environments: implication of Tn1721 in dissemination of the tetracycline resistance determinant Tet A.info/uploads/Roheim_Sutinen_Final_draft_March_8. Huys. M. P. Pike. J. Alonso-Rodriguez. J. http://www. Lubchenco. Swings. M. Lyle-Fritch. J. Stokstad. 2008. Annu Rev Energy Environ 1996... F. P. 46:806-815. DC: National Research Council. 2003. Mangroves and brackishwater pond culture in the Philippines. K. Aquacult. 318:1711. Holtkamp N. C. R. P. McGann. Clay. Gracia..2010. N. NRC.H. H.Is eco-label for Russia Pollock unlikely?.1098/rstb. C. Parasites from fish farms driving wild salmon to extinction. 136p. PG. Rhodes.1126/science.. 2003. M. 2004 Ecosystem-based fishery management. Science305. 28. H. B 2010 365. 96-100. Folke. /doi: 10. Pikitch E. Naylor RL. Primavera.The epidemics of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: current status and future prospects. Goldburg. F. Science. Res. R. Intrafish. Griot. 346–347. Simon D. Roque. FEBS Lett 538. M. L. Bull. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE): causes and consequences of a common source epidemic. 1995. Hydrobiologia 295. 2006.W. & Barlow. A.. Trade and market-related instruments to reinforce fisheries management measures to promote sustainable fishing practices. Mar Pollut.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 35 Nathanson. 2000. Baier M. S. J.illegalfishing.. Mooney.
Plastics. R.C.com/articles/1165/cod-mislabeling-disguises-cheaper-fishproducts accessed July 23. R. Trans.1098/rstb. J. Phil. Phil.. Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in industrially compounded aquafeeds: trends and future prospects. pp 37-60.015) [Accessed July 27.171–207. R. B (2010) 365. G. vol. S.2008. 2011 . J. Hart & J. Soc.2025 [Accessed July 27.F. 1998 Major challenges to feed development for marine and diadromous finfish and crustacean species. De Silva). 2002a. In Handbook of fish and fisheries. M.2007. F. Soc. & Metian. pp. (2009) 364. Soc. New York: Academic.ECCAP WG13 Aquaculture draft for contributions 36 Tacon. C.com/articles/559/organic-aquaculture-whats-in-a-label accessed July 23.thefishsite. 2011 http://www.2009. Thompson. 2011] WorldFish and PRIMEX Final Report. Final Report Submitted to the Asian Young.com/articles/1147/managing-the-environmental-costs-ofaquaculture accessed July 23. 2009.thefishsite. B (2007) 362. 2011 http://www. 947-957 doi:10. G. J.B.J. A.D. P. the environment and human health:current concensus and future trends.aquaculture. 2011] Website http://www. Moore. 1973-1976 doi:10. R. A. Oxford:Blackwell Science.J. Global trends in feed ingredient use within the aquaculture industry: a review. Trans.1098/rstb. R. S. C.2010.A. 2007.J. Zhu Chen. 2153-2166 doi:10.com/articles/721/eco-labeling-of-fisheries-products-assessment-ofits-benefits accessed July 23 2011 http://www.& F. G. future prospects. 146–158.K.0053 [Accessed July 27.0054 [Accessed July 27. Trans. J.08. C. Zhao-Jun Wen & Yihuang Wang. In preparation. U.com/articles/580/catching-the-ethical-fish-no-strings-attached accessed July 23. & Metian. Tacon.S. J. (doi:10.thefishsite. 2008. & Barg.1098/rstb.2009..H. M. A.0134 [Accessed July 27.1016/j. Life sciences and biotechnology in China. In Tropical mariculture (ed. R. 2853-2867 doi:10. 2007.. Swan.thefishsite. Moore.H. 2011 http://www. Swan.1098/rstb. Phil. Trans.com/articles/580/catching-the-ethical-fish-no-strings-attached accessed July 23 2011 http://www. Aquaculture 285. B (2009) 364. vom Saal. 2011] Thompson. vom Saal. Phil. Reynolds).C. & Muir. S. 2011] Thornton. 2011] Tacon. & S.thefishsite. II (ed. 2007. 2009. Soc. Our plastic age.thefishsite. P. Livestock Production: recent trends. Marketing fish.S. Hong-Guang Wang.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.