This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]

On: 20 June 2013, At: 16:23

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Journal of Aquatic Food

Product Technology
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wafp20

Applications of HACCP
Principles to Address Food
Safety and Other Issues in
Aquaculture
a b
E. Spencer Garrett , Michael L. Jahncke & Roy E.
c
Martin
a
National Seafood Inspection Laboratory, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 3209 Frederic Street,
Pascagoula, MS, 39567, USA
b
Seafood Research and Extension Center of Virginia
Tech, 102 South King Street, Hampton, VA, 23669,
USA
c
National Fisheries Insitute, 11283, Hickory Ridge
Court, Spring Hill, FL, 34609, USA
Published online: 22 Sep 2008.

To cite this article: E. Spencer Garrett , Michael L. Jahncke & Roy E. Martin
(2000): Applications of HACCP Principles to Address Food Safety and Other Issues in
Aquaculture, Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, 9:1, 5-20

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J030v09n01_02

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-

and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
 sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable
for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with or arising out of the use of this material.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013
 PEER REVIEWED PAPERS
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

Applications of HACCP Principles

to Address Food Safety
and Other Issues in Aquaculture:
An Overview
E. Spencer Garrett
Michael L. Jahncke
Roy E. Martin

ABSTRACT. Aquaculture is important to our United States fishery

system. Import and export markets for such products can be expected to
expand, particularly as increased research begins to remove physiologi-
cal and animal husbandry barriers, and over fishing of wild stocks
require replenishment through increased aquaculture efforts. Some
unique risk factors associated with aquacultured products must be ad-
dressed and controlled as the United States relies more on aquacultured
species. This is particularly the case due to concerns about increased
risk exposure to our national sea animals, vegetation in the marine

E. Spencer Garrett is Director of the National Seafood Inspection Laboratory,

National Marine Fisheries Service, 3209 Frederic Street, Pascagoula, MS 39567.
Michael L. Jahncke is Director of Seafood Research and Extension Center of
Virginia Tech, 102 South King Street, Hampton, VA 23669.
Roy E. Martin is Science Advisor, National Fisheries Insitute, 11283, Hickory
Ridge Court, Spring Hill, FL 34609.
Address correspondence to E. Spencer Garrett at the above address.
Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, Vol. 9(1) 2000
E 2000 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 5
 6 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

estuarine, and fresh water environments when live animals are trans-
ferred across state, provincial, and national borders. Nonetheless, ap-
plication of the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) prin-
ciples as a risk management tool in aquaculture will work provided the
proper infrastructures are executed. We must also overcome the histori-
cal regulatory pitfalls of HACCP dealing with concept understanding,
critical control point definitions, misunderstanding of and between the
complimentary roles of sanitation and process controls, agency and
industry commitment, inspector and consumer acceptance and effective
training. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: getinfo@haworthpressinc.

com <Website: http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

KEYWORDS. HACCP, aquaculture, safety, trade

INTRODUCTION

Commercial and recreational fishing represent one of the most im-

portant uses of a natural resource. Wild species are harvested by 17
million recreational anglers, and nearly 300 thousand commercial har-
vesters, many of which come from generations of commercial fishing
families. Commercial harvesters deploy 94 thousand vessels, and rec-
reational fishermen own millions of recreational fishing boats, con-
tributing approximately 30 billion dollars annually to the U.S. Gross
National Product (commercial fisheries 17 billion dollars; and saltwa-
ter recreational fisheries 13.5 billion dollars) as depicted in Figure 1
(NMFS, 1995b).
The viability of both the commercial fishery and aquaculture pro-
duction is dependent upon the maintenance and availability of good
habitat and proper water quality. Loss of coastal habitat and wetland
areas has resulted in the decline of U.S. fishery stocks. Coastal estu-
aries serve as a breeding ground providing habitat for over 75 percent
of commercial species and 80 to 90 percent of recreational caught fish
and shellfish (NMFS, 1995b). Years of habitat destruction have been
detrimental to the life cycles of many fishery resources (NMFS, 1994).
Currently, many of the world’s commercial species are declining or
are on the verge of over exploitation (NMFS, 1994). Nevertheless, the
demand for high quality seafood is expected to continue to increase
over the next several years, exceeding that which can be supplied by
the commercial harvest of wild seafood (Anon., 1988).
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 7

FIGURE 1. The U.S. Fisheries System.

Per Capita (lbs) 17,000,000

14.6 Commercial Recreational
3-4 Recreational (est.) Anglers
HABITAT

RESOURCES
CONSUMER -- WILD
-- AQUACULTURE
93,000
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

DISTRIBUTION Vessels
& SALE HARVEST

350,000 PROCESSING 274,000

Marketers Commercial
Harvesters
4,635 Plants
Plus Imports

In 1997, the U.S. current per capita consumption of commercially

harvested species averaged 14.6 pounds (NMFS, 1998). Per capita
consumption of recreational harvested seafood is estimated at three to
four pounds per person (Krebs-Smith, 1989). As a goal, the National
Fisheries Institute (NFI) has set a seafood consumption goal of 20
pounds per capita by 2000 (Anon., 1990). One-half of the U.S. sea-
food consumption is dependent on imported cultured and wild caught
seafood.
Worldwide, approximately 12 million metric tons of cultured sea-
food products are presently produced. It is estimated that an additional
15 to 20 million metric tons could be produced by 2010 (Anon., 1994).
The United States domestic commercial landings are not expected to
increase any time in the near future. Any near term increases in sea-
food products will have to be produced through domestic aquaculture
operations in order to meet future demand, reducing our dependence
on imports. Aquacultured species now contribute up to 15 percent of
the U.S. seafood supply (Ratafia, 1994; Rhodes, 1987).
These increased aquaculture efforts could have detrimental impacts
on the environment (i.e., pollution through toxic and organic waste
discharges; buildups of suspended solids; reduced oxygen levels;
introduction or augmentation of disease; habitat impairment; loss of
natural resources; and risks associated with transfers and introductions
of exotics (NAS, 1992)). The application of the Hazard Analysis Criti-
 8 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

cal Control Point (HACCP) principles can be used to anticipate, iden-

tify, and prevent many of the potential environmental impacts associ-
ated with aquaculture operations.

FISHERY IMPORTS

Currently, the U.S. imports over 50 percent of its total consumption

Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

of seafoods originating from 172 countries around the world (NMFS,

1998). This economic reliance on seafood imports has steadily in-
creased over the past ten years to an extent that the United States is
now the world’s second largest importer of seafoods. Trade estimates
indicate that the United States imports approximately two billion dol-
lars in cultured products yearly. Using shrimp as an example, large
quantities are imported from Mexico, Ecuador, Indonesia, Pakistan,
and Thailand. Other principle U.S. imported species consist of tuna,
lobster, groundfish, and salmon (NMFS, 1998).
Occasionally imported aquaculture species may pose some unique
potential human safety hazards from antibiotic residues, pesticides,
PCBs, etc. The use of antimicrobials in aquaculture at both therapeutic
and subtherapeutic levels is known (Brown, 1989). Oxytetracycline
residues have been found in cultured shrimp imported from Thailand
(Food Chemical News, 1994). Also of note, was the use of chloram-
phenicol in shrimp culture and ampicillin in yellowtail culture (Seriola
lalandei) (Hawke et al., 1987; Manci, 1990).
These imported products can originate from the other side of the
world making it difficult to track their origin for recall purposes. For
example, neither Switzerland or Panama are noted for their vast
salmon resources. Nevertheless, in 1994, the United States imported
small quantities of salmon from these countries, illustrating the in-
credibly complex nature of international trading in seafoods (NMFS,
1995a).
Regulations on imported seafood vary tremendously by country
regarding allowable contaminant levels and inspection protocols. The
regulation of imported seafoods to ensure safety is largely based on
end product testing, except where Memorandums of Understanding
(MOUs) exist (NAS, 1991). This testing will change in the future as
HACCP-based programs are harmonized and implemented world wide,
resulting in a ‘‘more level’’ playing field for seafood products.
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 9

FISHERY EXPORTS

In addition to being the world’s second largest importer of seafood

products, the United States is also the world’s second largest exporter
of seafood products. The United States currently exports seafoods to
162 countries. Major U.S. exports include salmon, crabs, surimi, fish
blocks, groundfish, flatfish, shrimp, and lobsters (NMFS, 1998). This
export trend has accelerated in part due to the full development and
exploitation of the northwest and Alaska fisheries in conjunction with
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

improved efficiencies in seafood processing. Interestingly, U.S. labor

rates and processing efficiencies for the production of surimi are such
that the United States now exports surimi to Asia (instead of import-
ing it).
In 1997, estimated U.S. aquaculture production was nearly 400
thousand metric tons consisting of baitfish, catfish, salmon, trout,
clams, crawfish, mussels, oysters, fresh and saltwater shrimp, and
other species such as ornamental fish, alligators, algae, aquatic plants,
tilapia, hybrid striped bass, etc. (NMFS, 1998). Of these products, the
United States principally exported rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon,
tilapia, catfish, freshwater crawfish, and live mussels to 19 countries
in Europe, North and South America, and Asia. In 1994, freshwater
crawfish value lead the export seafood market for aquacultured spe-
cies at slightly over 16 million dollars (NMFS, 1995a).

BUSINESS ISSUES
Within the past several years, numerous agribusiness mergers have
led to more sophisticated wholesale buying techniques, particularly as
many seafood firms have downsized their inventory operations. These
changes are leading to an increased sophistication in the areas of raw
material acquisition; processing methods; packaging; inventory and
shipping control; and national and international regulatory interfaces,
leading to a dramatic increased emphasis on quality management.
Business sophistication, and the recent implementation of the Gen-
eral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have changed the world’s economy
and fostered the need for more interactions between worldwide regu-
latory agencies to harmonize standards and regulatory requirements
(WTO, 1995). In this regard, the Codex Alimentarius Commission is
 10 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

currently working on a document to harmonize worldwide HACCP re-

quirements (FAO/WHO, 1997). Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA)
discussions between the United States and the European Union (EU)
are also further along regarding seafood than they are in dairy, meat, or
poultry (World Food Chemical News, 1995).

HACCP
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

HACCP-based systems are currently being implemented world-

wide. This system became increasingly important with the imple-
mentation of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) mandatory
HACCP program late in 1997 (Federal Register, 1995), and the re-
quirements by the EU that only products produced by facilities with an
approved HACCP system will be allowed to be exported to EU coun-
tries (World Food Chemical News, 1995). The HACCP concept was
developed in the late 1960s as a quality assurance system to enhance
food safety. The basic principles were not new. The introduction of
HACCP shifted emphasis from resource intensive end-product inspec-
tion and testing to preventative control of hazards at all stages of food
production (FAO/WHO, 1996). HACCP is considered one of the most
effective and efficient ways to enhance food safety.
HACCP is a system of food control which requires a hazard analy-
sis to be conducted on the product and process and requires that
Critical Limits (CLs) be set at each Critical Control Point (CCP) of the
process. When ‘‘real time’’ monitoring of a CCP reveals that a CL is
being violated, specific corrective actions are taken to isolate all non-
complying products. Once the non-complying product is isolated a
specific hazard analysis is performed to determine its proper disposi-
tion, as well as determining what went wrong in the process to pro-
duce the noncomplying product. Once the process malfunction is de-
termined, a ‘‘short-term’’ fix is identified and executed and a long-term
corrective action is scheduled for implementation. All of these activi-
ties are documented through corrective action reports, as well as the
final disposition of the isolated non-complying product.
Through systematic monitoring and surveillance procedures at the
CCPs, major food safety errors can be prevented. It allows for re-
sources, money, people, and equipment to be focused on the essential
elements of food safety. It applies, from production to consumption.
The following seven basic principles must be followed for each
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 11

HACCP plan that is executed by a facility: (1) performing a systematic

hazard analysis of the product relative to its end use and determining
the control measures necessary to eliminate and/or reduce the hazards
to acceptable levels; (2) defining CCPs in the process; (3) establishing
CLs at the CCPs; (4) determining corrective actions necessary to be
executed when deviations from the CLs occur; (5) establishing moni-
toring; (6) verification procedures to document that the process is
under control; and (7) record keeping.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

MODEL SEAFOOD SURVEILLANCE PROJECT (MSSP)

At the request of Congress, the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) defined how a regulatory HACCP system based upon critical
control points could work throughout the seafood industry from pro-
duction, harvesting, imports, aquaculture, processing, distribution and
retail. This effort was conducted in cooperation with the National
Fisheries Institute (NFI) and was known as the Model Seafood Sur-
veillance Project (MSSP) (NMFS, 1990). For guidance, it borrowed
heavily on the advice of a 1985 National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
report which indicated that in HACCP development--the role of the
regulatory agency is to detail only the basic elements of a program and
verify industry performance. The industry role was to take the lead in
determining the actual details of the HACCP program and executing
its use (NAS, 1985).
The NAS also indicated that implementation of the program would
require extensive training for both regulatory inspectors and industry
personnel; that HACCP must be made mandatory beyond the process-
ing plant level; and that the regulatory agency and the industry must
agree on the minimal records to be shared to verify that the HACCP
process is working. As NMFS initially looked at HACCP, it was
determined that historically there were eight regulatory pitfalls associ-
ated with the implementation of HACCP in food control systems.
They are: (1) understanding the HACCP concept; (2) choosing a defi-
nition for a ‘‘critical control point’’; (3) incorporation of sanitation
controls in the HACCP system; (4) agency resource commitment;
(5) inspector acceptance; (6) consumer acceptance; (7) the regulatory
approach to industry; and, finally, (8) training.
NMFS initial HACCP efforts were directed at developing a strategy
to minimize regulatory pitfalls by providing the industry an opportuni-
 12 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

ty to come together and design a HACCP program for their individual

segments. This was accomplished by holding a series of workshops
around the country on a commodity-by-commodity basis. At those
workshops, industry personnel defined and determined what a HACCP
model should be for a given commodity.
Models were developed and tested at a representative number of
facilities, and summarized results submitted to an industry steering
committee to review and modify the model where necessary. Follow-
ing the steering committee action, the NMFS staff integrated all the
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

data and information into proposed regulatory HACCP models for use
in a new mandatory seafood inspection program. During this process
the NMFS staff was not bound by the steering committee’s action and
could upgrade or downgrade individual CCPs in the proposed regula-
tory models. Since its inception, the NMFS Fishery Product Inspec-
tion Program has successfully operated a HACCP inspection program
for all fishery products including those derived from aquaculture.

PUBLIC, ANIMAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS

All foods--including seafoods--can be conveniently categorized into

three risk areas: (1) product safety; (2) food hygiene (clean versus
dirty plants, wholesome vs. unwholesome products); and (3) econom-
ic fraud (Figure 2). Traditionally, human seafood product safety risks
have been categorized into environmental, process, distribution and/or
consumer induced categories. The environmental category can be fur-
ther divided into either natural hazards, such as biotoxins, or anthropo-
genic contaminants, such as PCBs (Garrett and Hudak-Roos, 1991).
Ensuring seafood product quality, safety and wholesomeness is
important not only to the consumers, but also for the long-term stabil-

FIGURE 2. Analysis of Consumer Hazards.

Product Food Economic

Safety Hygiene Fraud

Food Consumption
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 13

ity of the industry. Aquaculture firms have an advantage over tradi-

tional wild harvesting since they have better control of such factors as
water quality, harvest, storage conditions, etc.
In aquaculture, since live animals are involved that may be
introduced into non-traditional habitats, product safety considerations
must also be expanded to include risk exposures to wild sea animals,
aquatic plants, and the environment. This is true when non-native
species are to be placed, for whatever reason, into U.S. marine, estua-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

rine, and freshwater environments. In terms of in situ animal risk, such

as those for bacterial and viral diseases in salmonids and catfish, there
is little regulatory protection against the introduction of exotic species
or disease pathogens that could decimate our natural wild sea animals.
A recent example is the emergence of a shrimp virus from South
America into Texas shrimp ponds (Anon., 1995a; Anon., 1996). This
has become even a more serious issue with the discovery that native
white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) may also be infected with this virus
(Anon., 1995b).
Similarly, other regions of the world have neglected disease regula-
tory control procedures to their detriment, such as Europe with its
oyster disease problems. Other examples include introduction of the
‘‘crayfish plague’’ in Britain by farmed crayfish imported from the
United States (Thompson, 1990). Other farmed fish and shellfish have
also been implicated as reservoirs of disease organisms (Monro and
Wadell, 1984). Most disease transfer from cultured to wild species
occurs in conjunction with the introduction of nonindigenous species.
Weston (1991) reviewed the literature and found that 48 parasitic
species of freshwater fish were transferred among continents via im-
portation of live or frozen fish. Within the past ten years little progres-
sive regulatory movement appears to have occurred in minimizing
possible adverse health effects to the in situ sea animals and vegetation
in marine and estuarine environments resulting from animal or vegeta-
tion disease intrusions. Discussions have occurred concerning adop-
tion of a quarantine protocol recommended by the International Com-
mission for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) and the European
Inland Fisheries Advisory Committee (EIFAC). Attempts to prevent
disease and contamination of aquaculture products are carried out
primarily by individual countries, but to date, little has happened.
 14 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

ECONOMIC FRAUD CONSIDERATIONS

Aquaculturists, throughout the world, are proud of their accomplish-
ments, and have striven to distinguish their products from those of the
wild harvest. As over fishing continues, and natural stocks are depleted,
great pressures often exist to engage in fraudulent activities substituting
lower value species for those of higher value, including those of aqua-
culture origin. Accurate identification of seafood species is important
consumer information. Approved trade names for fish species exist
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

(FDA, 1993), but enforcement is difficult and lower valued species are
sometimes mislabeled to obtain a better market price. For example, a
cultured cuttlefish steak retailing for less than $3.00 per pound can be
effectively substituted to the unwary for an abalone steak, which can
retail for $56.00 per pound. Marine aquaculture of finfish in the United
States is in the early stages for such species as mahi mahi (Coryphaena
hippurus), white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), red snapper
(Lutjanus campechanus), etc. Successful culture of such species as red
snapper will introduce additional challenges to regulatory agencies re-
sponsible for enforcing the proper labeling of seafood products. Current
estimates indicate that approximately 77 percent of red snapper is mis-
labeled (Hsieh et al., 1990; Langerkrist, 1989; NMFS, 1990). In addi-
tion, successful culture of mahi mahi will involve product handling and
temperature safety requirements, since histamine can form in this spe-
cies under temperature abuse conditions.
Considerable interest has also been shown in the commercial cul-
ture of ‘‘game’’ fish such as hybrid striped bass, a cross between a
striped bass (Morone saxatilis) and white bass (Morone chrysops)
(Van Olst and Carlberg, 1990). These ‘‘game’’ fish support consider-
able recreational activity, and many states have implemented legal
provisions against the commercial sale of these fish (Parker and Mill-
er, 1988; Sharpe and Moore, 1987). Traditionally, law enforcement
agencies have relied on paper trails to monitor sales and movement of
cultured ‘‘game’’ fish. Recently, a biochemical method using fatty
acid profiles has been developed to distinguish wild from some cul-
tured fish (Jahncke et al., 1992).

APPLICATION OF HACCP PRINCIPLES- AQUACULTURE

During the MSSP, three workshops were held dealing with the
aquacultured production of southeast catfish, southeast crawfish, north-
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 15

west finfish, and molluscan shellfish. For the HACCP aquaculture

model, a hazard analysis versus the end-use of the product was con-
ducted by reviewing a great deal of literature including FDA consum-
er complaint and import detention files, and Centers for Disease Con-
trol (CDC) food borne disease surveillance data. From this review a
two-part conclusion was reached indicating that: with the exception of
molluscan shellfish eaten raw--aquaculture presents no more, and per-
haps even less of a safety risk than from wild sea animals. Secondly,
that aquaculture products may represent some unique risks from anti-
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

biotic residues, herbicides, etc. An expansion of those hazards would

include pesticides, microbial pathogens, chemical contaminates, and
unapproved food additives.
Operational flow diagrams were developed for each of the four
aquacultured items and the control and CCPs were identified. The
flow diagram for catfish is shown in Figure 3. For each operational
step and CCP for catfish production, all hazards, control measures for
the hazards, monitoring, and record keeping requirements were identi-

FIGURE 3. Southeast Catfish Aquaculture Production Flow Chart.

Site Selection

Water Supply

Culture System

Feed Supply Production

Harvesting/
Holding

Delivery/
Transport

Critical Control Point

 16 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

fied. Note there are seven steps: three of which were identified as
CCPs, i.e., water supply, feed supply, and production methods (Figure 3).
At the production step, the three possible hazards were related to
misuse of registered or use of non-registered chemicals or drugs;
non-conforming antibiotic residues in flesh due to inadequate with-
drawal times; and/or pathogen contaminates of the fish (Figure 3). The
preventive measures necessary to control the hazards at the production
step were identified as: (1) the use of approved drugs and chemicals at
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

proper concentrations; (2) executing drug withdrawal procedures from

feeds in accordance with antibiotic labeled instructions; and (3) pro-
hibiting use of feed or water contaminated with human and/or animal
wastes (NMFS, 1991).
For southeast crawfish production, six steps were identified with
pond site selection, pond management, and transportation as CCPs.
For northwest aquacultured finfish production six steps were also
identified, three dealing with site selection/water supply, feed supply
and spawning throughout growout being CCPs. Finally, for molluscan
shellfish production, ten steps were identified with eight dealing with
approval of site selection, site certification, maintenance, relaying of
contaminated products, harvesting, bulk transport, wet and dry stor-
age, and packing being CCPs. Specific compliance procedures of the
National Shellfish Sanitation Plan (NSSP) are referenced at each of
these molluscan shellfish CCPs. The industry/government workshop
participants identified for each step of an individual aquacultured
product operation, hazards, and control measures to prevent, elimi-
nate, or reduce the hazards to acceptable levels, CCP monitoring, and
record keeping requirements.
The NMFS MSSP proposed Aquaculture HACCP Regulatory Mod-
el also detailed the necessary industry controls, regulatory controls,
research focus and CCPs in dealing with such products. The identified
industry controls necessary to make the system work were an inten-
sive management commitment to HACCP; instituting formal SOPs
and executing effective hazard prevention measures. Also required
was the need to establish effective monitoring procedures and imple-
ment corrective actions by trained personnel when SOPs are violated.
Additionally inherent in the HACCP concept is the requirement for
formalized procedures and proper record keeping and HACCP system
verification.
Possible regulatory controls, beyond HACCP-based inspections in-
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 17

cluded more chemical guidelines, and increased enforcement against

bootlegged oysters. Personnel certification recommendations as well
as recommendations to prohibit wild to cultured species substitution
were made. Increased training for personnel in HACCP was also
identified.
Proposed research needs focused on developing more chemical
standards, approving more chemicals and drugs for use by the aqua-
culture industry, developing more rapid methods to determine product
compliance and correlating soil and water contaminants to potential
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

public health problems.

On December 18, 1997 (FDA, 1993), the FDA required that all
fishery products must be produced under the HACCP concept and
processors must have an appropriate HACCP plan in effect for their
commodities. Since the HACCP concept applies from production to
consumption, it is not unreasonable to expect that aquaculture produc-
tion endeavors must also employ the HACCP concept. The MSSP
program for aquaculture can be used as a foundation to design HACCP-
based aquaculture production systems.

CONCLUSION

Aquacultured products produced around the world are safe and

wholesome. Nevertheless, it is important to understand and recognize
potential public, animal, and environmental risks associated with
aquaculture to more effectively anticipate and manage them. Aquacul-
ture, like traditional farming operations, can have associated risks to
animals, environment, and employees.
As wild fishery stocks decline there will continue to be more de-
mand for aquacultured products. Along with this growth, consumers
and governments will demand to maintain a safe and healthy food
supply and environment. Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing
sectors of agriculture, which means that there are numerous business
entrepreneurs looking for new companies. Local, regional, and nation-
al governments are also encouraging the development of community
compatible business enterprises.
Application of HACCP principles as a risk management tool in
aquaculture can be used to help to ensure the continued successful
outlook for aquaculture.
 18 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

REFERENCES
Anonymous. 1988. Aquaculture and capture fisheries: Imports in the U.S. seafood
markets. Report prepared pursuant to the National Aquaculture Improvement Act
1985 (P.L. 99-198). U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS, Washington,
DC, April, 1988.
Anonymous. 1990. NFI sets sights on 20 lbs per capita. Water Farming Journal.
5(6):14.
Anonymous. 1994. State of world’s fisheries report. NFI’s 49th annual convention.
Aquaculture News. Dec. Vol. 3(2):13.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

Anonymous. 1995a. Virus destroys shrimp crop in South Texas. The Aquaculture
News. June. Vol. 3(8):1.
Anonymous. 1995b. Native shrimp susceptible to South American virus. The Aqua-
culture News. Aug. Vol. 3(10):2.
Anonymous. 1996. Virus re-emerges at shrimp farms. The Aquaculture News. Sep-
tember. Vol. 4(11):1, 15.
Brown, J. 1989. Antibiotics: Their use and abuse in aquaculture. World Aqua. June.
34-43.
Federal Register. 1995. Procedures for the safe and sanitary processing and importing
of fish and fishery products: final rule. Food and Drug Administration. Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services. 21 CFR, Parts 123 to 1240. Docket No.
93N-0196, RIN 0910-AA10. December, Washington, DC.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organiza-
tion. 1996. Report of the twenty-ninth session of the Codex Committee on Food
Hygiene. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program. ALINORM 97/13A. Rome.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organiza-
tion. 1997. Report of the twenty-second session of the joint FAO/WHO Codex
Alimentarius Commission. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program. ALI-
NORM 97/37. Rome.
Food Chemical News. 1994. Shrimp with tetracycline trace to Thailand. April 11.
Vol. 36(7):13.
Food and Drug Administration. 1993. The Seafood List: FDA’s guide to acceptable
market names for seafood sold in interstate commerce 1993. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Garrett, E.S. and M. Hudak-Roos. 1991. U.S. Seafood and HACCP. In Microbiology
of Marine Food Products. Edited by Donn R. Ward and Cameron R. Hackney. Van
Norstrand Reinhold. pp. 111-131.
Hawke, J.P., S.M. Plakas, R.V. Minton, R.M. McPhearson, T.G. Snister, and A.M.
Guarino. 1987. Fish pasteurellosis of cultured striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in
coastal Alabama. Aquaculture 65:193-204.
Hsieh, Y., P. Kirsch, and B. Woodward. 1990. Species identification of retail red
snapper fillets in Florida. In Proc. of the 14th An. Conf. of the Trop. and Subtrop.
Fish. Technol. Society of the Am. FL Sea Grant Program. SGR-101. Univ. of FL,
Gainesville, FL.
Jahncke, M.L., G.T. Seaborn, and T.I.J. Smith. 1992. Marine Forensics Program:
Development of a biochemical method to distinguish wild from cultured fish:
Final report. NOAA. Technical Memorandum NMFS. SEFSC-310.
 Garrett, Jahncke, and Martin 19

Krebs-Smith, S.M. 1989. As cited In National Academy of Sciences 1991 Seafood

Safety: A report of the committee on evaluation of the safety of fishery products.
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Langerkrist, M. 1989. Test show markets mislabeled fish red snapper. Asbury Park
Press, Asbury Park, NJ. May 28.
Manci, W. 1990. Hope and caution highlight fish disease news. Catfish News/Aqua-
culture News 4:10.
Monro, A.S.S., and I.F. Wadell. 1984. Furunculosis: Experience of its control in the
sea water cage culture of Atlantic salmon in Scotland. ICES. CM/F:32.
NAS. 1985. An evaluation of the role of microbiological criteria for foods and food
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

ingredients. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press. Washing-

ton, DC.
NAS. 1991. Seafood Safety: A report to the committee on evaluation of the safety of
fishery products. F.E. Ahmed (ed.). National Academy of Sciences, National
Academy Press. Washington, DC.
NAS. 1992. Marine Aquaculture: Opportunities for growth: Report of the committee
on assessment of technology and opportunities for marine aquaculture in the
United States: Marine Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical Sys-
tems. National Research Council, National Academy Press. Washington, DC.
NMFS. 1990. A model seafood surveillance design: A report to Congress. U.S.
Department of Commerce. NOAA, NMFS, Office of Trade and Industry Services,
NSIL, Pascagoula, MS. This document is reference No. 35 to the U.S. FDA
Proposed Ruling entitled ‘‘Proposal to Establish Procedures for the Safe Process-
ing and Importing of Fish and Fishery Products’’ [Docket Nos. 90N-1099 and
93N-0195], Vol. 59, No. 19, January 28, 1994, p. 4191.
NMFS. 1991. HACCP regulatory model for aquaculture. Report of the model sea-
food surveillance project (MSSP), U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA,
NMFS, Office of Trade and Industry Services, NSIL, Pascagoula, MS.
NMFS. 1994. Habitat protection activity report 1991-1993. U.S. Department of
Commerce, NOAA, NMFS. Silver Spring, MD.
NMFS. 1995a. Fisheries Statistics Division 1994. U.S. exports and imports by prod-
uct and country. Silver Spring, MD.
NMFS. 1995b. The national habitat program of the National Marine Fisheries Ser-
vice. Report. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS. Silver Spring, MD.
NMFS. 1998. Fisheries of the United States 1997. Current Fisheries Statistics No.
9600. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, NMFS. Silver Spring, MD.
Parker, N.C. and R.W. Miller. 1988. Report to the striped bass board of the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission from the Technical Advisory Committee:
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Special Report No. 10.
Ratafia, M. 1994. Aquaculture today: A worldwide status report. Aquaculture News.
Nov. Vol. (3):12-13, 18-19.
Rhodes, R.J. 1987. Status of world aquaculture. Aquaculture Magazine 17th Annual
Buyers Guide. pp. 4-18.
Sharpe, W.F. and S. Moore. 1987. Law enforcement symposium on aquaculture.
South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. Columbia, SC.
 20 JOURNAL OF AQUATIC FOOD PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY

Thompson, A.G. 1990. The danger of exotic species. World Aquaculture. 21(3):
25-32.
USDA. 1989. A margin of safety: The HACCP approach to food safety education.
Project report. Information on Legislative Affairs. FSIS, USDA. Washington, DC.
Van Olst, J.C. and J.M. Carlberg. 1990. Commercial culture of hybrid striped bass.
Aquaculture Magazine. 16(1):49-59.
Weston, D.P. 1991. The effects of aquaculture on indigenous biota. In Aquaculture
and Water Quality. D.E. Brune and J.R. Tomasso (eds.). Baton Rouge, LA. World
Aquaculture Society. pp. 534-564.
World Food Chemical News. 1995. U.S. seafood exporters to EU face USFDA
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 16:23 20 June 2013

December 1st deadline. Oct. Vol. 2 (28):17, 19.

World Trade Organization. 1995. Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade
Negotiations, 1993. Agreement on Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures. Center William Rappard, Rue de Lausanne 154, CH-1211, Geneva 21,
Switzerland. December 1.

HAWORTH JOURNALS
ARE AVAILABLE ON MICROFORM
All Haworth journals are now available in either microfiche or microfilm from
The Haworth Microform/Microfiche Division at the lowest possible prices.

Microfiche and microfilms are available at 25% above the ‘‘library’’ subscription rate.
For journal subscription rates, please look within the journal on the copyright pages.
For all microform subscriptions, these charges apply: outside US and Canada: 40% to total;
in Canada, 30% to total as well as 7% GST.

Microfilm specifications: 35mm; diazo or silver.

Microfiche specifications: 105mm x 184mm (4” x 6”); reduction ratio: 24X;
nonsilver (diazo) positive polarity.
Microform are mailed upon completion of each volume.

For further information, contact Janette Kemmerer, Microform Contact,

The Haworth Press, Inc., 10 Alice Street, Binghamton, NY 13904-1580;
Tel: (607) 722-5857, ext. 311; Fax: (607) 722-1424;
E-Mail: getinfo@haworthpressinc.com

Microform and microfiche are also available from Bell & Howell Information
and Learning (formerly University Microfilms International), 300 North
Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346; Tel: (800) 521-0600.