PDA

View Full Version : Austrailian Article has U.S. Fish Farmers Upset



Cecil
17th October 2010, 11:28 PM
Thoughts on the following article? It has fish farmers upset all the way over here in the U.S. Criticisms are:

Ironically, on Australis’ own website, they show picture of their farm in a “pristine” bay, where their fish are being raised in net pens,called modern sea cages on their website, but described as unsustainable in the article below. I don’t think Mr. Goldman is going to be very popular at the Aquaculture America meetings.

http://www.thebetterfish.com/our-story

http://www.thebetterfish.com/our-fish/sustainability

A couple of other inconsistencies on their website. They claim that they only use “sustainabley-harvested fishmeal” in their diets.

Well, contrary to recent popular beliefs, most fishmeal and oil are produced from sustainable, managed, and monitored fish stocks, reducing the possibility of over-fishing. The supply is presently stable at 6.0 to 6.5 million tons annually.

They also claim that their fish are fed “a largely vegetarian diet containing soy, canola, wheat and other grains with less than 20% of fish meal & fish oil vs. 50% or more for a typical salmon diet.”

While 50% fishmeal used to be common in salmon diets, today it is closer to 35%. Not the huge difference they are promoting.

Articles like these make me sad and mad.

Laura

A fish we can farm without guilt

Barry Estabrook

Our prehistoric ancestors in Southeast Asia had good reason to domesticate the area's wild sheep instead of tigers.

Sheep were docile creatures that preferred to live together in flocks and could convert grass and weeds that humans couldn't digest into valuable protein. Tigers were solitary and wide-ranging and needed to be fed many times their weight in perfectly edible animal protein. Early man realized the sheer folly of feeding several sheep to a tiger in order for it to produce a sheep's weight of meat.

In the 1970s, when modern aquaculturists began casting about for fish to tame, they ignored this 10,000-year-old wisdom. Species were chosen on the basis of their value in the marketplace. If not, what logical reason would anyone have for domesticating Atlantic salmon, a carnivorous fish that cruises the open oceans and needs to eat many times its own weight in smaller fish and marine animals? A tiger of the seas.

For a white-fleshed fish, the barramundi packs a mighty load of healthful omega-3s?about the same amount as a coho salmon.

Joshua Goldman, working in the unlikely setting of a collection of warehouse-like buildings in an industrial park near an airport in Turners Falls, a village in western Massachusetts's Pioneer Valley, is attempting to undo fish farming's fundamental wrong turn. After raising striped bass in the 1990s, Goldman, who is the chief executive officer of Australis Aquaculture, began a three-year quest for a better fish. After looking at more than 50 candidates, he chose the barramundi, a native of Southeast Asia and northern Australia that in some ways resembles members of the bass family.

In terms of biological needs, barramundi are the anti-salmon. They are born in the sea and migrate to fresh waters as adults, the reverse of a salmon's lifecycle. The sluggish rivers they call home are subject to frequent droughts, forcing barramundi to form tight schools in tiny pools left in otherwise dry riverbeds. Huge gills enable them to live in oxygen-deficient water. And best of all, they have the rare ability to transform vegetarian feed into sought-after omega-3 fatty acids. Salmon require as much as three pounds of fish-based feed to put on a pound of meat. Goldman's barramundi need only a half pound, the bulk of which is made from scraps from a herring processing plant.

There is another important way that Australis is charting a course for sustainable aquaculture. Farmed salmon live in net pens placed in the open ocean. Feces, excess food, and other waste flow directly into the surrounding waters or fall to the bottom, where they create oxygen-poor dead zones. Net pens not only pollute, but spread diseases and parasites to passing wild fish. Land-locked Australis uses what is called a recirculating system. Water is drawn into the facility from wells fed by the nearby Connecticut River. It flows through the fish tanks and then is cleaned in a treatment plant and sent back to the fish. Every gallon Australis uses is recycled 300 times. Solid waste is separated out and goes to local farms as fertilizer.

Goldman thinks that Australis, with 50 employees, operates the largest recirculating aquaculture operation in the world. It consists of a series of tanks that are about as big as above-ground backyard swimming pools. The tanks are housed in cavernous buildings that could do double duty as hangars for the nearby airplanes. Goldman and I sloshed through inch-deep trays of disinfectant. Inside, the air was heavy with an aroma not unlike that of the expensive dry cat food my spoiled cat enjoys.

The smaller tanks contained minnows that were not much bigger than a grain of rice and were born from giant, 40-pound breeding fish kept at the facility. As the young barramundi grow, they graduate through a series of larger tanks until, at the age of one year, they weigh about one and a half pounds and are ready for market. The Turners Falls operation sells about 3,500 fish a day, most of which are trucked away alive for sale in Asian markets throughout North America. A smaller number are frozen whole. The company owns a similar-sized farm in Vietnam that processes fish and packages them as breaded, seasoned filets.

In texture and appearance the flesh of a farmed barramundi is similar to firm white-fleshed fish like snapper, grouper, striped bass, or sole. But for a white-fleshed fish, it packs a mighty load of healthful omega-3s?about the same amount as a coho salmon. I have only tasted barramundi once, and to be honest it wasn't a fair test. The event was a 250-person banquet?a perilous venue for any cooked aquatic creature?and the chef leaned a little heavily on the seasoning, overpowering the fish. My friend Rick Moonen, the author of Fish Without a Doubt (which was edited by the woman I live with) and owner of the acclaimed Las Vegas temple of sustainably procured fish, rm seafood, endorses it without hesitation. "It's always sweet and buttery with a delicate texture," he writes.

Which is a lot more than I can say for the last piece of environmentally destructive farmed salmon I encountered.

Barry Estabrook is a former contributing editor at Gourmet magazine. His work on a dairy farm and fishing boat taught him that writing about food was easier than producing it. He blogs at politicsoftheplate.com.

Cecil
18th October 2010, 01:31 AM
Whoops I think I may have put this in the wrong category. Gary feel free to move it.

GaryD
18th October 2010, 10:49 AM
Hi Cecil,

I don't think that, while the company is named Australis, it is actually an Australian company......although an Australian seems to have some involvement.

The article raises some interesting points about the effect of nutrition on fish.

First of all, I guess I'm surprised to find that Barramundi would have higher Omega 3 levels that Atlantic salmon. I'd have thought that the salmon (being an oilier fish) would have had the higher levels.

I can recall some controversy, some time back, where farm-raised tilapia was seen as being problematic because it lacked the Omega 3 levels that were usual for the species .....because of the diet that the farm-raised fish were fed.

The changing nutritional profile of our food is of real concern. Omega 3, for example, is required for brain development in infants. If they are fed food (which is normally perceived as having a certain nutritional profile) with lower nutritional levels, the long term consequences could be huge.

While I understand that most infants would not be eating much Atlantic salmon or barramundi, most of them do eat plenty of chicken and it has been determined that, during the past 30 years, the Omega 3 levels in chicken have plummeted.

I guess that the point of my post, is that we should be wary of what agribusiness is doing to our food and not take anything they say about its nutritional value as gospel.

Only through independent testing do we get to really find out what's (or what's not) in the food we eat.

Gary