cqresearcher - california · pdf fileavailable online: july 27, 2007 627 fish farming the...

Fish FarmingIs it safe for humans and the environment?

Global demand for fish products has doubled

since the 1950s and is still rising. Today more

than 40 percent of the world’s seafood comes

not from wild catches but from land-based and

offshore farms. With many wild fisheries already overharvested

throughout the world, aquaculture is an important food source —

especially for poor countries — and has made seafood more

abundant and affordable. But some fish farms pollute surrounding

waters, and escaped farm fish compete with wild stocks and

spread diseases. Moreover, raising carnivorous fish can use up

more fish protein for feed than it produces, further stressing wild

fisheries. There are also growing concerns about whether imported

seafood is safe to eat and whether the United States regulates fish

imports strictly enough. Congress is considering legislation to expand

ocean aquaculture, but many fish and marine experts urge caution,

saying we know little about the potential impact on the oceans.

I

N

S

I

D

E

THE ISSUES ......................627

CHRONOLOGY ..................635

BACKGROUND ..................637

CURRENT SITUATION ..........639

AT ISSUE ..........................641

OUTLOOK ........................643

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................646

THE NEXT STEP ................647

THISREPORT

The new face of farming: Butch Medlin of New Haven,Ill., is all smiles after switching from raising hogs to

striped bass. “Both are an awful lot of work,” he says.

CQResearcherPublished by CQ Press, a division of Congressional Quarterly Inc.

www.cqresearcher.com

CQ Researcher • July 27, 2007 • www.cqresearcher.comVolume 17, Number 27 • Pages 625-648

RECIPIENT OF SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AWARD FOR

EXCELLENCE ◆ AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL AWARD

626 CQ Researcher

THE ISSUES

627 • Are farmed fish safe toeat?• Is aquaculture pollutingthe oceans?• Should the United Statescommercialize geneticallyengineered fish?

BACKGROUND

637 Ancient Fish FarmersHumans have raised fishand aquatic plants formore than 2,000 years.

637 The Blue RevolutionAquaculture grew rapidlyaround the world startingin the early 1960s.

638 Troubled WatersEvidence mounted thatfish farms were spreadingdisease and competingwith wild fisheries.

CURRENT SITUATION

639 Offshore LegislationThe proposed NationalOffshore Aquaculture Act would authorize fishfarming in federal waters.

642 Seafood SafetyContaminants in importedfarmed seafood, along withsimilar problems in otherfood sectors, are spurringCongress to pass new lawsregulating food safety.

OUTLOOK

643 Seeking SustainabilityPressure to farm the seasis growing worldwide.

SIDEBARS AND GRAPHICS

628 Consumption of FarmedSeafood Is RisingAquaculture accounted fornearly half of all seafoodeaten worldwide in 2005.

629 China Leads in AquacultureChina raised 60 percent ofthe world’s seafood in 2004.

631 Carp Is Top AquacultureSpeciesMore than 16 million tons ofcarp and other cyprinidswere grown in 2004.

633 Seafood Safety InformationOften ConfusingStudy calls for better adviceon risks, benefits.

635 ChronologyKey events since 1853.

636 Proposed Organic-FishStandards Raise QuestionsUse of offshore “netpens” iscontroversial.

639 Shrimp is Most PopularSeafood in U.S.Americans eat an average of4.4 pounds per year.

641 At IssueWill expanding offshoreaquaculture benefit U.S.coastal communities?

FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

645 For More InformationOrganizations to contact.

646 BibliographySelected sources used.

647 The Next StepAdditional articles.

647 Citing CQ ResearcherSample bibliography formats.

FISH FARMING

Cover: AP Photo/Kevin J. Kilmer

MANAGING EDITOR: Thomas J. [email protected]

ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITOR: Kathy [email protected]

ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Kenneth Jost

STAFF WRITERS: Marcia Clemmitt, Peter Katel

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Rachel S. Cox,Sarah Glazer, Alan Greenblatt,

Barbara Mantel, Patrick Marshall,Tom Price, Jennifer Weeks

DESIGN/PRODUCTION EDITOR: Olu B. Davis

ASSISTANT EDITOR: Darrell Dela Rosa

A Division ofCongressional Quarterly Inc.

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT/PUBLISHER:John A. Jenkins

DIRECTOR, EDITORIAL OPERATIONS:Ann Davies

CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC.

CHAIRMAN: Paul C. Tash

VICE CHAIRMAN: Andrew P. Corty

PRESIDENT/EDITOR IN CHIEF: Robert W. Merry

Copyright © 2007 CQ Press, a division of Congres-

sional Quarterly Inc. (CQ). CQ reserves all copyright

and other rights herein, unless previously specified

in writing. No part of this publication may be re-

produced electronically or otherwise, without prior

written permission. Unauthorized reproduction or

transmission of CQ copyrighted material is a violation

of federal law carrying civil fines of up to $100,000.

CQ Researcher (ISSN 1056-2036) is printed on acid-

free paper. Published weekly, except; (March wk. 4)

(June wk. 4) (July wk. 1) (Aug. wk. 2) (Aug. wk. 3)

(Nov. wk. 4) (Dec. wk. 3) and (Dec. wk. 4), by CQ

Press, a division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. An-

nual full-service subscriptions for institutions start at

$667. For pricing, call 1-800-834-9020, ext. 1906. To

purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or elec-

tronic format (PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call

866-427-7737. Single reports start at $15. Bulk pur-

chase discounts and electronic-rights licensing are

also available. Periodicals postage paid at Washing-

ton, D.C., and additional mailing offices. POSTMAS-

TER: Send address changes to CQ Researcher, 1255

22nd St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20037.

July 27, 2007Volume 17, Number 27

CQResearcher

July 27, 2007 627Available online: www.cqresearcher.com

Fish Farming

THE ISSUESA t the Portland Fish Ex-

change, a long ware-house beside Maine’s

Casco Bay, seafood proces-sors and wholesalers wavetheir numbers as the auc-tioneer takes bids on haddock,flounder and other fish freshoff the boat. The exchangehandled 30 million pounds offish per year in the early 1990s,but this year it may sell as lit-tle as 5 million pounds. Rea-sons for the decline includelimits on the number of daysfishermen can spend at seaand a state ban on selling lob-sters accidentally caught introlling nets. 1

Fifty miles south and sixmiles off the coast, the newface of the seafood industrycan be seen. Using under-water cages, the University ofNew Hampshire’s AtlanticMarine Aquaculture Center hasraised 3,000 pounds of hal-ibut and 15,000 pounds ofhaddock here since 2004. Theproject is also demonstrating a methodfor growing mussels on lines suspend-ed 40 feet below the surface.

“Twenty-five years ago, I was acommercial fisherman in the Gulf ofMaine,” Richard Langan, director of theuniversity’s Open Ocean AquacultureProject, told a Senate subcommittee in2006. “One night when I was at thewheel, I looked out the pilothouse win-dow and saw the lights from what musthave been at least 50 boats, all doingthe same thing as ours — catching asmany fish as fast as they could. . . .It was clear to me that New England’scommercial fisheries could not sustainthat level of exploitation and that therehad to be a better way to provideseafood and make a living.” 2

Experts disagree over whether fishfarming is providing that better way.But there’s no question it is supplyingmore seafood than ever. In 2005 aqua-culture provided an estimated 44 per-cent of the seafood used for globalhuman consumption, and experts pre-dict that by 2012 fish farms may out-produce wild fisheries. 3 In the early1950s fish farms produced less than 1million tons of seafood per year. By2004 they were raising 60 million tonsof finfish, shellfish and aquatic plantsannually worth about $70 billion.

But many environmental and healthadvocates worry that marine fish farms— especially for large species like salmon,tuna and cod — could foul the oceans.Critics call ocean fish farms “floating

feedlots” and say that they havethe same potential to becomeserious pollution sources aslarge livestock farms. 4

“We cannot afford tomake the same mistakes withocean agriculture that we havemade on land,” a task forceon marine aquaculture con-vened by the Woods HoleOceanographic Institution(WHOI) in Massachusettswarned in a 2007 report. Thestudy concluded that oceanfish farming done properlyoffered significant health, eco-nomic and environmentalbenefits. Implemented care-lessly, however, it could pol-lute ocean waters, disrupt wildfisheries, introduce exoticspecies that might becomepests and compete with al-ready-stressed wild stocks. 5

“If you cram enough ani-mals into enclosures at highdensity, you’re going to seepollution. And if you crowdanimals together, they’re goingto be stressed and share theirparasites and diseases,” saystask force member Rebecca

Goldburg, a senior scientist with theadvocacy group Environmental Defense.“There’s plenty of room for aquacul-ture to learn from the problems of theanimal production industry, but we’restill figuring out the right system foroffshore operations.”

Two forces are driving the explo-sion in aquaculture, known as the BlueRevolution. Many of the world’s majorwild, or “capture,” fisheries have beenoverharvested and are producing flator declining yields. Meanwhile, de-mand for seafood is climbing. Fish isa cheap source of protein in develop-ing countries, and medical experts aretelling consumers in industrialized na-tions to eat more heart-healthy seafoodproducts and less red meat.

BY JENNIFER WEEKS

Get

ty I

mag

es/T

he

Ch

rist

ian

Sci

ence

Mon

itor

/John N

ord

ell

Fishermen harvest scallops grown in cages inMassachusetts’ Nasketucket Bay. Aquaculture providedan estimated 44 percent of the seafood used for globalhuman consumption in 2005, and experts predict fishfarms may soon outproduce wild fisheries. Fish raised

on land in tanks or ponds make up 85 percent of both global and U.S. production, but many

environmentalists worry the growing use of coastal and offshore operations could foul the seas or allowfarmed fish to escape and breed with wild species.

628 CQ Researcher

Many Americans apparently are fol-lowing doctors’ orders. U.S. per-capitaseafood consumption increased by 30percent from 1980 through 2005, in partbecause aquaculture made seafood moreavailable and affordable. 6 Most farmedseafood comes from China and othercountries whose output dwarfs U.S.production. (See chart, p. 629.) The Unit-ed States imports 80 percent of its seafoodfor human consumption, including some2 million tons of farmed products eachyear. If domestic aquaculture produc-tion does not rise, the “seafood tradegap” could grow to 4 million tons peryear by 2025, according to the Nation-al Oceanographic and Atmospheric Ad-ministration (NOAA). 7

“Globally, aquaculture is growingpretty well, but in the U.S. it’s slow-ing down,” says Randy MacMillan,president of the National AquacultureAssociation. “Our producers are veryefficient and have excellent-quality prod-ucts, but cheaper imports are floodingthe market, and they can’t compete.

The catfish industry, which is one ofour biggest drivers, is taking ponds outof production because of imports fromChina and Vietnam and economicfraud from mislabeled foreign fish.”

In a rare prosecution last year, aseafood trader in Panama City, Fla.,was sentenced to four years in prisonand fined $1.1 million for selling 1.6million pounds of Vietnamese basacatfish falsely labeled as more expen-sive species like bass and grouper. 8

To meet rising demand for seafoodand reduce pressure on wild fisheries,NOAA wants to expand the U.S. aqua-culture industry from $1 billion to $5billion in annual revenues by 2025.The agency has proposed legislationthat would allow aquaculture opera-tions in waters under federal control,between three and 200 miles offshore.Marine fish farms currently operate instate waters, which extend three milesoffshore along most U.S. coastlines.

“The United States accounts foronly 1 percent of the global $70 bil-

lion per year aquaculture industry,”said Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutier-rez in March, announcing the offshorelegislation. “The U.S. is not in the game,and this bill will help the U.S. com-pete in this highly profitable industry.”

Aquaculture is a diverse business withproducts ranging from seaweed andtropical aquarium fish to 1,000-poundbluefin tuna. Freshwater fish raised onland in tanks or ponds make up about85 percent of both global and U.S. pro-duction, but saltwater fish are winninga growing share of the market. Two ofthe most popular types of seafood inthe United States, salmon and shrimp,come predominantly from fish farms.

Due to fish migration patterns, breed-ing seasons, weather and other con-straints, good-quality supplies of manywild fish are only available for a fewmonths each year. For example, folkwisdom once held that oysters shouldonly be eaten during months with an“R” (September through April) becausewarm waters encourage the growth ofbacteria in shellfish and because oys-ters are less flavorful during summerspawning. But worldwide farming hasmade many types of oysters and otherseafood available year-round.

“Farmed products give our menumore stability,” says Roger Berkowitz,president of the 35-resturant Legal SeaFoods chain, which also sells manytypes of wild-caught fish. “You don’talways know when wild species willbe available.”

From a health perspective, morefish is a good thing. Both the U.S. De-partment of Agriculture and the Amer-ican Heart Association recommendfish as a source of lean protein andomega-3 fatty acids, which reduce theincidence of cardiovascular disease. 9

Oily fish such as salmon, anchoviesand herring are especially good sourcesof key fatty acids.

Some analysts, however, have raisedconcerns about pollutants in farmedfish, especially imports. Consumer ad-vocates, U.S. fish farmers, and state

FISH FARMING

Consumption of Farmed Seafood Is Rising

Aquaculture accounted for nearly half of all seafood eaten worldwide in 2005, compared with slightly more than a third in 2000. During the same period, total consumption of seafood (both farmed and wild) rose to nearly 100 million tons.

Source: “The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2006,” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2007

Human Consumption of Farm-Raised Seafood(in millions of tons)

0

20

40

60

80

100

200520042003200220012000

Total seafood consumption Aquaculture consumption

87.3

32.0

89.8

34.2

90.0

36.4

92.5

38.5

95.0

40.9

96.5

43.0


officials criticize the Food and DrugAdministration (FDA) for inadequate-ly policing imported fish. “We’re let-ting tainted products come into theUnited States with improper testing,”says Barry Costa-Pierce, a professor offisheries and aquaculture at the Uni-versity of Rhode Island. “Everybodyin the scientific community knowsabout these issues, but there’s no gov-ernment hammer behind them.”

Whether and how to expand U.S.fish farming is part of a broader dis-cussion about the state of the oceansand fisheries. Since 2003 two high-level expert commissions — the gov-ernment-appointed U.S. Commissionon Ocean Policy and the privatelyfunded Pew Oceans Commission —have warned that pollution, overfish-ing and coastal development pose se-rious threats to the world’s oceans. 10

Congress, states and the Bush ad-ministration have taken some steps inresponse, such as overhauling nation-al policies for managing wild fisheries.

But big-picture ocean aquacultureissues remain unsettled, experts say.“Many new uses are being proposedfor the oceans, including offshore windfarms and energy ports,” says Uni-versity of New Hampshire ProfessorAndrew Rosenberg, a member of theU.S. Commission on Ocean Policy andformer deputy director of the Nation-al Marine Fisheries Service. “All of theseuses require exclusive use of oceanspace and raise environmental con-cerns. We really don’t have any con-sistent management system to decidewho gets to use what piece of theocean bottom on an exclusive basis.”

As lawmakers, scientists and con-servationists debate the pros and consof aquaculture, here are some of thequestions they are asking:

Are farmed fish safe to eat?In the wild, salmon eat tiny shrimp

called krill and a variety of other fish.Farmed salmon eat processed feedsthat contain fish meal and fish oil from

smaller fish like anchovies and her-ring. Indiana University chemist RonaldHites and his colleagues identified thesefeeds as likely culprits in a 2004 studythat found higher levels of PCBs, diox-ins and other organichlorine pesticidesin farmed salmon than in wild salmon.They concluded that salmon farmingproduced fish containing potentiallydangerous concentrations of pollu-tants because toxins from smaller fishthat foraged in polluted waters wereconcentrated in the feed stocks. 11

FDA officials replied that the lev-els of contaminants in farmed salmondid not pose health risks and thatfarmed salmon was safe to eat. 12

Some producers argued that the studyobscured different life histories andfeeding habits among wild salmonspecies, which caused different cont-aminant levels. They also noted that

consumers received much larger dosesfrom meat and dairy products. “Nomatter how the data [are] calculatedand no matter whose PCB values forsalmon are used, the amount of PCBscontributed to the diet from farmedor most wild salmon is truly insignif-icant in the context of overall PCB in-take of the average American,” RonaldHardy, director of the University ofIdaho’s Aquaculture Research Institute,wrote in 2005. 13

The controversy spurred more re-search. Several studies indicated thatsubstituting vegetable oil for fish oilin feeds reduced PCB and dioxin lev-els in farmed fish. 14 A Canadian studyfound that while farmed salmon gen-erally had higher PCB levels than wildspecies, all concentrations were atleast 50-fold lower than U.S. and Cana-dian levels of concern, and levels in

China Leads in Aquaculture Production

China raised more than 27 million tons of seafood from 2002-2004 — nearly two-thirds of the 45 million tons of total global aquaculture production. The United States ranked 10th.


Top 10 Aquaculture Producers in 2004

Rank Country No. of tons Annual growth(2004) (2002-2004)

1. China 27,553,471 5.0%

2. India 2,225,102 6.3

3. Vietnam 1,078,755 30.6

4. Thailand 1,055,579 10.8

5. Indonesia 940,546 6.9

6. Bangladesh 823,277 7.8

7. Japan 698,779 -3.1

8. Chile 607,481 11.2

9. Norway 574,194 7.7

10. United States 545,894 10.4

Rest of the World 4,818,443 7.3

World Total 45.5 million 6.1

630 CQ Researcher

different types of wild salmon variedwidely. 15

Medical experts stress the biggerhealth picture. A 2006 article in theJournal of the American Medical As-sociation reviewed findings from morethan 200 studies and concluded thatfor most adults, health benefits fromeating one or two servings of fishweekly outweighed risks from conta-minants. The authors estimated coro-nary heart disease benefits outweighedcancer risks by up to 370-fold forfarmed salmon and by 300-fold to morethan 1,000-fold for wild salmon. 16

“The benefits offish are well estab-lished, while the risksare overblown,” saidHarvard MedicalSchool Assistant Pro-fessor Dariush Mozaf-farian, a co-author ofthe article. 17

But other problemsubstances are turn-ing up in importedfarmed seafood,much o f wh i chcomes from countriesthat allow producersto use drugs andchemicals banned inthe United States.One of the mostcontroversial prod-ucts is farmed shrimp,which has become alarge-scale industry in South and Cen-tral America and Asia.

Cramming shrimp into ponds makesthem vulnerable to diseases and par-asites, so shrimp farms in developingcountries often use antibiotics, disin-fectants and pesticides to keep ani-mals healthy. But certain antibioticscan cause illnesses. For example, somenitrofurans are carcinogenic, and chlo-ramphenicol causes two types of ane-mia in humans. 18 Others, such asciprofloxacin, are used in both animaland human medicine, and their overuse

threatens human health by creatingdrug-resistant bacteria that can be passedon to humans in tainted seafood. 19

Fungicides also pose health threats:Malachite green is suspected in geneticmutations, and gentian violet has beenlinked to mouth cancer.

These additives are banned in theUnited States, but many have turnedup in imported shrimp. According tothe advocacy group Food & WaterWatch, the FDA rejected 2,817 seafoodshipments containing antibiotic residuesin 2005 even though it only tested 1.2percent of all imported seafood. 20 U.S.

inspections have detected proscribedantibiotics and fungicides in shrimpfrom Vietnam, Venezuela, Thailand,Malaysia and Mexico, as well as inAsian catfish, tilapia and eel. 21

U.S. producers argue their com-petitors gain an economic edge byraising fish in dirty water and crowd-ed conditions, then dosing them withchemicals to keep them healthy. “TheUnited States has a very stringent reg-ulatory system to review drugs foraquaculture,” says the National Aqua-culture Association’s MacMillan. “That

process does not exist in China, Viet-nam or some other countries that ex-port seafood here.”

Not all imported seafood is taint-ed. Legal Sea Foods restaurants buyfarmed shrimp from sources includingThailand, Vietnam and the Philippines.“I’ve found over the years that farmedshrimp is a far more consistent prod-uct than wild, because people in theU.S. just don’t know how to handleshrimp,” says company presidentBerkowitz. “Domestic boats add a lotof chemicals to the product and don’tice it properly, but with farmed shrimp

we can dictate the qual-ity that we want.”

Legal Sea Foods testsfish at its own in-houselaboratory, but mostconsumers rely on in-spections by the FDA. 22

Reports in 2001 and2004 by the U.S. Gen-eral Accounting Office(now the GovernmentAccountability Office[GAO]) warned theFDA was not doingenough to improve thesafety of importedseafood, mainly becausethe agency was notputting priority on es-tablishing “equivalenceag reemen t s ” w i thseafood-exporting coun-tries. These voluntary

agreements document that exportingnations have seafood-safety systemsequivalent to U.S. regulations. The GAOalso found that the FDA was not quick-ly reporting problems with importedseafood to port inspectors. 23

Critics want more oversight of therising tide of foreign seafood. “About1 percent of imported seafood is sent toa lab and tested. That’s pretty startlingconsidering that seafood causes 18 to20 percent of food-borne illnesses,” saysWenonah Hauter, executive director ofFood & Water Watch. “FDA doesn’t

FISH FARMING

Hybrid striped bass are netted at the Kent Seatech facility near PalmSprings, Calif. The United States accounts for only 1 percent of the

global $70 billion aquaculture industry. To help expand U.S. output,the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has proposed

allowing aquaculture operations in offshore federal waters.

AP P

hoto

/Ric

Fra

nci

s


have the resources or staff to reallyinspect seafood imports. We hear lotsof rhetoric about homeland security, butwhat about homeland food security?”

FDA officials acknowledge they needmore support to police imported food,drugs and other goods. “The world hasglobalized, and all this stuff is comingin from outside the United States, butthe regulations and procedures we havein place really did not contemplate thischange,” chief medical officer JanetWoodcock said last month. 24

Taking matters into their own hands,Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi —major producers of farm-raised catfish— this year banned Chinese and Viet-namese catfish containing prohibitedantibiotics. On June 28 the FDA is-sued an import alert blocking all im-ports of Chinese farmed catfish, basa,shrimp, dace (a type of carp) and eelunless they tested negative for nitro-furans, fluoroquinolones, malachitegreen and gentian violet. 25

“We’re taking this strong step be-cause of current and continuing evi-dence that certain Chinese aquacultureproducts . . . contain illegal substancesthat are not permitted in seafood soldin the United States,” said David Ache-son, FDA assistant commissioner forfood protection. 26 According to theFDA, contaminant levels in Chinese fishwere very low and posed a risk main-ly from long-term exposure.

Not all problems stem from im-ports. In late May melamine, an in-dustrial chemical not authorized in foodproducts, was found in shrimp feedmade in Ohio. Earlier this spring,thousands of pets across the UnitedStates were killed or sickened by petfoods containing melamine that wastraced back to China. The Ohio pro-ducer, Tembec, tested its feed ingre-dients after hearing about the pet foodproblems. “They just asked themselves,‘I wonder what’s in this stuff? I won-der if we have anything in here thatshouldn’t be in here?’ ” said a com-pany spokesman. 27

Is aquaculture polluting theoceans?

Oceans cover almost three-quartersof Earth’s surface to an average depthof 2.5 miles. Until recently, few peo-ple imagined that human actions couldhave lasting effects on such vast ex-panses of water. But recent studiesshow that overfishing, coastal devel-opment, offshore oil drilling and otheractivities are polluting the seas anddamaging marine habitats. 28 Harmfulaquaculture practices can make the sit-uation worse.

Marine aquaculture operations raisefish in cages and so-called netpens thatallow currents to carry their wastes intothe surrounding environment. Dischargesof dissolved nutrients, uneaten feed,fish sewage and dead fish cause a formof pollution called eutrophication. Algaeand plankton feed on these materialsand multiply, then are broken downby bacteria when they die. The de-composition process consumes dissolved

oxygen from surrounding water andsediments, making the area less able tosupport life.

Eutrophication degrades nearby coralreefs and seagrass beds and reducesbiodiversity. Some studies have foundthat surrounding areas recovered quick-ly when farming stopped, but in othercases impacts persisted several yearslater. 29 On a local scale, fish farmscan be serious pollution sources: Anaverage-size salmon farm with 200,000fish produces as much fecal matter asa city of 65,000 people. 30

In its January 2007 report theWoods Hole Marine Aquaculture TaskForce concluded that discharges fromU.S. fish farms were small comparedto other water pollution sources, butit warned that little was known abouthow well the oceans could absorbthese pollutants. Impacts could be muchmore serious if aquaculture increases,the group warned, especially if fishfarms are sited close together.

Carp Is Top Aquaculture Species

Carp and other members of the cyprinid family, such as barbs and chubs, are by far the most widely cultivated type of fish. Many shellfish and mollusks are also among the top 10 aquaculture species.


Top Ten Aquaculture Species, 2004

Rank Species Production Annual Growth(in tons) (2002-2004)

1 Carps and other cyprinids 16,473,462 4.8%

2 Oysters 4,143,345 3.1

3 Clams, cockles, arkshells 3,705,155 9.1

4 Miscellaneous freshwater fish 3,365,954 -0.3

5 Shrimps, prawns 2,228,421 28.7

6 Salmons, trouts, smelts 1,780,298 5.1

7 Mussels 1,674,224 4.6

8 Tilapias and other cichlids 1,640,471 10.9

9 Scallops, pectens 1,050,080 -2.6

10 Miscellaneous marine mollusks 958,672 -12.4

632 CQ Researcher

Furthermore, the United States doesnot have legal guidelines for oceanwater quality as it does for drinkingwater. “Without federal standards formarine water quality, there’s really noway to measure whether marine wa-ters are being polluted by aquaculture,”says Goldburg of Environmental De-fense. The Clean Water Act requiresmarine aquaculture farms to apply fordischarge permitsand employ so-called“best managementpractices” to limit pol-lution, but states havebroad discretion todefine those prac-tices. “EPA and thestates need to de-velop marine water-quality standards sothey can measurewhether waters arebeing impaired by allkinds of offshore de-velopment, not justfish farms,” Goldburgcontends.

Many aquacultureoperators say they al-ready are strictlyregulated and thatmarine fish farms willnot harm the oceans. “Environmentalstewardship is crucial to aquaculture,”says MacMillan of the National Aqua-culture Association. “Our industry inthe United States has only developedin the past 20 years, so we’ve grownup in a very different environmentaland regulatory climate than land-basedagriculture. Expectations for us are farmore demanding.”

The University of New Hampshire’sRosenberg disagrees. “Our environ-mental standards for aquaculture aren’tmore stringent than regulations in othercountries, they’re vaguer,” he says.“That’s one reason why U.S. produc-tion hasn’t grown faster — we don’thave a clear set of guidelines for howit should be done. We need a policy

that recognizes environmental concernslike pollution discharges and the spreadof diseases to wild stocks.”

Aquaculture can also cause “bio-logical pollution” — interbreedingbetween wild fish and escaped farmfish. Such genetic mixing produceshybrid offspring that are less well-adapted to survive. A decade-longstudy in Ireland found that hybrid

offspring of wild and farmed salmonhad lower survival rates at sea thanwild salmon and that 70 percent ofsecond-generation hybrids died with-in a few weeks of hatching. 31 Simi-larly, in Norway — where about halfa million farmed salmon and sea troutescape each year — hybrid salmonsurvive and return to rivers for spawn-ing at lower rates than wild fish. 32

Marine experts worry biological pol-lution will become more serious asfish farms move offshore, where hur-ricanes are strong enough to damageoil drilling rigs weighing thousands oftons. “Systems out in the open oceanwill be hit by storms, so we have tomake sure the biological impacts ofescaped fish are as small as possible,”

says Goldburg. “Unless they can showthat escapes pose a very low risk, grow-ers should only produce native fishspecies from local genotypes thatwon’t cause harm if they mix withwild fish.”

Others say the issue is manageable.“Whenever fish escapes happen, itmakes headlines,” says George Nardi,co-founder and chief technology offi-

cer at GreatBay Aqua-culture in New Hamp-shire, which is workingto commercialize off-shore Atlantic cod farm-ing in submersible cages.“The failure gets atten-tion, but no one talksabout how many fish areput into tanks and cagesevery day without anyproblems. We should putescapes in perspective,learn how to minimizeproblems and work onthe animals that go inso that they don’t harmthe environment if theydo escape.”

Some kinds of aqua-culture make watercleaner. Bivalve shellfish(species with two hinged

shells like oysters, clams and mussels)filter seawater and feed on planktonand suspended particles in the water.By doing so, they control plankton lev-els and improve water clarity, whichhelps sunlight penetrate the water andpromotes marine plant growth. Matureoysters can filter up to 55 gallons ofwater per day. 33

Making more space for shellfishaquaculture can help reduce nutrientoverloads that cause algae blooms andeutrophication. “Shellfish are by far themost cost-effective strategy to controlpollution,” says Woods Hole Oceano-graphic Institute researcher Hauke Kite-Powell, who is studying shellfish farm-ing for water cleanup at Waquoit Bayin southeastern Massachusetts. 34

FISH FARMING

Greece’s coastline offers ideal conditions for fish farming, one of thecountry’s fastest-growing industries. Greece produces about 60 percent

of the European Union’s sea bass and sea bream, the most popular species in the Mediterranean region.

AP P

hoto

/Dim

itri

Mes

sinis


A traditional aquaculture approachcalled polyculture — growing fish nearshellfish and seaweed that feed on fishwastes — is receiving increasing at-tention from large-scale producers. Thismakes environmental sense, says Gold-burg: “Recycling nutrients is a founda-

tion of sustainable agriculture. You getanother crop, and you cut pollution.”

Polyculture is widely used in Asia, butmost major Western producers have notadopted the practice yet. Applied on alarge scale, it could produce enough fish,shellfish and seaweed to meet growing

world demand for seafood over the nextseveral decades, scientists predict. 35 Butconsumers would have to eat more ma-rine plants and shellfish and fewer ofthe popular, large carnivorous fish andshrimp that generate aquaculture’s worstenvironmental impacts.

S eafood is good for you — unless it’s contaminated withmercury, which can cause profound neurological damage— or PCBs, which may cause cancer, say government

and private health experts.But while some farmed fish may have more contaminants

than wild fish, chemical levels in both types of fish typicallyare below government advisory levels, according to govern-ment scientists.

With mixed messages like these coming from governmentagencies and private health groups, it’s not surprising there’sconfusion about how much and what kinds of fish to eat.Health and consumer advocates worry that unclear and con-flicting advisories could drive people away from eating the rightkinds of seafood. Conversely, some warnings may not keepconsumers away from risky species or adequately protect at-risk groups like pregnant women.

For example, in 2004 the Food and Drug Administration(FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issueda joint advisory warning pregnant women, those who mightbecome pregnant, nursing mothers and young children to avoidshark, swordfish, tilefish and king mackerel — large wild-caughtpredatory fish that contained high mercury levels. The adviso-ry also recommended limiting consumption of albacore tuna,which contains more mercury than other varieties. 1

But a survey two years later by the Center for Science inthe Public Interest found that only 20 percent of respondentscould identify the high-risk fish, and that a comparable num-ber incorrectly thought salmon was high in mercury. The groupargued that consumers could not be relied on to rememberwhich fish species were safe to eat and called for mandatorywarning notices at seafood counters and on fish packages. 2

Producers object to mandatory labeling, but California re-quires retailers to post warnings at seafood counters, and somelarge grocery chains do so voluntarily at stores nationwide.

Other problems include conflicting state and local warnings— which can recommend different consumption levels of thesame species of fish from the same watershed — and gettingsafety information to ethnic and minority groups that are heavyfish consumers. Some communities have found that personalcontact with anglers is a more effective way to raise aware-ness of risks than simply publishing brochures or posting them

on the Internet. Even when warned, however, many peoplewho fish in local waters continue to eat fish. 3

In any event, Americans are eating less seafood than the lev-els recommended by the American Heart Association and otherhealth groups, according to a 2006 report from the Institute ofMedicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences. 4 Addi-tionally, some of the most widely consumed types, such as salmonand shrimp, contain low amounts of the omega-3 fatty acids thatconfer important health benefits. The study also found that con-sumer advice on seafood choices from government agencies andprivate groups was uncoordinated and fragmented, used incon-sistent portion sizes and treated benefits separately from risks.

“We need better work on risk communication,” says MaldenNesheim, emeritus professor of nutrition at Cornell University andchair of the study. “Seafood is a good food, and people ought tobe consuming it, but there are certain segments of the populationthat need to be careful, mainly children and pregnant women.”

It’s not clear whether the relative risks and benefits of eat-ing seafood are understood, Nesheim adds. “We don’t have alot of good data to go by. There’s anecdotal evidence thatsome people stopped eating all fish after the FDA-EPA advi-sory on mercury was issued, but we can’t confirm that.”

The IOM study concluded government agencies need to knowmore about seafood-consumption patterns and levels of nutrientsand contaminants in common types of seafood. To help con-sumers, the IOM urged federal agencies to develop new tools,such as interactive Web-based programs, that users could pro-gram with specific information about their ages and risk factors.

“There are health messages that everyone of a certain gen-eration has heard — ‘Just Say No’ — but like shoes, advice ismore helpful if it is sized appropriately and designed appro-priately for the intended use,” the report observed. 5

1 “What You Need to Know About Mercury in Fish and Shellfish,” Departmentof Health and Human Services and Environmental Protection Agency, March2004, www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/admehg3.html.2 Center for Science in the Public Interest, “Is It High or Is It Low?” July 6, 2006.3 Karl Blankenship, “Despite Advisories, Study Finds Many Still Eating TaintedFish,” Bay Journal, May 2005; Bill Novak, “Catch of the Day: Good Info,”Capital Times (Madison, Wis.), Sept. 15, 2006, p. B1.4 Institute of Medicine, Seafood Choices: Balancing Benefits and Risks (2006).5 Ibid., p. 241.

Seafood Safety Information Often ConfusingStudy calls for better advice on risks, benefits

634 CQ Researcher

Should the United States commer-cialize genetically engineered fish?

For $5, hobbyists curious aboutseafood trends can buy a geneticallyaltered fish at pet stores throughoutthe United States. The GloFish, theonly so-called transgenic fish approvedfor commercial sale, is produced byinjecting a fluorescent protein gene de-rived from jellyfish and sea anemonesinto the eggs of zebrafish, a commontropical aquarium species. MatureGloFish, which glow bright green, or-ange or red, pass fluorescence geneson to their offspring.

Conventional zebrafish are widelyused in medical research because theygrow quickly, their immune systemsare similar to those of humans andtheir embryos are transparent, so sci-entists can see early developmentalstages clearly. Fluorescent zebrafishtechnology offers researchers some newoptions — for example, tinting certaingenes or organs to make it easier towatch them develop. 36

Biotechnology companies are alsoworking on food species. Massachu-setts-based Aqua Bounty Technologiesis seeking FDA approval for AquAd-vantage salmon, which have been ge-netically modified to grow year-round,not just in summer. The company saysAquAdvantage fish will reach marketsize twice as fast as conventionalsalmon, saving farmers money on feedand releasing fewer waste productsinto the oceans. 37

Researchers worldwide are study-ing ways to genetically modify manyseafood and aquatic plants to makethem grow faster, convert feed to bodymass more efficiently, resist disease,tolerate cold water or produce usefulsubstances for food, pharmaceuticalsand cosmetics. These genetically mod-ified organisms (GMOs) could lowerseafood production costs and reducethe need for antibiotics in fish farm-ing. Scientists are also working onproducts that change color when theydetect contaminants in water (the orig-

inal goal for GloFish) or shellfish en-gineered to grow without producingproteins that trigger allergic reactionsin some consumers. 38

Many experts worry about healthand environmental impacts from trans-genic fish. A 2002 National Academyof Sciences study identified severalmoderately risky substances that mightbe found in genetically modified (GM)animals, including new proteins thattrigger allergies, biologically activesubstances such as growth hormonesand toxic metabolites created throughthe genetic engineering process. 39

The report also warned of envi-ronmental impacts if GMOs escapedinto the wild. “Animals that becomeferal easily, are highly mobile andhave a history of causing extensivecommunity damage” pose the biggestenvironmental threats, the study con-cluded. 40 Fish and shellfish fall intothis category.

If engineered strains escape fromfarms in areas where they have no nat-ural predators, they could spread andbecome invasive. Transgenic fish couldalso compete with or prey on wildspecies, especially if they have beenaltered to grow quickly and eat at high-er rates. “GMOs have different prop-erties from conventional species,” saysthe University of New Hampshire’sRosenberg. “They might be conduitsfor diseases or parasites, so what hap-pens if they escape? Producers may saythe odds are 95 percent against escape,but other things work 95 percent ofthe time too, like condoms, and that’snot always good enough.”

One way to reduce escape risks isto alter the chromosomes of GMOs sothey cannot reproduce in the wild. Bysubjecting newly fertilized eggs to ex-treme temperatures, high pressure, orcertain chemicals, scientists can pro-duce “triploid” individuals with threesets of chromosomes, which are in-fertile. Triploidy has been used to re-duce escape threats from convention-al finfish. But it can be hard to verify

that large batches of eggs have beencompletely sterilized, and a few unaf-fected eggs in large batches could eas-ily go unnoticed. 41 Another option isto raise finfish stocks that are all maleor all female so that escaped fish can-not reproduce in the wild.

Some scientists question whether ge-netic manipulation adds much valueover traditional breeding techniques thathumans have used for centuries to mod-ify plants and animals. Aquaculture isalready bringing fish and marine plantsunder cultivation about 100 times fasterthan land plants and animals were do-mesticated, and humans are farming alarger share of known aquatic speciesthan of known land species, eventhough land agriculture developed some11,000 years ago. 42

“We don’t need to do gene jockeyingwith fish,” says the University ofRhode Island’s Costa-Pierce. “With con-ventional animal breeding technolo-gies we can get phenomenal gains ingrowth and other favorable character-istics. I doubt there’s a big market forGM fish in North America, so why godown a path of conflict and contro-versy that could undercut markets forconventional products?”

Many Americans unknowingly eat oruse products made from GM crops. 43

In 2006, crops engineered to tolerateherbicides or resist pests accounted for89 percent of the soybeans planted inthe United States, 40 percent of cornand 57 percent of cotton. 44 But surveysshow Americans are more comfortablewith GM plants than with animals. 45

“Big corporate producers are veryworried about the consumer responseto transgenic fish,” says Stanford Uni-versity economist Rosamond Naylor.“Most producers don’t want GM fishintroduced because they’ll run into mar-ket constraints in Europe and otherplaces where buyers don’t want it.”California, Oregon, and Washingtonstate have banned raising GM fish instate waters, and Maryland passed a

FISH FARMING

Continued on p. 636


Chronology2500 B.C.-Early 1700sSmall-scale aquaculture developsin ancient China, Egypt, Japan.

•

1800-1900Aquaculture develops in U.S.

1853Ohio trout farm artificially fertilizesbrook trout eggs.

1871Congress creates U.S. Fish Commis-sion, which develops a system offederal hatcheries.

1870s-1900sU.S. rivers, lakes and coastal watersstocked with trout and other species.

•

1900-1960sAquaculture becomes profession-alized, with support from uni-versities and government.

1909First commercial U.S. trout farmestablished in Idaho.

1910-1930State and federal researchers de-velop methods for farming chan-nel catfish.

1938Mitchell Act funds hatcheries inthe Pacific Northwest to replacewild salmon and steelhead spawn-ing grounds blocked or floodedby hydroelectric dams.

1930s-1940sFranklin D. Roosevelt administration

supports construction of fish pondson farms to aid soil and water con-servation and generate income.

1940s-1960sFarming of tilapia, shrimp and chan-nel catfish develops in United States.

•

1970s-1980sRising world population helpsdrive global aquaculture boom.Concerns emerge about waterpollution, wild fisheries andcontamination in farmed fish.

1970sU.S. catfish farm acreage hits 40,000in 1970, up from 400 acres in 1960.Salmon, abalone and mussel farmingdevelop in the United States.

1972Congress passes Clean Water,Coastal Zone Management andMarine Mammal Protection acts.

1980National Aquaculture Act promotesU.S. aquaculture, but federal agenciesfail to develop a comprehensive sys-tem for regulating fish farming. . . .Sturgeon farming begins in Califor-nia. . . . Massachusetts starts farmingquahogs (hard clams).

1989Alaska bans farming of largeocean fish, such as salmon, instate waters, to protect wild fish-eries from escaped farm fish.

•

1990s-2000sRestrictions are imposed onaquaculture in response toharmful impacts. U.S. considersfish farms in federal waters.

1995U.N. Food and Agriculture Organi-zation adopts code of conduct forresponsible fisheries.

1997Washington state classifies escapedAtlantic salmon from fish farms asa “living pollutant.”

2000An estimated 100,000 salmon es-cape from Maine fish farm.

2003Pew Oceans Commission recom-mends moratorium on new marinefinfish farms until Congress legis-lates standards for sustainableaquaculture. . . . Federal judgerules salmon farms in Maine areviolating Clean Water Act.

2004U.S. Commission on Ocean Policyendorses Pew report, calls for “acoordinated and consistent policy”for aquaculture development. . . .Science reports farmed salmon con-tain higher levels of contaminantsthan wild salmon.

2005National Oceanographic and At-mospheric Administration (NOAA)proposes legislation to create regu-latory framework for aquaculturein federal waters

2006NOAA issues 10-year plan to ex-pand U.S. aquaculture into federalwaters.

2007Alabama, Mississippi and Louisianaban Chinese catfish after samplesare found to contain an antibioticbanned for use in fish by Food andDrug Administration (FDA). . . .FDA halts shipments of five typesof Chinese fish for testing.

636 CQ Researcher

five-year moratorium in 2001 on re-leasing GM fish into its coastal waters.

Lower production costs are not astrong argument for commercializingtransgenic fish, says Naylor. “Fish arealready underpriced in the market be-cause prices don’t reflect any of thesocial costs of production,” such as

waste discharges or coastal develop-ment, she says. “Making fish cheaperthrough genetic engineering shouldn’tbe our priority.”

Berkowitz would consider puttingGM fish on Legal Sea Foods’ menu.“If it’s deemed safe, we’d have to lookat it. It would have to have the samenutritional benefit as wild fish, and I’d

want character and flavor profiles beforeI decided to carry it. But anything thattakes the pressure off wild stocks andhas the potential to feed more peopleis good,” says Berkowitz. “I don’t thinkpeople truly understand what geneticengineering means or that they’re [al-ready] consuming a lot of geneticallymodified produce.”

FISH FARMING

Continued from p. 634

Proposed standards for certifying organic aquaculture haveraised complex questions about how to define an or-ganic fish. The proposal, developed by a federal work-

ing group with strong industry representation, contains sever-al controversial recommendations.

In general, foods that are produced without chemicals,pesticides or genetic alteration are entitled to organic certifi-cation from the Department of Agriculture (USDA). To winUSDA approval, livestock must be raised on 100 percent or-ganic feed.

Many observers argue that wild fish cannot be certified or-ganic, since there is no way to document what foods they haveeaten or chemicals they have been exposed to. This raises thequestion of whether farmed fish that eat feeds made from wildfish can be certified organic. In response, the working groupconvened by the USDA’s National Organic Standards Board(NOSB) proposed two choices for feed used for organic aqua-culture. Option A would allow use of fish meal and fish oilfrom sustainably managed fisheries, as long as such use did notexceed one pound of wild fish for every pound of aquatic an-imals cultured, along with scraps from processing of wild seafoodfor human consumption. Option B would not allow use of fishmeal and oil from wild fish.

The working group proposal also would allow species raisedin so-called netpens to be certified organic, as long as the pensare sited in areas where effluent discharges will not accumu-late to levels that harm the environment. Closed systems, whichrecirculate water, are also allowed as long as they provide ahealthy and high-quality growing environment.

Eager to tap into the booming organic food market, pro-ducers generally support the proposed standards, including theless-restrictive feed option A. “Diets of many aquatic animalsnaturally include other aquatic animals — including crustaceans,other invertebrates and baitfish,” Neil Anthony Sims, whoseKona Blue company raises yellowtail in deep waters off Hawaii,wrote in a public-comment Web site. “Inclusion of fish mealand fish oil ensures an efficient, nutritionally complete diet thatoptimizes fish health,” commented U.S. Trout Farmers Associa-tion President John Bechtel. 1

Critics counter that using fish meal and oil is incompatiblewith the concept of organic production. “[T]he term ‘organic’identifies a food product that has been raised under farmingpractices that are under direct control of the farmer, as wellas the requirement that feed inputs to the process itself be or-ganically produced. . . . At present, there is simply no way toraise carnivorous species and be true to the broadly accepteddefinition of ‘organic,’ ” argued analysts Corey Peet and GeorgeLeonard of California’s Monterey Bay Aquarium. 2

Netpens are also a divisive issue. Conservationists say be-cause netpens release untreated wastes to the environmentand can spread diseases and parasites to wild stocks, finfishcan only be certified organic if they are raised in ponds, tanksor other controlled production systems without direct oceanaccess. In practice, this approach would rule out raising mostlarge carnivorous fish organically, at least at the outset.

The NOSB has scheduled a public symposium on organicaquaculture on Nov. 27, 2007, in Washington, D.C., to solicitmore input on netpens and fish feeds. 3 Meanwhile, otherseafood producers also want organic standards. Shellfish farm-ers say their products exemplify the idea of organic agriculture,since they improve the surrounding environment and requireno feed inputs. And Alaska’s Republican Sens. Ted Stevens andLisa Murkowski have pressed for organic standards for wild-caught fish, such as Alaskan salmon, even though an NOSBtask force recommended in 2001 against doing so.

“Alaska salmon is as wholesome, if not more, than any otherorganic product on the market,” said Murkowski after she co-sponsored legislation with Stevens in 2003 that directed USDAto allow wild seafood to be certified and labeled as organic. 4

1 Included in public comments on the NOSB Aquaculture Working Group in-terim final report, www.ams.usda.gov/nop/PublicComments/AqaucultureWork-ingGroupInterim/PublicCommentsAquaWGInterim.html.2 Ibid.3 2007 NOSB Organic Aquaculture Symposium Call for Abstracts and Papers,www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/MeetingAgendas/Nov2007/OrganicAquacultureSym-posium/CallForAbstractsPapers.html.4 The Associated Press, “U.S. Congress Backs Organic Wild Fish Label,” April16, 2003.

Proposed Organic-Fish Standards Raise QuestionsUse of offshore “netpens” is controversial


BACKGROUNDAncient Fish Farmers

J ust as humans have farmed theland and domesticated animals for thousands of years, they also have

cultivated fish and aquatic plants.More than 2,000 years ago, Chineserice farmers raised carp as a second“crop” in their rice ponds. Carvings onancient Egyptian tombs show menharvesting tilapia from ponds. AncientRomans also bred fish in artificial ponds,called piscinae, for food and com-mercial sale and as a status symbol.

Most early aquaculture involvedfreshwater species, since it was eas-ier to control fish in ponds or streamsthan in ocean waters. Some prein-dustrial societies, such as Australianaborigines, built elaborate networksof canals with gates and weirs to sortand catch fish. The first ocean fishfarms may have been seawaterponds that were built 1,500 to 1,800years ago in the Hawaiian Islands.These systems had walls made ofcoral and lava rocks, cemented to-gether with algae, and canals thatchanneled fish in and out of theocean through movable grates. 46

Freshwater aquaculture spreadthrough Europe during the Middle Ages,spurred by Catholic Church doctrinethat called for meatless fasting daysthroughout the year. Monarchs, noblesand monks harvested live fish fromstreams and stocked them in pondsuntil they were needed. After water-powered mills appeared around theyear 1000, farmers began breedingcarp in millponds across Europe. 47

Rich supplies of fish and shellfishhelped to draw European explorers tothe New World, but by the 1800s someNorth American fisheries were alreadydegraded or overharvested. In response,

fish culturists began importing andbreeding fish to increase supplies. Bythe 1850s they had learned to prop-agate artificially, but efforts were toolimited to slow the decline of manyAmerican fisheries.

In 1871 Spencer Baird, assistant sec-retary of the Smithsonian Institution,persuaded Congress to create a Com-mission on Fish and Fisheries, withBaird in charge. The commission wasthe first U.S. government agency cre-ated to conserve a renewable resource.Under Baird the commission built a re-search laboratory at Woods Hole,Mass., and launched a broad researchprogram on America’s fisheries.

The commission also built a net-work of fish hatcheries and redistrib-uted salmon, shad, trout, striped bassand other species across the nation.One venture, importing European carpas a cheap protein source for ruralcommunities, proved to be a seriousmistake — and an example of the pit-falls of introducing exotic animals tonew habitats. Carp spread throughoutthe continental U.S. and were viewedas pests because they stirred up riverand stream bottoms during feeding.

Aquaculture became part of the agri-cultural extension system in the early20th century. State and federal re-searchers developed ways to raisenew species like catfish, which localextension offices and land-grant col-leges taught to farmers. In 1938,alarmed by the decline of the historicwild salmon and steelhead fisherieson the Columbia River, in the PacificNorthwest, Congress ordered the con-struction of large-scale hatcheries toboost fish stocks. But hatcheries couldnot compensate for overfishing anddam construction on the Columbia.From 1960 through 1990, up to 150million juvenile Chinook salmon werereleased into the Columbia each year,but the efforts failed to produce sus-tained increases in harvests. 48

After World War II the boomingpostwar economy created growth con-

ditions for aquaculture, giving Ameri-cans more time and income for sports(including fishing) and travel (whichexposed them to new cuisines andrestaurants). Land-based agriculture shift-ed from small family farms to large-scale production, aided by new ma-chines, synthetic fertilizers and pesticidesand animal antibiotics. 49 Similarly, fishfarming became more scientific as re-searchers developed low-cost feedsand standardized procedures for man-aging ponds and hatcheries.

The Blue Revolution

S tarting in the early 1960s, aqua-culture grew rapidly in the United

States and around the world. Totalproduction, including aquatic plants,rose from about 1 million tons in theearly 1950s to almost 60 million tonsin 2004. Nearly all the growth occurredin Asia and the Pacific. 50

Marine experts call the jump to massproduction the “Blue Revolution” in anod to the earlier “Green Revolution”in the 1940s, when private foundationsand national governments providednew high-yielding crop varieties to poorfarmers in Asia and Latin America. Thesecrops needed synthetic fertilizers andpesticides, which often caused new prob-lems, such as making insects resistantto pesticides. The Green Revolution thuscame to symbolize both the benefitsand pitfalls of massive technical inter-vention in agriculture.

In the United States Southern farm-ers started building ponds on marginalcroplands in the 1950s and stockingthem with catfish, a popular and easy-to-raise sport fish with a mild flavor.From the mid-1960s forward the indus-try became an important job source inMississippi, Alabama, Louisiana andArkansas. By 2002 the yearly catfish cropwas worth more than $400 million, near-ly half the total value of all U.S. aqua-culture products. 51

638 CQ Researcher

Aquaculturists also start-ed to raise marine fish andshellfish on both the Eastand West coasts, includingsalmon, sturgeon, clams,abalone and mussels. Butneither wild fisheries nor thenascent U.S. aquaculture in-dustry could keep up withconsumer demand, and U.S.seafood imports rose from$360 million in 1960 to $3.6billion in 1980. 52

In the 1980s globalaquaculture expandedrapidly, driving pricesdown for popular seafoods.Shrimp farming grew rapid-ly in Asia and South Amer-ica, while commercialsalmon farming became es-tablished in Norway, Chile,Scotland, Canada andJapan, as well as in Maineand Washington state.Shrimp and salmon, whichhad been rare delicaciesfor most Americans a fewdecades earlier, becameyear-round mainstays onrestaurant menus.

Troubled Waters

A s the industry grew,evidence mounted

that poorly operated fishfarms were spreading dis-ease and competing withwild fisheries. Some of thefirst alarms came from thePacific Northwest, wherethe Interior Department began listingwild salmon runs as endangered inthe early 1990s. Competition betweenhatchery fish and their wild cousins,as well as overfishing and changingocean conditions, caused Northwestsalmon fisheries to collapse starting inthe 1970s despite massive governmentinvestments in hatcheries. 53

From 20 to 40 percent of the At-lantic salmon caught in the North At-lantic between 1989 and 1996 were offarmed origin. By 1997, escaped farmsalmon were successfully breeding inthe wild in the waters off Norway, Ire-land, the United Kingdom and easternNorth America. 54 Alarmed, Alaskabanned finfish farming in state waters

in 1989 to protect its wildsalmon fishery, althoughsalmon farming continuednext door in British Colum-bia. In 2000 U.S. officials list-ed Atlantic salmon runs ineight Maine rivers as endan-gered, partly because of ge-netic mixing with escapedfarm salmon. 55

Concerns also arose aboutthe potential for fish farms tospread aquatic diseases to wildfisheries. Epidemiological pat-terns indicated that salmonfarms promoted the spread ofsea lice, infectious salmon ane-mia and whirling disease towild populations in Europeand North America. 56 Shrimpfarms were also highly sus-ceptible to disease. For ex-ample, white spot syndromevirus wiped out entire aqua-culture operations in someparts of Asia and South Amer-ica and threatened to spreadto wild shrimp and other crus-taceans via escaped shrimp,flooding, pond discharges orbird predation. 57

Environmentalists also crit-icized marine fish farms asserious pollution sources andargued that the problem couldgrow worse as aquacultureexpanded. They focused onwaste discharges from oceanpens and cages, includingfeces, unconsumed fish food,antibiotics and pesticides.

In 2003 a U.S. district courtfined two Maine companies

for operating salmon farms withoutClean Water Act discharge permits andordered them to suspend operationsfor two to three years while surroundingareas recovered and to stop stockingEuropean strains of Atlantic salmon.The court also denounced federal andstate environmental regulators who hadlet the farms operate without permits.

FISH FARMING

Several miles off the New Hampshire coast, a worker fills afeeding tank that automatically feeds farmed codfish twice

a day, powered by solar and wind power. The facility is part of a University of New Hampshire

experiment in offshore aquaculture.

AP P

hoto

/Jim

Cole


“In the absence of any regulatoryeffort, inertia has reigned supreme,and the entities causing the environ-mental harm have been given a freepass to continue their heedless de-spoiling of the environment,” wroteJudge Gene Carter. 58

Consumer demand for seafood keptgrowing in spite of these debates asAmericans sought alternatives to red meat,and researchers touted fish as a goodsource of lean protein. As debate widenedover the risks and benefits of eatingseafood, wild as well as farmed, buy-ing fish became complicated. To helpconsumers and chefs make sustainablechoices, ocean advocates and conserva-tion groups published guides that typi-cally endorsed farmed shellfish and veg-etarian finfish such as tilapia, but warnedusers away from salmon and shrimp.

Some health experts worried thatthese mixed messages, coupled withgovernment warnings about mercuryin some species of wild-caught fish,could turn consumers away fromseafood altogether.

“An advisory is like a medication,”said Joshua T. Cohen, a senior researchassociate at Harvard University’s Schoolof Public Health. “It has a therapeuticeffect, but it also has side effects.” 59

Cohen and colleagues calculatedthat if mercury warnings made peo-ple who were not pregnant cut theirseafood consumption by one-sixth, risksof heart disease and stroke would rise.

In the early 2000s, two commissionscarried out the first broad reviews of U.S.policies related to ocean use and con-servation in more than 30 years. ThePew Oceans Commission, funded by thePew Charitable Trusts, focused on newlaws and ways to strengthen existinglaws in its 2003 report. The government-funded U.S. Commission on Ocean Pol-icy, which issued its findings in 2004,stressed better coordination between fed-eral agencies and bigger roles for statesand communities in managing ocean re-sources. Both groups, however, foundthat the oceans were in crisis as a result

of overfishing, marine pollution, coastaldevelopment and poor coordination be-tween government agencies responsiblefor managing ocean policies.

CURRENTSITUATION

Offshore Legislation

C ongress is considering the NationalOffshore Aquaculture Act of 2007,

which would authorize fish farming infederal waters. The NOAA-sponsoredbill directs the secretary of Commerceto develop a process for permitting off-shore aquaculture facilities in the U.S.Exclusive Economic Zone, which stretch-es from three to 200 miles offshore,and to establish environmental re-quirements for marine fish farms.

“America is at a crossroads,” saysMichael Rubino, director of NOAA’saquaculture program. “We’re import-ing more than 80 percent of ourseafood, and a lot of that is farmed.The choice is between growing someof that domestically or importing anincreasing volume. The U.S. has verycrowded coastlines, and we value themfor other uses, but there’s lots of spacein federal waters.”

Deepwater aquaculture is challeng-ing because currents and storms arestronger, fish are more exposed topredators and it costs more to trans-port crews and equipment to farmsites. On the positive side, waters arecleaner, ocean currents carry wastesaway from fish cages quickly andthere are fewer conflicts with otheractivities such as recreational boaters.

“It’s more expensive to farm off-shore than to do it right next to thedock in calm water,” says Universityof Alaska economist Gunnar Knapp.

“But as more work takes place, thetechnical challenges of designing cages,feeders and monitoring devices willbecome less of an obstacle. A lot ofpros and cons depend on what kindsof species are farmed, where andhow.” Because of high costs, offshoreproducers are likely to concentrate onhigh-value finfish like cod, halibutand snapper.

Critics say raising more large car-nivorous fish will tax supplies of smallfish like herring and anchovies usedto make fish meal and fish oil, themain ingredients of fish feed. Raisingcarnivorous species often consumesmore protein in the form of fish mealand fish oil than it produces, althoughthe ratio has improved in recent years.Aquaculture already consumes almosthalf of global fish meal production and

Shrimp Is Most Popular U.S. Seafood

Shrimp is the most popular seafood among Americans. Canned tuna is second despite concerns about high mercury levels in some types of tuna.

Source: National Fisheries Institute, www.aboutseafood.com

Per Capita Consumption of Seafood Species by

Americans, 2006(in pounds)

Shrimp 4.40

Canned tuna 2.90

Salmon 2.026

Pollock 1.639

Tilapia .996

Catfish .969

Crab .664

Cod .505

Clams .440

Scallops .305

640 CQ Researcher

FISH FARMING

three-quarters of fish oilsupplies, and most foragefisheries are being fishedat or near sustainableharvest levels. 60

Many observers seethe “fish for fish feed”problem as crucial to thefuture of aquaculture.“The feed nut has got tobe cracked,” says Gold-burg of EnvironmentalDefense. “If you have tocatch more fish to putinto a farm than you getout at the end, then ma-rine aquaculture is eco-logically nonsensical.”

NOAA and fish farm-ers agree that the issueis serious, but they pointto new options on thehorizon. “These fish areeating other fish anyway,and the conversion ratiois worse in the wild,”says Nardi of GreatBayAquaculture in NewHampshire. “We’ve madea lot of progress on re-ducing the amount offish meal in feed and re-placing it with plant protein. Our in-dustry relies on fish meal for feed, sowe can’t afford to have it run out.”

The issue is complicated becausefish oil is a major source of omega-3fatty acids, so not all substitutes havethe same nutritional value. “We needmore research into alternatives likemarine algae,” says Rubino. “All fishneed protein, but it can come frommany places.”

Critics also argue that the NOAA leg-islation does not include strong envi-ronmental safeguards for open-oceanfish farming. The bill requires the sec-retary of Commerce, working withother agencies, to “identify . . . envi-ronmental requirements that apply tooffshore aquaculture under existing lawsand regulations,” including issues such

as escapes, disease transmission to wildstocks and impacts on marine ecosys-tems. The bill also calls on Commerceto “implement such measures as maybe necessary to protect the environ-ment,” such as limiting or barring sitesin certain areas. 61

“We’ve learned a huge amount fromour experience with salmon, shrimp andcatfish, and we have a very sustainableand environmentally responsible aqua-culture community in the United States,”says Rubino. “We’re going to use thatsame model in federal waters.” Butmany marine experts would like to seemore specific requirements.

“The bill should give some directionabout where to place offshore aqua-culture, based on areas’ values for dif-ferent uses,” says Michael Tlusty, re-

search director at the NewEngland Aquarium. “AndCommerce is required tomonitor offshore aquacul-ture impacts, but it wouldbe nice to do somethingwith that data.” For exam-ple, Tlusty points out, theCanadian province of BritishColumbia requires fish farmsto cut back or halt pro-duction if impacts exceedcertain limits.

Producers say Congressshould not legislate pre-scriptive environmental stan-dards. “If we impose toomany conditions, business-es won’t be able to investin that type of production,”says National AquacultureAssociat ion PresidentMacMillan. “You can applyconditions to prevent escapesand put bags under cagesto capture waste, but thatmakes it extremely expen-sive, and we can’t see howa company could afford todo that long term.”

Strict environmental safe-guards would yield more

valuable products, argues Stanford econ-omist Naylor. “The United States shouldraise the bar for aquaculture worldwide.The most sustainable producers out thereare doing quite well financially and aretrying to raise standards at every turn,”Naylor asserts. “It makes sense in anyindustry. And once you generate de-mand and scale up production, costsstart coming down.”

Senior members of Congress have al-ready signaled differences with NOAA.When Sens. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii,and Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, introducedthe bill at the Bush administration’s re-quest, they filed amendments to addressenvironmental risks, require more re-search on offshore aquaculture and for-bid finfish farming in federal waters off

Continued on p. 642

Extension aquaculture specialist Pat Duncan checks a tank oftilapia at Georgia’s Fort Valley State University, where she teaches

fish farmers and prospective growers about aquaculturetechnology and potential commercial markets.

AP P

hoto

/Ellio

tt M

inor

no


At Issue:Will offshore aquaculture benefit U.S. coastal communities?Yes

yesWILLIAM T. HOGARTHDIRECTOR, NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIESSERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC ANDATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)

WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, JULY 2007

o ffshore aquaculture will benefit the United States as awhole, from our coastal communities all the way tothe heartland. Fish and shellfish farming are integral to

global seafood production in the 21st century, and the UnitedStates must embrace it or be left behind the rest of the world.Now is not the time to hide behind myths about aquaculture.Over $1 billion of seafood is already farmed in the UnitedStates under stringent regulations that protect water quality andensure aquatic animal health. With a seafood trade deficit of al-most $9 billion, the United States must take the initiative to pro-duce more seafood here at home.

One of our best opportunities is in federal waters, three to200 miles offshore. However, we need the right regulations inplace to do that before any permits are issued. That’s why theNational Offshore Aquaculture Act of 2007 pending in Congressis so important. The current administration bill contains strongenvironmental requirements, and we are working with Congressto ensure states, councils and a long list of other stakeholdershave a role in the development of a new offshore aquacultureindustry.

Coastal communities, including fishermen, already play amajor role in coastal aquaculture operations in the UnitedStates. In fact, aquaculture plays a significant role in many com-mercial fisheries, including Alaska’s, where hatchery-producedsalmon make up 20 to 40 percent of the catch annually. And,U.S. fishermen are among those successfully pioneering musseland finfish farming in the ocean in Hawaii, Puerto Rico andNew Hampshire. They are clearly demonstrating that offshoreaquaculture is sustainable and safe.

As with any new industry, coastal communities will bene-fit from the economic “ripple effect” that offshore aquacul-ture will bring. More seafood production means more jobs,more demand for cold storage, transportation and processing.Businesses, from gas stations to boat repair and maintenance,will benefit. U.S. aquaculture can also provide fresh year-round, reliable product to help meet demand from retailersand consumers.

At NOAA, we are working on new rules to end overfishingin the United States, but even when our wild-capture fisheriesare rebuilt and sustainable, they will not produce enoughseafood to meet the U.S. appetite for fish and shellfish. Offshoreaquaculture will ensure America’s place as a global leader inboth production of healthy and safe seafood and environmen-tally responsible seafood farming.No

PAULA TERRELFISH-FARMING AND WATER-QUALITY ISSUESCOORDINATOR, ALASKA MARINECONSERVATION COUNCIL *

WRITTEN FOR CQ RESEARCHER, JULY 2007

c oastal communities depend on commercial, recreationaland subsistence fishing. But fishing is more than just“earning a living”; it is a way of life. Every new regula-

tion, federal action or market change directly affects coastalcommunities. Any potential “benefit” from offshore aquaculturemust be weighed against the potential social and economic lossto coastal communities and fishing families.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) argues that offshore aquaculture will result in fewerenvironmental concerns than those that have plagued coastalfish farming. But the environmental problems associated withnear-shore fish farming don’t go away just because you moveoffshore. These risks include escapes of non-native species,ocean pollution, use of chemicals, spread of disease and,more recently, the development of genetically modified fishthat will be used as brood stock for farmed species.

NOAA would have us believe that offshore aquaculture willcomplement wild fisheries. Rather, it is clear that it will com-pete with existing wild fisheries, especially finfish such assalmon, halibut and cod. Consider:

• Denying fishermen access to their fishing grounds islikely to cause conflicts.

• With offshore aquaculture focusing on carnivorous fin-fish, such as black cod and halibut, coastal communitieswill be negatively affected by market confusion abouthealthy, wild seafood.

• Farming of species that are healthy and are commer-cially harvested in the wild will compete with, ratherthan complement, wild fisheries.

NOAA also asserts that offshore aquaculture will provide jobsin coastal communities, but the facts show that:

• The high cost of tending fish far from shore means fa-cilities will likely be automated.

• Mom-and-pop operations will not survive, and operationswill be consolidated into a few multinational corporations.

• The United States cannot compete with lower labor costsin other countries.

Offshore aquaculture should not be a substitute for goodfisheries management. In places where there are depletions,rebuilding plans and other conservation tools should be usedto restore fish populations.

* Terrel and her husband have owned and operated a salmontrawler for 29 years.

642 CQ Researcher

Alaska. Inouye announced he wouldalso offer a comprehensive bill to ad-dress further concerns with NOAA’s ap-proach. 62 Inouye and Stevens’ actionsreflect worries in some coastal com-munities about the impacts of expand-ing offshore aquaculture. (See “At Issue,”p. 641.)

Seafood Safety

R ecurring contaminants in import-ed farmed seafood, along with

similar problems in other food sectors,are spurring Congress to pass newlaws regulating foodsafety. China, thesource of many taint-ed food products,appears to be feel-ing the heat, al-though it is not clearhow quickly Chineseregulators will beable to reform thenation’s vast pro-duct ion sys tem,largely made up ofsmaller farmers. 63

On May 9, theSenate passed anamendment callingon the FDA to ex-pand seafood in-spections and reportto Congress on thefeasibility of devel-oping a tracer system for all domes-tic and imported seafood. “It is un-acceptable to allow substandard catfishand shrimp, mostly produced in China,to enter the U. S. market when thoseimported products do not meet theestablished safety standards that gov-ern our food supply,” said Sen. JeffSessions, R-Ala., who sponsored themeasure. 64

The bill also included an amend-ment offered by Sen. Richard J. Durbin,D-Ill., designed to strengthen the na-

tion’s food system by creating an early-warning system for food contaminationand a registry of adulterated-food casesand requiring companies to maintainrecords that would help the FDA tracecontaminated food. The measure alsostates the sense of the Senate that theFDA needs more resources and in-spectors and that the agency shouldplace priority on negotiating food safe-ty agreements with other countries.

Between 2003 and 2007, however,Congress reduced FDA’s budget for in-specting foreign seafood-processingplants from $211,483 to zero. 65 Whilethe program was small, critics say in-specting more foreign plants would help

FDA to identify potential risks from im-ported seafood before shipping. Con-gress could restore the funding whenit considers FDA’s budget later this yearas part of the fiscal 2008 Agricultureappropriations bill. The FDA, whichoversees all food except meat and poul-try, has 1,962 inspectors to police near-ly 300,000 plants in the United Statesand abroad. 66

In late June, just before the FDAbanned five types of Chinese farmedfish from entering the United States

without testing, regulators in Beijing dis-closed they had identified more than23,000 food-safety violations and closeddown 180 food plants in a nationalcrackdown over the previous six months.Problems included use of malachite greenin seafood and processing of shark finwith toxic industrial chemicals. 67

China may be trying to clean up itsquality problems, but reforms are like-ly to come slowly. According to im-porters and inspectors, most Chinesefish is raised by small family farmerswho have to contend with serious in-dustrial water pollution and who knowvery little about the chemicals theyuse. 68 And China’s poorly organized

regu la to ry sys tem,which is riddled with cor-ruption, gives producersfew incentives to meethigh standards. As a firststep, Sen. Durbin andRep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., chairwoman ofthe House Appropria-tions Subcommittee onAgriculture, have calledfor negotiating an agree-ment that would allowFDA inspectors intoChina. 69

U.S. consumers whoare wor r i ed abou tseafood safety can getsome information fromcountry-of-origin labels(COOL), which havebeen required on fresh

and frozen seafood products (but notcanned or processed goods) since2005. The labels also specify whetherproducts are wild-caught or farmed.But many Americans don’t read them,says the aquaculture association’sMacMillan: “Consumers don’t necessar-ily distinguish between domesticallyproduced fish and fish that’s producedabroad or captured in the wild — theybuy cheaper fish from countries withlower labor costs. Sometimes that ap-proach comes back to bite them.”

FISH FARMING

Continued from p. 640

Senior scientist Atle Mortensen is studying cod aquaculture at theNorwegian Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture Research in Tromso.

Farmers have perfected salmon aquaculture, but raising the endangered cod is trickier.

AFP

/Get

ty I

mag

es/F

ranci

s K

ohn


University of Alaska economistKnapp agrees that most U.S. consumersknow very little about fish, but he saysretailers are asking for much more in-formation about seafood products.“Large buyers like Wal-Mart, Safewayand Whole Foods have a very strongincentive only to buy healthful foods.These companies are going to startdemanding 100 percent traceability andthe ability to audit all along their sup-ply chains,” he says. “When marketsdepend on those conditions, the sys-tem will be really reliable.”

In fact, Wal-Mart and other largebuyers already have adopted stan-dards drafted by the Global Aquacul-ture Alliance, an industry group, whichhas set minimum environmental andsocial conditions for fish farming. Whilesome environmental groups say thatindustry standards could be stricter,enforcing these codes will help to es-tablish some basic standards for aqua-culture, such as cleaning up water dis-charged from fish farms and endinguse of antibiotics.

The new standards are promptingsome suppliers, including shrimp farm-ers in Thailand, to improve their op-erations and restore environmental dam-age. For example, Rubicon Resources,a Los Angeles-based supplier of Thaishrimp, has replanted new mangroveswamps to compensate for trees de-stroyed to make way for its ponds andhas standardized treatment of dischargedpond water. 70

OUTLOOKSeeking Sustainability

A s Congress considers authorizingoffshore aquaculture or requiring

more study, pressure to farm the seasis growing worldwide. Meanwhile, is-

sues such as food-conversion ratiosand effluents from fish cages are beingconsidered in the debate over how toconduct large-scale aquaculture with-out harming the oceans.

Many researchers are developingequipment and methods to minimizeenvironmental impacts. Several com-panies are patenting rigid spherical cagesfor ocean finfish farming that are en-gineered to withstand storms and sharkattacks. Researchers are also studyingways to grow shellfish in deep wateron submerged lines or platforms.

Another low-impact approach isto adapt marine species to grow infreshwater tanks. Florida’s OceanBoy Farms grows Pacific white salt-water shrimp in low-salinity pondsand uses specially cultivated bacte-ria to consume shrimp wastes. 71

Other producers are raising gamefish like cobia and barramundi at fa-cilities far from the coast in Virginiaand Massachusetts. 72

Using less fish for fish food is ahigh priority. Some improvements arelow-tech. For example, Kona BlueWater Farms, which raises Hawaiianyellowtail in state-controlled deep oceanwaters off Hawaii, feeds its fish oncea day instead of multiple times so thatthey devour the food quickly and letvery little drift out of their cages. Theapproach produces one pound of fishfrom one pound of feed. 73

Researchers have had trouble find-ing substitutes for fish meal and fishoil that contain the omega-3 fatty acidsand other nutrients that fish need togrow, but some companies are start-ing to derive these nutrients fromsources such as marine algae and poly-chaete seaworms. In February a Mary-land company, Advanced Bionutrition,released a new shrimp feed that com-pletely replaces fish meal and fish oilwith nutrients from sustainablesources.

Sustainability is also a social issue,says the University of Rhode Island’sCosta-Pierce, who questions whether

ocean farming will benefit coastalcommunities. “It’s at a primitive stageof planning, and there’s been no dis-cussion of all the other pieces be-sides production, like hatcheries andtransportation,” says Costa-Pierce. Heis much more enthusiastic about thegrowth in coastal shellfish farming.“An enormous number of fishermenare fishing part time and raisingshellfish part time. That’s a very ex-citing transition because it’s an ad-ditional enterprise that fits into theirlifestyles socially, economically andenvironmentally.”

In the view of the University ofAlaska’s Knapp, however, aquaculturewill benefit fishing communities in thelong run by making the economic piebigger for all fish producers. “Aqua-culture is vastly expanding consumerdemand for fish,” he explains. “It’sgoing to turn people into fish eatersby making fish available and gettingthem to think about trying it. Farmedsalmon can’t keep up with demandeven though there’s three or four timesas much salmon in the world now asthere was 15 years ago, because they’veincreased demand so rapidly.”

But aquaculture has to be eco-nomically sustainable for producersto undertake it. Some experts ques-tion whether ocean fish farms in U.S.waters can compete with importedfarmed fish. “There’s been no hard-nosed economic assessment of theeconomic viability of cod, haddockand some of the other species thatare being tested, and the operationsthat are making money in Hawaii arein state waters near the shore,” saysCosta-Pierce.

The economics are especially chal-lenging for companies trying to developnew sustainable approaches, says Nardiof New Hampshire’s GreatBay Aqua-culture. His company is researchingnew designs for submersible cages andsubstitutes for fish meal, and it recircu-lates water at its dry-land hatchery tominimize discharges.

644 CQ Researcher

FISH FARMING

“We can’t do it on our own. Weneed to team with other people atuniversities and agencies to get grantsand work on these measures until wecan see whether they’re economicallyviable” says Nardi. Still, he believesthat U.S. aquaculture can and shouldexpand: “If people knew that a bigshare of their seafood supply is farmedand a growing share will come fromfarms, they would agree that it makessense for us to participate in it.”

Notes1 Clarke Canfield, “Maine Fish Industry,Auction in Jeopardy,” The Associated Press,April 21, 2007.2 Testimony before Senate National OceanPolicy Study Subcommittee, April 6, 2006.3 United Nations Food and Agriculture Orga-nization, The State of World Fisheries and Aqua-culture 2006 (2007), p. 3; Steven Hedlund,“Farming Closes In on Wild Production,” SeafoodBusiness, October 2006, p. 1.4 For background see Jennifer Weeks, “Fac-tory Farms,” CQ Researcher, Jan. 12, 2007,pp. 25-48.5 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Sus-tainable Marine Aquaculture: Fulfilling thePromise, Managing the Risks (2007), p. 10,www.whoi.edu. For background see Mary H.Cooper, “Threatened Fisheries,” CQ Researcher,Aug. 2, 2002, pp. 617-648.6 National Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheriesof the United States — 2005 (February 2007),p. 74, www.st.nmfs.gov.7 National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Ad-ministration (NOAA), “Quick Stats on Aquacul-ture,” March 12, 2007, www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aqua-culture/docs/05_AQ%20Stats.pdf.

8 James Wright, “Fighting Fraud,” SeafoodBusiness, June 5, 2007; Christian M. Wadeand Kevin Begos, “Fishing for Solutions,”Tampa Tribune, June 23, 2006, p. 1.9 U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Inside thePyramid,” www.mypyramid.gov/pyramid/meat_why_print.html; American Heart Associa-tion, “Fish and Omega-3 Fatty Acids,” www.amer-icanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4632.10 For background see Marcia Clemmitt, “Sav-ing the Oceans,” CQ Researcher, Nov. 4, 2005,pp. 933-956.11 Ronald A. Hites, et al., “Global Assessmentof Organic Contaminants in Farmed Salmon,”Science, Jan. 9, 2004, pp. 226-229.12 Eric Pianin, “Toxins Cited in Farmed Salmon,”The Washington Post, Jan. 9, 2004, p. A1.13 Ronald W. Hardy, “Contaminants in Salmon:A Follow-Up,” Aquaculture Magazine, March/April 2005, p. 3.14 Ibid.; “Seafood: Farmed vs. Wild,” ConsumerReports, January 2005, www.consumerreports.org.15 M.G. Ikonomou, et al., “Flesh Quality ofMarket-Size Farmed and Wild British ColumbiaSalmon,” Environmental Science & Technol-ogy, vol. 41, no. 2 (2007), pp. 437-443.16 Dariush Mozaffarian and Eric B. Rimm, “FishIntake, Contaminants, and Human Health: Eval-uating the Risks and Benefits,” Journal of theAmerican Medical Association, vol. 296, no.15, Oct. 18, 2006, pp. 1885-1895.17 Suzanne Schlossberg, “Go Fish,” Women’sHealth, April 2007.18 Merck Veterinary Manual, www.merck-vetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp.19 For background, see Adriel Bettelheim,“Drug-Resistant Bacteria,” CQ Researcher,June 4, 1999, pp. 473-496.20 Suspicious Shrimp: The Health Risks of In-dustrialized Shrimp Production, Food & WaterWatch (December 2006), p. 4.21 Preston Lauterbach, “Invasion of the AsianCatfish,” Memphis Flyer, May 31, 2007.

22 For background, see David Hosansky, “FoodSafety,” CQ Researcher, Nov. 1, 2002, pp.897-920.23 See U.S. General Accounting Office, FoodSafety: Federal Oversight of Seafood Does NotSufficiently Protect Consumers, Jan. 31, 2001,and Food Safety: FDA’s Imported Seafood Safe-ty Program Shows Some Progress, But FurtherImprovements Are Needed, Jan. 30, 2004.24 Robert Cohen, “Lacking Resources, FDAInspects Less Than 1% of Imports,” San DiegoUnion-Tribune, June 13, 2007.25 Garry Mitchell, “Chinese Catfish Bannedin 3 States,” The Associated Press, May 16,2007; Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, “FDA SaysChinese Fish Tainted,” Los Angeles Times,June 29, 2007, p. A1.26 “FDA Detains Imports of Farm-Raised Chi-nese Seafood,” press release, Food and DrugAdministration, June 28, 2007.27 Andrew Martin, “Melamine From U.S. PutIn Feed,” The New York Times, May 31, 2007.28 For background, see Clemmitt, op. cit.29 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, op. cit.30 Pew Oceans Commission, “America’s LivingOceans: Charting A Course for Sea Change,”May 2003, p. 77, www.pewoceans.org.31 James Owen, “Wild-Farm Hybrids Not Reach-ing Spawning Grounds?” National GeographicNews, Oct. 28, 2003.32 World Wildlife Fund, On the Run: EscapedFarmed Fish in Norwegian Waters (2005),pp. 6, 22.33 Puget Sound Action Team, “Shellfish Ecol-ogy,” July 2003, www.psat.wa.gov/Pro-grams/shellfish/fact_sheets/ecology_web1.pdf.34 Paul Thacker, “Oysters and Clams Clean UpDirty Water,” Environmental Science & Tech-nology, May 15, 2006, pp. 3131-3132.35 Amir Neori, et al., “The Need for a BalancedEcosystem Approach to Blue Revolution Aqua-culture,” Environment, April 2007, pp. 41-42.36 Jason Dean, “Recent Biotechnology Inno-vation Is a Bit Fishy: A Fluorescent Pet,” TheWall Street Journal, May 8, 2003; Annie Huang,“Fluorescent Fish Aids Medical Research,”The Associated Press, Sept. 1, 2005.37 Aqua Bounty Technologies, “Our Prod-ucts,” www.aquabounty.com/products.html.38 Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology,Future Fish: Issues in Science and Regulationof Transgenic Fish (2003), pp. 6-7, 10, 34.39 National Research Council, Animal Biotech-nology: Science-Based Concerns (2002), pp.68-72.40 Ibid., p. 10.41 Ibid., p. 30.

About the AuthorJennifer Weeks is a CQ Researcher contributing writer inWatertown, Mass., who specializes in energy and environ-mental issues. She has written for The Washington Post,The Boston Globe Magazine and other publications, andhas 15 years’ experience as a public-policy analyst, lob-byist and congressional staffer. She has an A.B. degreefrom Williams College and master’s degrees from the Uni-versity of North Carolina and Harvard.


42 Carlos M. Duarte, Nuria Marba and MarianneHolmer, “Rapid Domestication of Marine Species,”Science, April 20, 2007, pp. 382-383.43 For background, see David Hosansky,“Biotech Foods,” CQ Researcher, March 31,2001, pp. 249-272.44 U.S. Department of Agriculture, EconomicResearch Service, “Adoption of Genetically En-gineered Crops in the U.S.,” July 14, 2006,www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/adop-tion.htm.45 Pew Initiative on Biotechnology, “PublicSentiments About Genetically ModifiedFood,” 2003 and 2005 surveys, http://pewag-biotech.org/research/2006update/.46 Barry A. Costa-Pierce, “Aquaculture in An-cient Hawaii,” BioScience, vol. 37, no. 5, May1987, pp. 320-330.47 Brian Fagan, Fish on Friday: Feasting, Fast-ing, and the Discovery of the New World (2006),pp. 42-45, 133-141.48 Jim Lichatowich, Salmon Without Rivers:A History of the Pacific Salmon Crisis (1999),pp. 182-190, 199.49 For background, see Jennifer Weeks, “Fac-tory Farms,” CQ Researcher, Jan. 12, 2007,pp. 25-48.50 United Nations Food and Agriculture Or-ganization, State of World Aquaculture2006, FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 500(2006), p. 5.51 Craig Tucker and Jimmie Avery, “IndustryProfile: Pond-Raised Channel Catfish,” Mis-sissippi State University, May 2004, www.age-con.msstate.edu/Aquaculture/pubs/Catfish_In-dustry_Profile.pdf.52 Nick C. Parker, “History, Status, and Fu-ture of Aquaculture in the United States,” Al-abama Cooperative Extension System,www.aces.edu/dept/fisheries/education/doc-uments/historyofaquaculture.pdf, p. 10.53 Lichatowich, op. cit.54 Rosamond Naylor, et al., “Fugitive Salmon:Assessing the Risks of Escaped Fish from Net-Pen Aquaculture,” BioScience, vol. 55, no. 5,May 2005, pp. 427-429.55 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, “Wild AtlanticSalmon in Maine Protected as EndangeredSpecies,” news release, Nov. 13, 2000.56 Naylor, et al., op. cit., p. 431; Martin Krkosek,et al., “Epizootics of Wild Fish Induced ByFarm Fish,” Proceedings of the National Acad-emy of Sciences, vol. 103, no. 42, Oct. 17, 2006.57 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animaland Plant Health Inspection Service, “CEI Im-pact Worksheet: White Spot Disease, Louisiana,USA,” May 16, 2007.

58 United States Public Interest Research Group,et al., v. Atlantic Salmon of Maine, LLC; Unit-ed States Public Interest Research Group, et al.,v. Stolt Sea Farm, Inc., 257 F. Supp. 2d 407,May 28, 2003.59 “Study Finds Government Advisories on FishConsumption and Mercury May Do MoreHarm Than Good,” Harvard School of PublicHealth, Oct. 19, 2005; Daniel J. DeNoon, “Ben-efits of Fish Outweigh Mercury Risk,” WebMD,Oct. 19, 2005.60 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute,op. cit.61 National Offshore Aquaculture Act, H.R.2010, Sec. 4(a)(4) and 4(a)(5)(B).62 Congressional Record, June 13, 2007, p. S7645.63 David Barboza, “Food-Safety Crackdownin China,” The New York Times, June 28, 2007,p. C1.64 “Senate Adopts Sessions’ Amendment to BoostInspection of Fish and Seafood,” press release;www.sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=273830.

65 Food & Water Watch, Import Alert: Govern-ment Fails Consumers, Falls Short on SeafoodInspections, May 2007, p. 3.66 Ibid., p. 3.67 Barboza, op. cit.68 Julie Schmidt, “Chinese Fish Crisis ShowsSeafood Safety Challenges,” USA Today,June 28, 2007, p. 1A.69 “Durbin, DeLauro: Chinese GovernmentAgrees to Toughen Food Safety Standards forImports,” press release, May 9, 2007, www.sen-ate.gov/~durbin/record.cfm?id=273861.70 Kris Hudson and Wilawan Watcharasakwet,“The New Wal-Mart Effect: Cleaner Thai ShrimpFarms,” The Wall Street Journal, July 24, 2007,p. B1.71 See www.oceanboyfarms.com.72 See www.virginiacobiafarms.biz/Virginia-CobiaFarms, www.australis.us/.73 Hsiao-Ching Chou, “ ‘Guilt-Free’ Fish Farm-ing Arrives,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Feb. 22,2006.

FOR MORE INFORMATIONAlaska Marine Conservation Council, P.O. Box 101145, Anchorage, AK 99510;(907) 277-5357; www.akmarine.org. Coalition of fishermen, scientists and conser-vationists seeking protection and restoration of Alaska’s marine environment.

Atlantic Marine Aquaculture Center, University of New Hampshire, 35 ColovosRd., Durham, NH 03824; (603) 862-3685; amac.unh.edu. Federally funded researchcenter working to stimulate environmentally sustainable offshore ocean aquaculture.

Environmental Defense, 257 Park Ave. South, New York, NY 10010; (212) 505-2100; www.ed.org. National environmental organization conducting scientific andeconomic analysis of ocean issues.

Food & Water Watch, 1400 16th St., N.W., Suite 225, Washington, DC 20036;(202) 797-6550; www.foodandwaterwatch.org. Watchdog group analyzing foodsafety, agriculture policy, fisheries and water rights.

Kona Blue Water Farms, 1 Keahole Point Rd., Kailua-Kona, HI 96740; (808)331-1188; www.kona-blue.com. Group of marine biologists and local residentsraising Hawaiian yellowtail through environmentally sound practices.

National Aquaculture Association, 111 W. Washington St., Suite 1, Charles Town,WV 25414; (304) 728-2167; www.nationalaquaculture.org. Trade organization for theaquaculture industry, representing both ocean and land-based fish-farming operations.

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Aquaculture Pro-gram, 1315 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; (301) 713-2370;www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture. Manages federal aquaculture activities.

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 266 Woods Hole Rd., Woods Hole,MA 02543; (508) 289-2252; www.whoi.edu. Works to advance ocean science.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

646 CQ Researcher

Books

Costa-Pierce, Barry A., ed., Ecological Aquaculture: TheEvolution of the Blue Revolution, Blackwell, 2002.A collection of articles by marine scientists highlights lessons

about sustainability for today’s fish farmers from aquaculturepracticed in pre-modern societies.

Lichatowich, Jim, Salmon Without Rivers: A History ofthe Pacific Salmon Crisis, Island Press, 1999.A fisheries biologist argues that wild salmon populations

are dwindling in the Pacific Northwest because human in-terventions have failed to preserve salmon’s habitat.

Molyneaux, Paul, Swimming in Circles: Aquaculture andthe End of Wild Oceans, Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2007.Contrary to advocates’ view that aquaculture can help ease

the pressure on wild fisheries, journalist Molyneaux sees fishfarming as merely the newest way to exploit the oceans.

Sourcing Seafood: A Professional’s Guide to ProcuringOcean-Friendly Fish and Shellfish, Seafood Choices Al-liance, 2004, www.seafoodchoices.org/resources/docu-ments/SCA%20Directory%20Final.pdf.A trade association for the sustainable-seafood industry pro-

vides detailed descriptions of many ocean-friendly farmedand wild seafood products.

Articles

Bladholm, Linda, “Down on the (Shrimp) Farm: They’reOrganic, Planet-Friendly and Florida-Grown,” The MiamiHerald, Feb. 2, 2006.OceanBoy Farms wants to reshape the shrimp-farming in-

dustry by using freshwater tanks instead of coastal ponds.

Greenberg, Paul, “Green to the Gills,” The New YorkTimes Magazine, June 18, 2006.Major fish-farming countries like Norway are shaping the

future of aquaculture by finding ways to domesticate codand other wild species.

Lean, Geoffrey, “The GM 99,” The Independent (London),July 9, 2006, p. 14.Food giant Unilever is seeking approval in Europe to market

ice cream containing an artificial protein copied from fish, butscientists call it a dangerous genetically modified product.

Pierce, Charles P., “The Next Big Fish,” The Boston GlobeMagazine, Nov. 26, 2006, p. 46.In an illustration of how the seafood industry is globalizing,

the barramundi, an Australian game fish, is now being raised

in tanks in western Massachusetts and showing up on white-tablecloth U.S. restaurants.

Shumway, Sandra, et al., “Shellfish Aquaculture — InPraise of Sustainable Economies and Environments,”World Aquaculture, December 2003, pp. 15-17.An overview of environmental and community benefits

produced by shellfish farming.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, “How FDA RegulatesSeafood,” June 28, 2007, www.fda.gov/consumer/up-dates/seafood062807.html.The FDA describes how it detected antibiotics and other

banned substances in imported seafood.

Reports

Knapp, Gunnar, Cathy A. Roheim and James L. Anderson,The Great Salmon Run: Competition Between Wild andFarmed Salmon, World Wildlife Fund, January 2007.This in-depth look at policy issues related to wild and

farmed salmon in North America includes the status of wildstocks, hatchery output, markets, and consumer preferences.

Import Alert: Government Fails Consumers, Falls Short onSeafood Inspections, Food & Water Watch, January 2007.A consumer watchdog group contends the U.S. Food and

Drug Administration is not policing health risks from importedfarmed seafood adequately.

Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, U.S. Ocean PolicyReport Card, 2006, www.jointoceancommission.org/im-ages/report-card-06.pdf.Members of the Pew Oceans Commission and the U.S. Com-

mission on Ocean Policy say the nation’s progress toward re-forming and improving ocean policy has been uneven andthat more funding is needed at all levels of government tosupport the steps that have been taken.

Marine Aquaculture Task Force, Sustainable MarineAquaculture: Fulfilling the Promise, Managing the Risks,Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, January 2007.A group of experts says ocean fish farming could produce

many benefits but also poses significant environmental risks. Tomake it work, the group calls for the United States to developa well-structured regulatory system and environmental standardsthat focus on minimizing potential impacts on the oceans.

WorldFish Center, Fish: An Issue for Everyone, revised 2005.The nonprofit WorldFish Center, which works to make fish

more available for food and income, argues that fish shouldbe a major policy issue on the global agenda.

Selected Sources

Bibliography


Environmental Concerns

Kay, Jane, “Fish Farm Regulations Await Signature,” TheSan Francisco Chronicle, May 18, 2006, p. B2.California will become the first state to adopt comprehensive

controls on fish farming if Republican Gov. ArnoldSchwarzenegger signs the Sustainable Oceans Act.

Spotts, Peter N., “Fish Farms in the Ocean? Group PushesCongress to Pass Tough Rules,” The Christian ScienceMonitor, Jan. 10, 2007, p. 2.Before oceans are opened up to aquaculture, the Marine

Aquaculture Task Force wants Washington to ensure thatfish farms don’t pollute the waters that nurture them.

Weise, Elizabeth, “Farmed Fish Swim to the Fore,” USAToday, Jan. 18, 2007, p. 7D.Aquaculture has led to serious ecological damage and water

pollution, especially overseas, according to researchers at theMonterey Bay Aquarium in California

Zeller, Shawn, “Sea Changes,” CQ Weekly, April 2, 2007,p. 939.Environmentalists worry fish bred in aquaculture farms

could spread diseases to outlying sea life.

Genetic Engineering

“Little Fish, Big Medicine; Laboratories Turn to the Zebrafishfor Faster, Cheaper Drug Research,” The Boston Globe,Dec. 25, 2006, p. D9.The zebrafish, a two-inch-long freshwater fish, has been

genetically altered to fluoresce during tests in order to showthe effects of potential drugs.

Huang, Annie, “Fluorescent Fish Aids Medical Research,”The Associated Press, Sept. 1, 2005.Taiwanese researchers have developed a method that uses

fluorescent fish to show the impact of experimental drugson cancerous tumors.

Kerber, Ross, “Murky Regulatory Waters,” The BostonGlobe, Aug. 27, 2005, p. A11.Aqua Bounty Technologies in Waltham, Mass., has been

waiting many years for the FDA to approve its geneticallymodified salmon for human consumption.

Organic Fish

Martin, Andrew, “Free or Farmed, When Is a Fish ReallyOrganic?” The New York Times, Nov. 28, 2006, p. A1.The Department of Agriculture is having trouble defining

the standards that make a fish organic.

Ness, Carol, “Organic Label Muddies the Waters,” TheSan Francisco Chronicle, April 28, 2004, p. F1.Although fish cannot be certified organic in the U.S., “organic”

fish in the San Francisco area have been selling well.

Quaid, Libby, “Is it Organic? For Fish, Depends On itsOrigin,” The Associated Press, Dec. 3, 2006.Since the U.S. does not have its own standards for organic

fish, all fish with the organic label come from overseas.

Seafood Safety

Brown, David, “No Melamine Found in Fish From TwoCommercial Farms in U.S.,” The Washington Post, May 18,2007, p. A10.Federal officials say no melamine was found in fish that

ate adulterated feed at two commercial fish farms and havecleared the fish for human consumption.

Grescoe, Taras, “Catfish With a Side of Scombroid,” edi-torial, The New York Times, July 15, 2007, p. WK13.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) receives nowhere

near enough money to properly monitor the safety of the6.6 million tons of seafood imported annually into the U.S.

Henderson, Diedtra, “US Cracks Down On Fish FromChina,” The Boston Globe, June 29, 2007, p. C2.FDA authorities said they will halt shipments of five fish

species from China because they contain dangerous chemicals.

Schmit, Julie, et al., “Crisis Reflects Struggles to ImproveSafety of Seafood,” USA Today, June 29, 2007, p. 1A.China has had more seafood imports rejected by the FDA

than any other country.

The Next Step:Additional Articles from Current Periodicals

CITING CQ RESEARCHER

Sample formats for citing these reports in a bibliography

include the ones listed below. Preferred styles and formats

vary, so please check with your instructor or professor.

MLA STYLEJost, Kenneth. “Rethinking the Death Penalty.” CQ Researcher

16 Nov. 2001: 945-68.

APA STYLE

Jost, K. (2001, November 16). Rethinking the death penalty.

CQ Researcher, 11, 945-968.

CHICAGO STYLE

Jost, Kenneth. “Rethinking the Death Penalty.” CQ Researcher,

November 16, 2001, 945-968.

?Are you writing a paper?

Need backup for a debate?

Want to become an expert on an issue?

For 80 years, students have turned to CQ Researcher for in-depth reporting on issues in the news. Reports on afull range of political and social issues are now available. Following is a selection of recent reports:

ACCESSCQ Researcher is available in print and online. For access,visit your library or www.cqresearcher.com.

STAY CURRENTTo receive notice of upcoming CQ Researcher reports, orlearn more about CQ Researcher products, subscribe to thefree e-mail newsletters, CQ Researcher Alert! and CQ ResearcherNews: http://cqpress.com/newsletters.

PURCHASETo purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or electronicformat (PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call 866-427-7737.Single reports start at $15. Bulk purchase discounts andelectronic-rights licensing are also available.

SUBSCRIBEA full-service CQ Researcher print subscription—including44 reports a year, monthly index updates, and a boundvolume—is $688 for academic and public libraries, $667for high school libraries, and $827 for media libraries.Add $25 for domestic postage.

CQ Researcher Online offers a backfile from 1991 and anumber of tools to simplify research. For pricing in-formation, call 800-834-9020, ext. 1906, or [email protected].

Upcoming ReportsCorporate Responsibility, 8/3/07

Superbugs, 8/24/07

Treatment of Veterans, 8/31/07

Poverty in America, 9/7/07

Megachurches, 9/14/07

In-depth Reports on Issues in the News

Civil LibertiesPrison Reform, 4/07Voting Controversies, 9/06Right to Die, 5/05Immigration Reform, 4/05

Crime/LawGun Violence, 5/07Patent Disputes, 12/06Sex Offenders, 9/06Treatment of Detainees, 8/06War on Drugs, 6/06

EducationStress on Students, 7/07Presidential Libraries, 3/07Academic Freedom, 10/05Intelligent Design, 7/05

EnvironmentFactory Farms, 1/07The New Environmentalism, 12/06Biofuels Boom, 9/06Nuclear Energy, 3/06Climate Change, 1/06

Health/SafetyHPV Vaccine, 5/07Universal Coverage, 3/07Combating Addiction, 2/07

International Affairs/PoliticsCuba’s Future, 7/07Prosecutors and Politics, 6/07Electing the President, 4/07Rethinking Foreign Policy, 2/07Future of the Catholic Church, 1/07Understanding Islam, 11/06

Social TrendsShock Jocks, 6/07Consumer Debt, 3/07Television’s Future, 2/07

Terrorism/DefenseReal ID, 5/07New Strategy in Iraq, 2/07

YouthDebating Hip-Hop, 6/07Drinking on Campus, 8/06Teen Spending, 5/06

CQ RESEARCHER PLUS ARCHIVE

Get Online Access to VitalIssues From 1923 to the Present

For a free trial, visit http://library.cqpress.com/trials.

For pricing information, call 1-800-834-9020, ext. 1906 or e-mail [email protected].

*Editorial Research Reports, the predecessor to CQ Researcher, provides the same expert, nonpartisan reporting on the vital issues that have shaped our society.

CQ Press • 1255 22nd Street, NW, Suite 400 • Washington, DC 20037

CQ Researcher Plus Archive delivers fast, online access to every CQ Researcher report from 1991 to the present, PLUS lets you ex- plore the complete archive of Editorial Research Reports* from 1923-1990. Search and browse more than 3,600 in-depth reports.

Loaded with handy online features, CQ Researcher Plus Archive provides the trustworthy reporting and the advanced online functionality today’s research-ers demand. The new “Issue Tracker” feature pro-vides quick links to past and present reports on the specific topics you need.

New!

cqresearcher - california · pdf fileavailable online: july 27, 2007 627 fish farming the...

Documents