 United States Department of Agriculture  Agricultural Research Service  National Agricultural Library  Beltsville Maryland 20705-2351 January 2005 |
Organic AquacultureAFSIC Notes #5Compiled by: Contents
|
|
The creation of this document was prompted by many customer requests for information on the topic. Text and citations were compiled by Alternative Farming Systems Information Center (AFSIC) staff members Stephanie Boehmer, Mary Gold, Stephanie Hauser, Bill Thomas, and Ann Young. The authors wish to thank Becky Thompson for her work on editing and layout. This publication is available in print format on request to AFSIC or electronically at the AFSIC Web site, http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/.
AFSIC is one of several topic-oriented Information Centers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Library (NAL). AFSIC specializes in locating and accessing information related to alternative cropping systems including sustainable, organic, low-input, biodynamic, and regenerative agriculture. AFSIC also focuses on alternative crops, new uses for traditional crops, and crops grown for industrial production. The Center is supported, in part, by USDA’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program, through and a cooperative agreement with the University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
Disclaimers:
The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) or the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
This publication provides links to many other Web sites. Once you access another site through a link that we provide, you are subject to the copyright and licensing restrictions of the new site. It is the sole responsibility of you, the user of this site, to carefully examine the content of the site and all linked pages for copyright and licensing restrictions and to secure all necessary permissions. See http://riley.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=8&tax_level=1&tax_subject=489#NAL%20Copyright%20Statement for more information.
The USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
National Agricultural Library Cataloging Record:
Organic aquaculture. (AFSIC notes ; no. 5)
1. Aquaculture—Standards. 2. Natural foods—Certification. 3. Fish—Marketing. 4. Shellfish—Marketing. 5. Organic farming—Standards.
I. Boehmer, Stephanie. II. National Agricultural Library (U.S.) III. Title.
aS494.5.A65 no. 5
For more information please contact AFSIC:
Alternative Farming Systems Information Center
10301 Baltimore Avenue, Room 132
Beltsville, MD 20705-2351
301-504-6559; fax 301-504-6927
afsic@nal.usda.gov
http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/
[Go to: Contents]
Diminishing fishery harvests, wild fish food-safety issues, environmental concerns, increased fish consumption, and the increasing market share of organic foods have combined to focus attention on “organic aquaculture.” Consumer demand may well drive the organic production of finfish, shellfish, and other aquatic species into the mainstream during the next decade.
Organic aquaculture has attracted the attention of researchers from several academic disciplines as well as that of environmental advocates and entrepreneurial innovators. A small number of “certified” and non-certified organic fish and microalgae products have made it to the retail market place. While the regulatory specifics still need to be addressed, this new organic market niche has significant potential for growth in the future.
This publication briefly identifies and describes the important issues pertaining to organic aquaculture with regard to production technology, standards and laws, environmental and economic sustainability, research and development, and markets and trade. Presently, there are many contradictions and unresolved questions facing the organic aquaculture production and market sector. The authors have worked to present a snapshot of the situation today with the intention of providing an unbiased and neutral contribution to the dialog of discovery on this issue.
The information covered in this document — organic production in aquaculture; the current status of U.S. standards; the National Organic Standards Board Aquatic Animal Task Force; international organic aquaculture standards; marketing outlook and consumer trends; and research and development in organic aquaculture — is current and up–to–date as of December 2004. Background information pertaining to organic agricultural production and to conventional aquaculture is included in order to provide context for developments in organic aquaculture. This document highlights references to print and electronic documentation chosen from representative sources. Referenced sources are indicated by abbreviated citations within the text; the complete citations and additional sources are found with the Selected Readings list at the end the section. A detailed companion bibliography is included at the end of this publication.
Selected ReadingsThe Future of Fish: Issues and Trends to 2020, by Christopher L. Delgado, Nikolas Wada, Mark W. Rosegrant, and Mahfuzuddin Ahmed. Washington, DC; Penang, Malaysia: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); WorldFish Center, 2003.
Online information/reviews: Additional materials related to this topic available at http://www.ifpri.org/media/fish20031002.htm
Full-text online:
http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/ib/ib15.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Completing the First Decade,” by S. Bergleiter. 7th IFOAM International Conference on Trade in Organic Products: 2003 Mainstreaming Organic Trade: New Frontiers,Opportunities and Responsibilities, November 6-8, Bangkok, Thailand, 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.greennetorganic.com/downloads/IFOAM%20speaker%20presentation%20-PDF/Presentation_Seminar%20E_Stefan%20Bergleiter.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“U.S. Seafood Market in 2020: Strong Demand Likely Boon to Aquaculture,” by Howard M. Johnson. Global Aquaculture Advocate, November 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.hmj.com/Seafood%20Vision%20Article.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[Go to: Contents]
Defining “organic aquaculture” is very much a work-in-progress and, for many reasons, an endeavor marked by controversy. Members of both the organic and the aquaculture communities disagree on how, or even if, aquatic animal and plant production systems can qualify as “organic” as the term is commonly used. Any potential definition must be a multi-faceted one. “Organic” in the context of food production connotes standards and certification – a verifiable claim for the production process and production practices – as well as more elusive characteristics such as consumer expectation for food quality and safety and general environmental, social, and economic benefits for farmers and for society. The variety of species produced in aquacultural systems and vast differences in cultural requirements for finfish, shellfish, mollusks, and aquatic plants add to the complexity of defining this sector. Some species and some production systems may prove quite difficult to adapt to a traditional “organic” system. [See the Conventional Aquaculture section in this document for detail about existing production systems.]
Traditional organic farming systems “rely on ecologically based practices, such as cultural and biological pest management, and virtually exclude the use of synthetic chemicals in crop production and prohibit the use of antibiotics and hormones in livestock production.” [Briefing Room: Organic Farming and Marketing, 2004] Sustainability, environmental stewardship, and holistic, integrated approaches to production are hallmarks of organic systems. Standards for organic cropping and terrestrial livestock husbandry practices have existed for decades. In recent years, standards have been incorporated into state and national organic rule making and certification requirements. [See Organic Agriculture background section in this document for detail about agricultural practices and standards.]
Interpreting practices and standards developed for terrestrial species into practices and standards relevant to aquatic species, both animal and plant, remains a major challenge for organic aquaculture. How can aquatic operations comply with the requirements for an organic system plan, for obtaining acceptable stock, for implementing health care monitoring and management, for maintaining prescribed “living conditions,” for development and acceptance of allowed and prohibited substances lists, for organic feed requirements, for controlled post-harvest processing, for nutrient management, and for required animal identification and record-keeping?
Many specialists agree that the most immediate deterrent to production of organic animals is the issue of providing organically produced feed, especially for species requiring significant proportions of animal-based protein. Where will it come from? Can wild-caught fish and fish by-products be utilized as organic feed stock for farmed species? Should emphasis be placed on farming lowtrophic species?
Other points of discussion:
Criteria for evaluating the suitability of a production site for an organic aquaculture operation; specifically, how standards will be developed for the site of production to address nutrient concentration/effluent management and water testing parameters, chemical drift, the emergence and transfer of disease, the escape of captive species to the wild, biodiversity, and detrimental impacts on indigenous species;
Guidelines to control practices used in aquaculture operations that are consistent with organic principles, especially with regard to chemicals administered to control diseases and parasites, and to accommodating “natural behavior” and animal welfare in closed systems;
Induction of triploidy in fish species;
Origin of livestock requirement for aquaculture operations that obtain stock or fry from wild populations;
Status of “wild caught” fish and related by-products;
Conversion requirements for producers wishing to change over to an organic system;
Recordkeeping/traceability elements, and inspection practices pertinent to aquatic species; and
Harmonization of organic aquaculture standards between countries.
Today, organic aquaculture production takes place primarily in Europe, where certified organic salmon, carp, and trout are grown and sold. Certified organic mussels, Tiger shrimp, white shrimp, and tilapia also are cultured in such diverse places as Vietnam, Peru, Ecuador, Chile, New Zealand, and Israel. Standards and certification procedures are set by just a few certification agencies. Universal acceptance of any standards does not currently exist. [See the International Organic Aquaculture Standards section in this document for detail.] To risk investment in this sector, producers require formally recognized standards in order to communicate the advantages of organic aquaculture products to consumers. The key to the continued growth and development of organic aquaculture lies in resolving a number of issues that currently stand in the way of instituting internationally accepted certification standards.
Selected ReadingsFurther Comments of the Organic Trade Association (OTA) for the USDA-AMS-NOP Hearings on Organic Production and Handling of Aquatic Animals to be Labeled as Organic, by Tom Hutcheson. Federal Register Docket Number TM-00-03. May 3, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.ota.com/pp/otaposition/frc/fish.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Growing Organic Seafood Sales,” by Dan McGovern. IntraFish2, no. 5 (May 2004): 14, 16-19.
Full-text online: http://www.intrafish.com/pdf/download/2c95643bf128d4597b2176f78b462154/2004/5/14.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
OMRI’s Comments on Organic Standards for Aquatic Animals submitted to National Organic Program, by Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI). Federal Register Docket Number TM00-03. May 17, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.omri.org/fishy.pdf (accessed
Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Current Standards and Future Prospects: Chapter 6,” by Albert G. J. Tacon and Deborah J. Brister. Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, edited by Nadia El-Hage Scialbba and Caroline Hattam. Environment and Natural Resources Series, 4. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002. [NAL Call Number: QED.E68 no. 4]
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E/y4137e06.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Organic Production in Aquaculture] [Go to: Contents]
As of the writing of this document, the legal status of using the organic label in the United States for aquatic species, and the future of developing U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) certification standards for organic aquacultural products and aquatic species, are under review. USDA and National Organic Program (NOP) staff, and National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) members are currently studying the legal and rule-making latitude granted USDA in terms of several commodity areas including fish, both farmed and wild-caught.
The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), from which current USDA standards were derived, addressed “aquatic species” in its definition of livestock: “The term ‘livestock’ means any cattle, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, equine animals used for food or in the production of food, fish used for food, wild or domesticated game, or other non-plant life.” [Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, 6502 Definitions] However, the Final Rule, as issued, did not present specific standards for the production and labeling of aquatic species or for aquaculture operations. Recognizing the lack of commonly accepted certification programs for aquatic operations, including aquaculture, and the limited models on which to base national standards, NOP staff made the decision to delay presenting standards for selected commodities, including aquatic species, until a later date.
The Final Rule, under the heading “Additional NOP Standards for Specific Production Categories,” states: “Many commenters asked that the NOP include in the final rule certification standards for apiculture, greenhouses, mushrooms, aquatic species, culinary herbs, pet food, and minor animal species (e.g., rabbits) food. The NOP intends to provide standards for categories where the Act provides the authority to promulgate standards. During the 18-month implementation period, the NOP intends to publish for comment certification standards for apiculture, mushrooms, greenhouses and aquatic animals. These standards will build upon the existing final rule and will address only the unique requirements necessary to certify these specialized operations.” [Federal Register, p. 80556-57]
Certain aquatic species and harvesting systems fall under OFPA and NOP guidance pertaining to wild-crop harvesting. “Wild-crop producers must comply with the same organic system plan requirements and conditions, as applicable to their operation, as their counterparts who produce crops and livestock. Wild harvest operations are production systems, and they must satisfy the general requirement that all practices included in their organic system plan must maintain or improve the natural resources of the operation, including soil and water quality. We modified the practice standard to emphasize that wild harvest production is linked to a designated site and expect that a certifying agent would incorporate mapping and boundary conditions into the organic system plan requirements. Finally, we changed the definition of ‘wild crop’ to specify that harvest takes place from a ‘site’ instead of ‘from land,’ thereby allowing for aquatic plant certification.” [Federal Register, p. 80566]
Selected ReadingsApplying Organic Principles to AquacultureSystems: Understanding Proposed Organic Certification Standards for Farmed Salmon: Market Trends in Aquaculture, by Nathan Pelletier. June 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/aquaculture-standards.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Developing Organic Standards for Molluscan Shellfish. White-paper. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, March 6-7, 2001, Buena Park, CA, by Robin Downey and Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association. [March 2001?].
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/archives/minutes/March01/attachments/04.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Federal Register: Rules and Regulations, vol. 65, no. 246, 8064780684, December 21, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a001221c.html [scroll down to Agricultural Marketing Service]
(accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Aquaculture: A New Wave of the Future, by Deborah J.Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. 2000.
Full-text online: http://aquanic.org/news/2000/organic.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Meeting Fundamental Organic Certification Requirements Similarities and Differences Between Terrestrial and Aquatic Organisms,” by James Riddle. Final Report of the National Organic Aquaculture Workshop, June 23-24, 2000, Minneapolis, Minnesota, edited by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Social Economic and Ecological Sustainability, 2001. pp. 13-17.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/Workshop/finalrep.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, National Organic Program. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/archive/OFPA.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Unique Features of Microalgae Culture Systems: Organic Spirulina Production. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, March 6-7, 2001, Buena Park, CA, by Amha Belay. [March 2001?].
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/archives/minutes/March01/attachments/06.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on U.S. Standards for Organic Aquaculture] [Go to: Contents]
“The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA), part of the 1990 Farm Bill, authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to appoint a 15-member National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). The board’s main mission is to assist the Secretary in developing standards for substances to be used in organic production. The NOSB also advises the Secretary on other aspects of implementing the national organic program.” Recommendations made by the NOSB are not official policy until they are approved and adopted by U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). [National Organic Standards Board Web site, 2004]
In September 2000, the NOSB named six of its members to an Aquatic Animal Task Force “to evaluate aquaculture and wild capture aquatic animal operations and to assess the feasibility of developing organic production and handling standards for their certification.” [NOSB Task Force Recommendations, May 2001]
The Task Force compiled a report of recommendations which covered issues related to organically produced aquatic animals in general, and aquaculture specifically. Subtopics included “origin of livestock,” “livestock feed,” “health care management,” “livestock living conditions,” and “identification and record keeping.” In October 2001, the NOSB accepted the report and unanimously approved the following recommendations:
Standards be developed for the production of farmed aquatic animals that reflect an innovative approach to organic certification while remaining fully consistent with the statutory requirements of the Organic Foods Production Act
If standards are developed for farmed aquatic animals, we recommend that the National Organic Program and the National Organic Standards Board use the Aquatic Animal Task Force report as guidance.
No standards be developed for wild caught aquatic animals
[NOSB Draft Meeting Minutes, October 17, 2001]
From the time the Final Recommendations of the Task Force were approved by the NOSB in October 2001, the National Organic Program (NOP) has struggled to define their scope of enforcement for the certification of nontraditional products including aquatic species. In a Directive dated April 13, 2004, the NOP stated, “Although OFPA provided coverage for organic aquatic animal standards, NOP has not developed any standards for proposal to the public for comment.” [National Organic Program Scope, September 28, 2004] Additionally, in the period since 2001, a rider to the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act regarding organic standards for wild seafood was passed in April 2003; “Notwithstanding the requirement of section 2107(a)(1)(A) requiring products to be produced only on certified organic farms, the Secretary shall allow, through regulations promulgated after public notice and opportunity for comment, wild seafood to be certified or labeled as organic.”
In October 2004, the Livestock Committee of the NOSB recommended the establishment of a new task force on aquatic animals to provide guidance for the creation of aquatic animal standards. This Task Force will be comprised of two working groups; one for wild-caught and one for farmed aquatic species. The Task Force responsibilities will be two-fold:
After consideration of the 2001 Aquatic Animals Task Force report, recommend to the NOSB whether organic standards for wild caught and farmed aquatic animals should be developed at the present time, and if so, the scope of the standards.
If standards should be developed at the present time, recommend draft standards to the NOSB.
[Formation of a Task Force on Standards for Aquatic Animals, October 2004]
Selected ReadingsEmergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003, Public Law 108-11, 117 Stat. 589, Title II - Miscellaneous and Technical Appropriations, Chapter 1, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies, General Provisions, Sec 2105. Wild Seafood, by U.S. Congress. April 16, 2003.
Full-text online: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ011.108 (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Formation of a Task Force on Standards for Aquatic Animals, by National Organic Standards Board. [October 2004?].
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/meetingbooks/Oct2004/AquaticAnimalsTaskForce.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Livestock Committee Final Recommendations. Aquatic Species Standards. National Organic Standards Board Draft Meeting Minutes, October 17, 2001, Washington, DC, by Eric Sideman. October 17, 2001.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/October2001Minutes/10_17_01.html(accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The National Organic Standards Board Aquatic Animal Task Force Recommendation on Operations that Produce Aquatic Animals, by National Organic Standards Board, Aquatic Animal Task Force. May 30, 2001.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/TskFrcRec5.01.doc
OR http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/orgaqua.htm (Click on “Read the Aquatic Task Force Final Recommendations here.”) (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
National Organic Standards Board Home Page, by National Organic Standards Board. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/index.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
National Organic Program Scope, by National Organic Standards Board. Policy Development Committee. September 28, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/meetingbooks/Oct2004/NOPScope9_04.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on National Organic Standards Board (NOSB)] [Go to: Contents]
Several countries and international organizations have addressed or mandated standards for organic aquaculture. In the 2002 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations document, Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, Tacon and Brister cite the range of international organic aquacultural standards. “Despite its late start and modest size, the organic aquaculture sector currently boasts 20-25 private and non-private certifying bodies…They have a diverse set of aquaculture standards which sometimes vary considerably from country to country, certifier to certifier, and species to species.” Although this summary is presented by the FAO, the FAO’s food standards body, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, has not yet made recommendations for aquaculture in its provisions for organic livestock. Thus, while some international standards may be used to help formulate U.S. organic aquaculture standards, no one standard is definitive.
The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) is another international body that is attempting to create guidelines that will normalize organic production and certification worldwide. “IFOAM’s Organic Guarantee System unites the organic world through a common system of standards, verification, and market identity. It is the practical realization of IFOAM’s commitment to harmonize an international guarantee of organic integrity.” Through its IFOAM Norms document which is comprised of the IFOAM Basic Standards for Organic Production and Processing (IBS) and the IFOAM Accreditation Criteria for Bodies Certifying Organic Production and Processing (IAC); and its international membership of certification bodies, IFOAM’s guidelines for aquaculture, currently in draft form, will impact organic certification organizations worldwide.
Selected ReadingsApplying Organic Principles to Aquaculture Systems: Understanding Proposed Organic Certification Standards for Farmed Salmon: Market Trends in Aquaculture, by Nathan Pelletier. June 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/aquaculture-standards.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture,” by Australian Certified Organic and Biological Farmers of Australia. Organic Standard, Section 7.8, Version 6 ed. Chermside, Qld., Australia: Australian Certified Organic, August 2003. pp. 71-72.
Full-text online: http://www.australianorganic.com.au/_files/Organic_Standard_Version6_REVISIONS.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture,” by Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry, Quarantine and Export Services, Organic Produce Export Committee. National Standard for Organic and Bio-Dynamic Produce, Section 3.21, Third ed. Canberra, Australia: Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, December 2002. pp. 31-34.
Full-text online: http://www.affa.gov.au/corporate_docs/publications/pdf/quarantine/national_standards.pdf
OR available from the Quarantine and Export Services, Organic and Bio-dynamic Products, Legislation Web page at http://www.affa.gov.au/content/output.cfm?ObjectID=192BA6DF-3BF8-43E9-98E81CFD0E3DB8CC (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture,” by KRAV Standards Committee. Standards for KRAV Certified Production, Section 7, Uppsala, Sweden: KRAV, July 2004. pp. 91-104.
Full-text online: http://arkiv.krav.se/arkiv/regler/Standards2004EditionJuly.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture Production Standard,” by Bio-Gro New Zealand. Bio-Gro New Zealand Organic Standards, Module 4.7, 2001. pp. 4.7.1-4.7.11.
Full-text online: http://www.bio-gro.co.nz/content/files/1010430_aqua.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The Beginning of Organic Fish Farming in Italy, by Eli Defrancesco. Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation series, 65.03. Milan, Italy: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, July 2003.
Full-text online: http://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2003.65.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Compendium of UK Organic Standards, by UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Organic Farming and Industrial Crops Division. May 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/organic/legislation-standards/standard.pdf OR http://www.defra.gov.uk/farm/organic/legislation-standards/index.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004)
Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on Organic Production of Agricultural Products and Indications Referring thereto on Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs, by European Economic Community. August 18, 2004.
Full-text online: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/consleg/main/1991/en_1991R2092_index.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Edible Fish,” by Bio Suisse - Association of the Swiss Organic Agriculture Organisations. Standards for the Production, Processing and Marketing of Produce From Organic Farming, Section 3.10. Basel, Switzerland: Bio Suisse, 2004. p. 28.
Full-text online: http://www.bio-suisse.ch/media/en/pdf2004/rl_2005_e_ver_12-29.11.04.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Fish and Crustacea,” by the National Association for Sustainable Agriculture Australia (NASAA). Standards for Organic Agricultural Production, Section 30, 2003. pp. 43-44.
Full-text online: http://www.nasaa.com.au/2.1%20Production%20Stds%20November%202003.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Fish Farming and Organic Standards: Information Sheet, by The Soil Association. Bristol, UK: Soil Association, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sa/saweb.nsflibrarytitles/19426.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Fresh Water Fish Production,” by Bioland. Bioland Standards, Section 4.11, April 27, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.bioland.de//bioland/richtlinien/bioland-standards_4_2004.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labelling and Marketing of Organically Produced Foods (GL 32-1999; Rev.1-2001), by Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and World Health Organization (WHO), Codex Alimentarius Commission. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, [2001].
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/organicag/doc/glorganicfinal.pdf OR ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/standard/en/CXG_032e.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
IFOAM Basic Standards for Organic Production and Processing, Section 10, by International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.ifoam.org/standard/norms/ibs.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The IFOAM Norms and Organic Guarantee System, by International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.ifoam.org/standard/norms/orgguarsys.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
International Standards for Organic Aquaculture Production of Shrimp, Version 01/2002, by Naturland e.V., Swiss Import Promotion Programme (SIPPO), and Institute for Marketecology (IMO). 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.sippo.ch/files/publications/fish_shrimp2002.PDF (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Japanese Agricultural Standard of Organic Agricultural Products (Notification No. 59 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of January 20, 2000), by Ministry of Agriculture. Forestry and Fisheries of Japan. 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.maff.go.jp/soshiki/syokuhin/hinshitu/e_label/file/Specific%20JAS/Organic/JAS_OrganicAgriculture.pdf
OR available from the Food labeling and Japanese Agricultural Standard (JAS) Web page at http://www.maff.go.jp/soshiki/syokuhin/hinshitu/e_label/index.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The National Organic Standards Board Aquatic Animal Task Force Recommendation on Operations that Produce Aquatic Animals, by the National Organic Standards Board, Aquatic Animal Task Force. 2001.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/TskFrcRec5.01.doc (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Naturland Standards for Organic Aquaculture, by Naturland e.V. January 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.naturland.de/englisch/n2/aquaculture_01_2004.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
"Organic Aquaculture: Current Standards and Future Prospects: Chapter 6," by Albert G. J. Tacon and Deborah J. Brister. Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, edited by Nadia El-Hage Scialbba and Caroline Hattam. Environment and Natural Resources Series, 4. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002. [NAL Call Number: QH540 .E68 no. 4]
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E/y4137e06.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture Standards Reviewed,” by Deborah J. Brister. The Organic Standard, 29. September 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/aquaculture.html#organic-standards (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Seal for Mussels,” by Irene Chapple. New Zealand Herald, January 28, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.marketnewzealand.com/mnz/News/Story.aspx?sectionID=4557&contentID=9070 (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Production of Edible Fish,” by Bio Suisse - Association of the Swiss Organic Agriculture Organisations. Bio Suisse Directives. Art. 3.11.1 ff. Basel, Switzerland: Bio Suisse, 2001.
Full-text online: http://www.bio-suisse.ch/media/en/pdf2003/requirements_production_of_edible_fish.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on International Organic Aquaculture Standards] [Go to: Contents]
Consumer and market studies confirm a growing demand for both organic food products and for fish and related food products coming from convention aquaculture. Despite the unresolved status of the certification and labeling of organic aquatic animals and plants in the U.S., the parallel successes of both the organic livestock and conventional aquaculture markets have encouraged producers involved in both sectors to explore niche markets for organic aquacultural products. There are documented trends in the growth of other organic livestock sectors, and in the sales of “natural,” hormone-free, and antibiotic-free fish and shellfish. This increasing demand has started to drive producer and retail interest in aquacultural products that have a “certified organic” label. “Burgeoning consumer interest in organically grown foods has opened new market opportunities for producers and is leading to a transformation in the organic foods industry,” summarizes a current U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) report. It further clarifies the organic market situation, “Once a niche product sold in a limited number of retail outlets, organic foods are currently sold in a wide variety of venues including farmers markets, natural product supermarkets, conventional supermarkets, and club stores. Many U.S. manufacturers and distributors are specializing in processing and marketing organic products, while some longtime manufacturers of conventional products have introduced organic items to their product lines. As a result, an ever-widening array of organic agricultural and food products is now available.” [Dimitri and Greene, 2002, p. 1]
U.S. aquaculture is also a growing sector of the agricultural market, although experiencing considerable international competition. Recent ERS reports have supported this point. In the October 2003 USDA Aquaculture Outlook, author David Harvey observed that “Although beset with questions about the production of aquatic species, aquaculture is expected to continue to grow as a source of fish, shellfish, and mollusks. The potential for aquaculture production to expand and compete with wild-harvest seafood and other livestock products is readily evident in the continued growth in imported aquaculture products.”
Additionally, in the subsequent Aquaculture Outlook, Harvey reported “With a stronger domestic economy and higher prices for livestock and poultry products, domestic aquacultural production is expected to increase in 2004….Imports of foreign aquacultural products are also expected to expand, but at a slower rate than seen over the last several years.”
Consumer demand for fish will also play a role in the future of aquaculture. ERS projections point to not only increased per capita consumption of fish in the U.S., but to growth in the number of older Americans, who traditionally eat more fish than younger people. “Fish and fruits are predicted to lead the increase in total consumption, with about 30-percent growth over the next two decades.” [Biing-Hwan, 2003]
In a Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report from 2002, Brister and Tacon attempt to approximate the current international production for organic aquaculture. “Although no official statistical data are available concerning the global production of certified organic aquaculture products, it is estimated that total production in 2000 was only about 5,000 metric tonnes, primarily from European countries.” Later in the report this estimate is used to chart potential future production, “Based on current estimates of certified organic aquaculture production and an anticipated compound annual growth rate of 30 percent from 2001 to 2010, 20 percent from 2011 to 2020, and 10 percent from 2021 to 2030, it is estimated that production will increase 240-fold from 5,000 tonnes in 2000 to 1.2 [million] tonnes by 2030. Such a production of certified aquatic products would be equivalent to 0.6 percent of the total estimated aquaculture production in 2030.” This analysis parallels the outlook for organic and aquacultural production in the U.S. and may encourage U.S. producers to enter this market.
Selected Readings
Aquaculture News & Opinion, Cyber-Help for Organic Farmers, A Rural Capacity Building Through Organic Agriculture Project, by The Rural Capacity Building Through Organic Agriculture (RCBTOA) Project. Ongoing updates.
Full-text online: http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/organic-aquaculture-newslinks.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Aquaculture Outlook, by David J. Harvey.Semi-Annual Publication.
Full-text online: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture Production Forecast to Grow, but Many Uncertainties Loom,” by David J. Harvey. Aquaculture Outlook, LDP-AQS-18. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, October 9, 2003.
Full-text online: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/2003/aqs18.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Domestic Aquacultural Production Higher and Imports Up,” by David J. Harvey. Aquaculture Outlook, LDP-AQS-19. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, March 12, 2004.
Full-text online:http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/2004/aqs19.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Food and Agricultural Commodity Consumption in the United States: Looking Ahead to 2020, by Biing-Hwan Lin, Jayachandran N. Variyam, Jane Allshouse, and John Cromartie. Agricultural Economic Report, no. AER820. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, February 2003. [NAL Call Number: A281.9 Ag8A no. 820]
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer820/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Current Standards and Future Prospects: Chapter 6,” by Albert G. J. Tacon and Deborah J. Brister. Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, edited by Nadia El-Hage Scialbba and Caroline Hattam. Environment and Natural Resources Series, 4. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002. [NAL Call Number: QH540 .E68 no. 4]
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E/y4137e06.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Outlook for Fish to 2020: Meeting Global Demand, by Christopher L. Delgado, Nikolas Wada, Mark W. Rosegrant, Seit Meijer, and Mahfuzuddin Ahmed. Food Policy Report. Washington, DC; Penang, Malaysia: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); WorldFish Center, October 2003. Online information/reviews: Additional materials related to this topic available at http://www.ifpri.org/media/fish20031002.htm
Full-text online: http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/fpr/pr15.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market, by Carolyn Dimitri, Catherine Greene, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Agriculture Information Bulletin, no. 777. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 2002. [NAL Call Number: 1 Ag84Ab no. 777]
Full-text online:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib777/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
U.S. Organic Farming in 2000-2001: Adoption of Certified Systems, by Catherine Greene, Amy Kremen, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Agriculture Information Bulletin, no. 780. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, April 2003. [NAL Call Number: 1 Ag84Ab no. 780]
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib780/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Market Outlook and Consumer Trends] [Go to: Contents]
Aquatic species, both animal and plant; ecological situations and locations; and various production systems, both marine and freshwater; are now under scrutiny in order to determine adaptability to organic production systems. Concern about the production and handling requirements that organic standards would impose and the overarching environmental impacts that organic systems attempt to address has pointed research and development efforts in some new directions. Current research activities with important implications for the organic aquaculture industry include: alternative feeds, especially protein sources from grain and oilseed plants; culture of low-trophic aquatic species; disease management and use of natural and alternative medicines; polyculture and multi-species systems; self-filtering systems; techniques for expanded recovery of fishery by-catch and waste for use in organic systems; implications of using closed containment systems; environmentally sound effluent management systems; and consumer studies related to food preferences and purchasing habits.
The most recent World Aquaculture Society meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, March 1-5, 2004, included several presentations by leading researchers in the aquaculture field dealing with organic-related activities. Additionally, some key international research into organic aquaculture has resulted from on-farm experimentation by current producers of certified organic aquacultural products. The experiences of these producers serve as case studies for further exploration of research needs in organic aquaculture.
In the U.S., the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides leadership and funding for aquaculture research, technology development, and extension programs. The Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the primary research agency within USDA, has identified aquaculture feeds, water use and reuse, effluent management, social sustainability, and environmental sustainability as problems to be addressed through the Sustainability and Environmental Compatibility of Aquaculture component of its action plan for the aquaculture national programs. Some of the research objectives of the organic aquacultural community may be addressed through this mechanism.
Selected ReadingsAquaculture 2004 Hawaii: Sessions/Presentations in this Event, by World Aquaculture Society. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.quickstream.com.au/events/treeview/showEvent.asp?205 (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Development of Modern Aquaculture Systems and Technologies, by Research Institute for Fisheries, Aquaculture and Irrigation (HAKI). No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.haki.hu/english/R&D/corepr03.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
National Programs: Aquaculture-Action Plan, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/programs/programs.htm?np_code=106&docid=276 (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The Organic Black Tiger Prawn Project of Indonesia, by Suwidji Wongso and PT. Alter Trade Indonesia (ATINA). No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.greennetorganic.com/downloads/IFOAM%20speaker%20presentation%20-PDF/Presentation_Seminar%20E_Suwidji%20Wongso%20.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Regional Aquaculture Centers (RACs), by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service. March 22, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/animals/part/aquaculture_part_regional.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Sea Life, by Clare Island Seafarm. No date.
Full-text online: http://homepage.eircom.net/~chilldamhnait/sea_life.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Welcome to Biocentinela Aquaorganics, by BIOCENTINELA. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.biocentinela.com/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Research and Development] [Go to: Contents]
The foundation for commercial aquaculture in the U.S. was laid more than 100 years ago. During the late 1860s, Spencer F. Baird, assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, lobbied Congress to fund studies about a deteriorating fisheries situation, resulting in the creation of the U.S. Fish and Fisheries Commission in 1871. Baird, as the first Commissioner, instigated a research program in the marine sciences which helped to establish the basis of government-sponsored research and development in aquaculture and oceanography. In the next century, aquaculture progressed from the domain of hobbyists and hatcheries to an industry with large institutional support. For example, by 1960, several universities had developed aquaculture programs in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As the outlook for fisheries continued to raise concerns, aquaculture acquired increasing status as an alternative source of foodfish. It became not only a profitable industry, but it also assumed an important role in addressing food security issues in developing countries.
The 1970s and 1980s, saw an increase in the support and scope of aquacultural activities. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) established aquaculture projects in developing nations. The National Aquaculture Act, passed by Congress in 1980, mandated the establishment of a National Aquaculture Development Plan, published in 1983. Regional aquacultural centers were created through the efforts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in the mid-1980s to support industry research needs. Additionally, the World Mariculture Society, later the World Aquacultural Society (WAS), became the leading organization of aquaculture professionals during this period. [Stickney, 1996]
This investment in aquaculture has returned results. According to the USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS), “Between 1980 and 1998, the value of U.S. aquaculture production rose over 400 percent. The 1998 Census of Aquaculture reported farm-level sales of $972 million.” The ERS also reported that “the catfish industry is the largest sector in U.S. aquaculture, accounting for almost half of all sales. Other major foodfish species grown in the United States are trout, salmon, tilapia, hybrid striped bass, sturgeon, walleye, and yellow perch.” Additional farmed species include oysters, clams, baitfish, ornamental fish, alligator, turtles and algae. Most of the farmed aquatic species in the U.S. are raised in upland freshwater systems and a mixture of operations comprises the balance of production. [Briefing Room: Aquaculture, 2004]
The October 2003 ERS publication Aquacultural Outlook explained, “U.S. producers are at a disadvantage in the production of warm water species that require large expanses of coastal property, they do have some advantages for cool or cold water species, especially those that can be grown in fresh water on a mostly grain-based diet.” [Harvey, 2003, p. 1]
In terms of trade the ERS reports, “While the United States is a major seafood exporter, its exports of aquaculture products are relatively small: some farm-raised trout and salmon chiefly to Canada and Mexico and oysters and clams to Canada. The catfish industry has been attempting to develop export markets in Europe but has met with only limited success. The ornamental fish industry exports its products to a number of countries, but the United States is a net importer of ornamental fish. On the other hand, the United States is a major importer of farm-raised seafood products. The largest categories of imported aquaculture products are shrimp, salmon, and tilapia.” [Briefing Room: Aquaculture, 2004]
The outlook for aquaculture worldwide is also growing. “According to FAO statistics, aquaculture’s contribution to global supplies of fish, crustaceans and molluscs continues to grow, increasing from 3.9 percent of total production by weight in 1970 to 27.3 percent in 2000. Aquaculture is growing more rapidly than all other animal food producing sectors. Worldwide, the sector has increased at an average compounded rate of 9.2 percent per year since 1970, compared with only 1.4 percent for capture fisheries and 2.8 percent for terrestrial farmed meat production systems.” [FAO, 2002, p. 26]
Selected ReadingsAquaculture in the United States: A Historical Survey, by Robert R.Stickney. New York: J. Wiley, 1996. [NAL Call Number: HD9455.S75 1996]
“Aquaculture Production Forecast to Grow, but Many Uncertainties Loom,” by David J. Harvey. Aquaculture Outlook, LDP-AQS-18. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, October 9, 2003.
Full-text online: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/erssor/livestock/ldp-aqs/2003/aqs18.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Briefing Room: Aquaculture: Overview, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. June 24, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Aquaculture/overview.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2002, by U. Wijkström, A. Gumy, and R. Grainger. Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y7300e/y7300e00.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Conventional Aquaculture: Overview] [Go to: Contents]
Aquaculture is defined as the production of aquatic animals and plants under controlled conditions for all or part of their lifecycle. [Briefing Room: Aquaculture, 2004] The combination of the environment, equipment, and techniques selected for the farming of an aquatic species is referred to as the aquaculture production or cultural system. Several different types of systems have been developed based on availability of environmental resources and the type of species being raised. Environmental factors that can influence aquacultural system and species selection include salinity of the water (marine, brackish and fresh), seasonal climate, watershed drainage, and tides. Particular systems are most commonly found in the U.S. region where the climate is appropriate to a certain species: trout and salmon in the Northwest, catfish and other warmwater species in the Southeast, and marine species in Hawaii, California and the Gulf States. The major aquaculture systems are cage culture, pond, raceway, recirculating and integrated. Each of these systems has characteristics that may lead to consideration for organic production. A short description and selected resources for each type of system are presented below.
Cage culture utilizes hanging or floating containers that are anchored to remain in location. The open nature of the structures allows for natural water movement, such as tides and currents, to provide water circulation for oxygenation, delivery of nutrients and removal of wastes. Bottom culture and other systems for mollusk species or net-pens are some methods that also use open water flow as a main component of the production system.
Ponds are constructed outdoors using earthen dams or by taking advantage of topographical depressions. They are generally clustered in groups covering several acres. The water source used to fill the ponds can be runoff or pumped from wells. Drainage and aeration equipment is employed to control the water level and quality of the system.
Also known as flow-through systems, raceways are generally comprised of rectangular or circular tanks with a high volume, constant source of flowing water. Water sources such as wells, springs or streams that provide consistent water temperature, flow rate and quality are preferred. These systems are designed to flush accumulated waste products through or out of the system for collection.
Several methods of integrated aquaculture, such as polyculture or aquaponics, are currently in use. Polyculture is the simultaneous culture of two or more plant or animal species. Aquaponics incorporates recirculating aquaculture and hydroponic growing techniques to utilize waste water from fish culture for production of a vegetative crop. The plants grown may improve water quality through biological filtration of excess nutrients and addition of dissolved oxygen. The particulars of an aquacultural operation may generally determine which type of integrated system will be implemented. This type of system is attractive to some producers since it allows for the production of two crops using one infrastructure. However, some producers may use one or more of the species to provide benefit to another species solely for the favorable result and not as a harvestable product.
Recirculating systems, predominantly employed with closed tanks, use intensive filtration and water treatment systems to maintain the quality of the water, which is reused many times before being replaced. Due to the small volume of water needed to operate this system, it can be used in many settings and in most climates. The waste from these systems is generally high in nutrients and may be used for land application in some operations.
Selected ReadingsAquaponics: Integration of Hydroponics with Aquaculture, by Steve Diver. Horticulture Systems Guide. Fayetteville, AR: Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA), February 2000. (Update in progress.)
Check for update online: http://attra.ncat.org/
Briefing Room: Aquaculture, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. May 12, 2004.
Full-text online:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Aquaculture/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Cage Culture of Fish in the North Central Region, by LaDon Swann, J.E. Morris, Dan Sealock, and Jean Riepe. Technical Bulletin Series, 110. East Lansing, MI: North Central Regional Aquaculture Center, 1994. [NAL Call Number: SH35.A14T43 no.110]
Full-text online: http://aquanic.org/publicat/usda_rac/tr/ncrac/tb110.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Construction of Levee-Type Ponds for Fish Production, by Jim Steeby and Jimmy Avery. Revised ed. SRAC Publication, no. 101. Ada, OK: Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, May 2002. [NAL Call Number: SH151.S62]
Full-text online: http://srac.tamu.edu/101fs.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Evaluation of Recirculating Aquaculture Systems, by Ying Q. Ji, Ira R. Adelman, Jay Maher, and James Skurla. Minnesota Department of Agriculture and University of Minnesota, October 1997.
Full-text online: http://www.mda.state.mn.us/ams/aquaculture/recirc.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
In Pond Raceways, by Michael P. Masser and Andrew M. Lazur. SRAC Publication, no. 170. Ada, OK: Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, August 1997. [NAL Call Number: SH151.S62]
Full-text online: http://srac.tamu.edu/170fs.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Industry Profiles,” Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Concentrated Aquatic Animal Production Industry Point Source Category, by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. EPA-821-R-02-016. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency, August 2002.
Chapter online: http://epa.gov/guide/aquaculture/tdd/ch4.pdf
OR full document online: http://epa.gov/guide/aquaculture/tdd/tdd.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Recirculating Aquaculture Tank Production System: An Overview of Critical Considerations, by Thomas M. Losordo, Michael P. Masser, and James E. Rakocy. SRAC Publication, no. 451. Ada, OK: Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, September 1996. [NAL Call Number: SH151.S62]
Full-text online: http://srac.tamu.edu/451fs.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“A Sustainable Integrated System for Culture of Fish, Seaweed and Abalone,” by Amir Neori, Muki Shpigel, and D. Ben Ezra. Aquaculture 186, no. 3/4 (June 2000): 279-291. [NAL Call Number: SH1.A6]
What Is Cage Culture? by Michael P. Masser. SRAC Publication, no. 160. Ada, OK: Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, December 1988. [NAL Call Number: SH151.S62]
Full-text online: http://srac.tamu.edu/160fs.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Conventional Aquaculture: Production Systems] [Go to: Contents]
Aquacultural activities, like their terrestrial farming counterparts, affect surrounding ecosystems. Despite numerous regulations aimed at ameliorating these effects, environmental impacts currently associated with some operations and practices draw criticism of the industry. Concerns include pollution from solid waste and effluent by-products, pesticide and antibiotic residues, introductions of species to non-native environments, and transmission of disease between individual organisms and to other species. These impacts have been documented across several production systems and types of farmed species.
Developments in research and policy are increasingly being focused on resolving these environmental problems. Members of the aquaculture community believe that sustainable and ecologically based management practices can lead to environmentally benign aquacultural operations. One aquaculture researcher envisions a future where “ecological agriculture research is oriented to the design, development, and monitoring of aquatic farming systems that preserve and enhance the form and functions of the natural and social environments in which they are suited. Aquaculture depends upon inputs from various food, processing, transportation and other industries, and can produce valuable, uncontaminated wastewaters and fish processing wastes, all of which can be a vital part of an ecological system that can be planned and organized for community-based aquatic foods production – and natural ecosystem rehabilitation, reclamation and enhancement – not degradation.” [Costa-Pierce, 2002, p. 343] Additionally, aquaculture may provide some relief to over-fishing pressures for some species by supplying rising consumer demand for these products. Thus, the opportunity exists to create aquacultural systems that are models of environmental stewardship. The development and implementation of organic production practices may lead the way in this effort.
Selected ReadingsAquaculture and the Environment, by T.V.R. Pillay. New York: Halstead Press, 1992. [NAL Call Number: SH135.P55 1992]
Aquaculture and the Environment in the United States, edited by J. R. Tomasso. Baton Rouge, LA: U.S. Aquaculture Society, A Chapter of the World Aquaculture Society, 2002. [NAL Call Number: SH34 .A8 2002]
At a Crossroads: Will Aquaculture Fulfill the Promise of the Blue Revolution? by Kathryn White, Brendan O’Neill, and Zdravka Tzankova. SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse Report. Providence, RI: SeaWeb, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.seaweb.org/resources/sac/pdf/At_Crossroads.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Ecological Aquaculture: The Evolution of the Blue Revolution, edited by Barry A. Costa-Pierce. Oxford, UK; Malden, MA: Blackwell Science Publishing, 2002. [NAL Call Number: SH135 .E26 2002]
Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture, edited by Kenneth D. Black. Sheffield Biological Sciences. Sheffield, UK; Boca Raton, FL: Sheffield Academic Press; CRC Press, 2001. [NAL Call Number: SH135 .E58 2001]
Sustainable Aquaculture, by SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse. No Date.
Full-text online:
http://www.seaweb.org/resources/sac/sustainable.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Conventional Aquaculture: Environmental Issues] [Go to: Contents]
In the United States, responsibility for regulating aquacultural activities is shared between several Federal, State and some local agencies. Federal agencies regulate activities that fall within the scope of their mandated duties. For instance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for waste water permitting across all industries and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) covers food safety regulations and drug approvals. Additionally, legal definitions of aquaculture and aquacultural practices, ownership of animals or plants that may also be considered wildlife, water rights for fresh and marine bodies, and other such legal “principles” are established by Federal decision-makers. Several Federal agencies should be consulted when determining which regulations are applicable to aquaculture.
State and local governments generally regulate activities that are permitted or licensed at the community level. Main classes of permits deal with building, water use, waste discharge, species certification related to wildlife management, marketing or processing, and trade. Often, regulations are in effect based on the siting of the operation: inland, wetland, coastal and off-shore. Due mainly to environmental concerns, requirements for each type of operation are varied. Each State administers aquacultural permitting based on its own rules. Thus, regulations can vary considerably among geographic locations.
Internationally, aquaculture laws and regulations can be as varied and decentralized as the U.S. laws. In his book, The Law of Aquaculture, Howarth lists many court cases, statues and regulations in Britain that guide aquacultural activities such as licensing, disease control, water management, predator control, harvesting, and marketing guidelines. Many more examples of this distributed approach to aquacultural laws are presented in a United Nations (UN) review of aquaculture legislation globally. In addition to many examples throughout the text of national-level legislation that covers requirements such as licensing, land and water rights, environmental protection and fish disease and transportation; the authors of the UN report identify categories for government of aquaculture worldwide. These categories are: countries that have established a specific set of rules for aquaculture, countries with some aquacultural legislation to cover various species, systems or disputed circumstances, and countries with basic laws or clauses of other laws (generally Fisheries laws) that permit aquaculture. A great deal of variation within and between government regulations exists worldwide.
The UN has also played a significant role in the development of international law for seas and fisheries that has direct impact on coastal or open ocean aquacultural operations. The 1982 United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) set offshore territorial boundaries that establish zones of exclusive economic and fisheries rights for coastal nations. While some nations have not ratified this convention, it is the de facto set of guidelines, until changed, for the world’s oceans. Furthermore, the UN has developed a Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, based on international laws including UNCLOS. In the introduction to this document, an explanation of the scope of and impetus for these rules is presented:
“Fisheries, including aquaculture, provide a vital source of food, employment, recreation, trade and economic well being for people throughout the world, both for present and future generations and should therefore be conducted in a responsible manner. This Code sets out principles and international standards of behaviour for responsible practices with a view to ensuring the effective conservation, management and development of living aquatic resources, with due respect for the ecosystem and biodiversity.” Thus, aquacultural operations may be obliged to meet principles of conduct in addition to routine legal regulations.
Selected ReadingsAquaculture Operations - Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Guidance, by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Agriculture Compliance Assistance Center. July 22, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/anaqulaw.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, by Twenty-eighth Session of the FAO Conference. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, October 31, 1995.
Full-text online: http://www.faoorg/DOCREP/005/v9878e/v9878e00.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The Law of Aquaculture: The Law Relating to the Farming of Fish and Shellfish in Britain, by William Howarth.Oxford: Fishing News Books, 1990. [NAL Call Number: KD2310.H68]
Legal Framework for U.S. Ocean Management -Federal Activities & Programs, by U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Services Center. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/opis/html/fedprog.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Legal Framework for U.S. Ocean Management -Federal Statutes, by U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Services Center. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/opis/html/legal.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Preliminary Review of Selected Legislation Governing Aquaculture, by Anne R. Van Houtte, Nicola Bonucci,and William R. Edeson. Aquaculture Development and Coordination Programme Series, ADCP/REP/89/42. Rome, Italy: United Nations Development Programme; Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 1989. [NAL Call Number: K3895.4.V36]
Resource Laws,by U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Division of Congressional and Legislative Affairs. No Date.
Full-text online: http://laws.fws.gov/lawsdigest/reslaws.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Seafood Information and Resources, by U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. August 18, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/seafood1.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
State/Territory Permits and Regulations Impacting the Aquaculture Industry, by Maryland Department of Agriculture and National Association of State Aquaculture Coordinators. 1995.
Online information/reviews: Includes Appendix: Federal Aquaculture Legislation &Regulations.
Full-text online: http://aquanic.org/publicat/state/md/perm.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982: Overview and Full Text, by United Nations, Office of Legal Affairs, Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. February 10, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Conventional Aquaculture: Laws and Regulations] [Go to: Contents]
Commercial organic agriculture has been practiced in the United States for more than fifty years. Today, it is a small but rapidly growing sector of the agricultural economy. Certified organic cropland for corn, soybeans, and other major crops more than doubled from 1992 to 1997, and doubled again between 1997 and 2001. Two organic livestock sectors – poultry and dairy – grew even faster. [Data: Organic Production, 2004]
“Organic food production promotes biodiversity, biological cycles and biological activity. Organic farmers aim to manage food production as an integrated, whole system that is, as Fred Kirschenmann, former National Organic Standards Board Livestock Chair describes, an ‘organism’ whose individual parts mesh together into one whole production system. For example, in livestock production, the organic farmer relies on biological processes to integrate the management of individual parts including nutrient inputs, the animals themselves, the environment in which they live and the waste that is produced. These individual parts are connected, each component depending on every other component. When these parts are balanced within the production system, the system can be considered sustainable – one of the goals of organic production.” [Brister and Kapuscinski, 2000, p. 1]
From a marketing perspective, growth in retail sales has equaled 20 percent or more annually since 1990. Organic products are now available in nearly 20,000 natural foods stores, and are sold in 73 percent of all conventional grocery stores. Fresh produce is the top-selling organic category in retail sales. Nine U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agencies have expanded research, regulatory, and other programs on organic agriculture. Programs include crop insurance for organic farmers, information and outreach providers, and promotion of organic exports. The USDA National Organic Program (NOP) oversees the creation, implementation, and administration of the USDA organic standard. [Dimitri and Greene, 2002, p. iii]
“U.S. producers are turning to organic farming systems as a potential way to lower input costs, decrease reliance on nonrenewable resources, capture high-value markets and premium prices, and boost farm income. Organic farming systems rely on ecologically based practices, such as cultural and biological pest management, and virtually exclude the use of synthetic chemicals in crop production and prohibit the use of antibiotics and hormones in livestock production. Many producers, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers specialize in growing, processing, and marketing an ever widening array of organic food and fiber products.” [Briefing Room: Organic Farming and Marketing, 2004]
Internationally, organic agriculture has achieved progress similar to that in the U.S. A 2003 survey, undertaken in collaboration with the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), summarized its main findings:
“Organic agriculture is practiced in almost all countries of the world, and its share of agricultural land and farms is growing. The total organically managed area is more than 24 million hectares world-wide. In addition, the area of certified “wild harvested plants” is at least a further 10.7 million hectares, according to various certification bodies;
“The market for organic products is growing, not only in Europe and North American (which are the major markets) but also in many other countries. It is valued at 23 billion USD (2002)
“Official interest in organic agriculture is emerging in many countries, shown by the fact that many countries have fully implemented regulation on organic farming or are in the process of drafting regulation.” [Willer and Yussefi, 2004, p. 7]
Selected ReadingsBriefing Room: Organic Farming and Marketing, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. April 22, 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Organic/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Data: Organic Production, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. October 18, 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Frequently Asked Questions about Organic Farming, by Organic Farming Research Foundation. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ofrf.org/general/about_organic/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Iowa Agricultural Opportunities: Organic Production, by Iowa State University Extension. No. Date
Full-text online: http://www.iowaagopportunity.org/organicprod/ophomepage.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Aquaculture: A New Wave of the Future, by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. 2000.
Full-text online:
http://aquanic.org/news/2000/organic.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Crop Production Overview, by George Kuepper and Lance Gegner. Fundamentals of Sustainable Agriculture series. Fayetteville, AR: National Center for Appropriate Technology, Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA), August 2004. [NAL Call Number: S605.5.K83]
Full-text online: http://www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/summaries/organiccrop.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Industry Roots Run Deep,” by Ken Mergentime. Natural Foods Merchandiser 15, no. 6 (1994): 62-64.
Questions and Answers About Organic, by Organic Trade Association, 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.ota.com/organic/faq.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Questions Answered, by the Soil Association. 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sa/saweb.nsf/OtherDocs/questions.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004.
Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market, by Carolyn Dimitri, Catherine Greene, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Agriculture Information Bulletin, no. 777. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 2002. [NAL Call Number: 1 Ag84Ab no. 777]
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib777/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Report and Recommendations on Organic Farming, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA Study Team on Organic Farming. U.S. GPO no. 620-220/3641. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Agriculture, July 1980. [NAL Call Number: aS605.5.U52]
U.S. Organic Farming in 2000-2001: Adoption of Certified Systems, by Catherine Greene, Amy Kremen, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Agriculture Information Bulletin, no. 780. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, April 2003. [NAL Call Number: 1 Ag84Ab no. 780]
Full-text online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib780/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The World of Organic Agriculture - Statistics and Emerging Trends 2004, edited by Helga Willer and Minou Yussefi. 6th, revised ed. DE-53117. Bonn, Germany International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), 2004.
Full-text online: http://orgprints.org/2555/ (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Organic Agriculture: Overview] [Go to: Contents]
Prescribed production and product handling standards accompanied by state and/or private certification systems are an important aspect of organic farming, marketing, and trade. Certification processes provide consumers with assurance that they are buying a consistent product and farmers and handlers with a “level playing field,” in terms of management and marketing. “At least 100 regional or national standards have been developed worldwide. Several countries are formulating or have adopted laws and regulations on organic production and processing and on certification requirements to control the use of labels indicating organic origin.” [Jacobsen, 2002, p. 4]
October 2002 saw the full implementation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Standards (CFR 7 Part 205). Since that date, all agricultural products that are labeled and marketed in the U.S. as “organic” must meet USDA standards and be certified by a USDA-accredited certifying agent. The Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA) mandated uniform standards for the organic industry. “Congress passed the Act to: (1) establish national standards governing the marketing of certain agricultural products as organically produced products; (2) assure consumers that organically produced products meet a consistent standard; and (3) facilitate commerce in fresh and processed food that is organically produced.” [Background and History]
The completed standards/Final Rule appeared in the December 21, 2000 Federal Register and was activated on April 21, 2001. “This final rule establishes the National Organic Program (NOP or program) under the direction of the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), an arm of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This national program will facilitate domestic and international marketing of fresh and processed food that is organically produced and assure consumers that such products meet consistent, uniform standards.
“This program establishes national standards for the production and handling of organically produced products, including a National List of substances approved for and prohibited from use in organic production and handling. This final rule establishes a national-level accreditation program to be administered by AMS for State officials and private persons who want to be accredited as certifying agents. Under the program, certifying agents will certify production and handling operations in compliance with the requirements of this regulation and initiate compliance actions to enforce program requirements.
“The final rule includes requirements for labeling products as organic and containing organic ingredients. This final rule also provides for importation of organic agricultural products from foreign programs determined to have equivalent organic program requirements. This program is authorized under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, as amended.” [Federal Register, p. 80548]
To help clarify the over arching principles that describe “organic agriculture,” the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) presented a definition in 1995: “Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony. ‘Organic’ is a labeling term that denotes products produced under the authority of the Organic Foods Production Act.
“The principal guidelines for organic production are to use materials and practices that enhance the ecological balance of natural systems and that integrate the parts of the farming system into an ecological whole. Organic agriculture practices cannot ensure that products are completely free of residues; however, methods are used to minimize pollution from air, soil and water. Organic food handlers, processors and retailers adhere to standards that maintain the integrity of organic agricultural products. The primary goal of organic agriculture is to optimize the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil life, plants, animals and people.” [Final Minutes, 1995]
There are currently 94 USDA-accredited certifying agents, 34 of which are located outside the United States. These agents are indicative of a strong domestic and international presence overseeing organic certification and standards worldwide. While there is not one internationally recognized organic standard, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), founded in 1972, has developed Basic Standards and an International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS) through which certifying agents may become “IFOAM accredited.”
IFOAM has also worked in collaboration with other entities including the Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization Food Standards Programme Codex Alimentarius and with the European Union which enacted a regulation governing organic production and foods in 1991. Most European countries also rely on their own organic legislation. Other countries with organic regulations include Argentina, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Japan, and New Zealand. [Organicresearch.com, 2004]
Selected ReadingsBackground and History, by U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, National Organic Program. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/Consumers/background.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Federal Register: Rules and Regulations, vol. 65, no. 246, 80647-80684, December 21, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a001221c.html [scroll down to Agricultural Marketing Service] (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Final Minutes of the National Organic Standards Board Full Board Meeting Orlando, Florida, April 24-28, 1995, by [National Organic Standards Board]. [April 1995].
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/archives/April%2024-28,%201995%20NOSB%20Minutes.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labeling and Marketing of Organically Produced Foods (GL 32-1999; Rev. 1-2001), by United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO), Codex Alimentarius Commission. [Rome, Italy]: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, [2001].
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/organicag/doc/glorganicfinal.pdf OR
ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/standard/en/CXG_032e.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
International Harmonisation and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture. IFOAM Conference on Organic Guarantee Systems, Conference Conclusions, February 17-19, 2002, Nurenburg, Germany, edited by G. Rundgren and William Lockeretz. International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.ifoam.org/pub/harmoconferenceconclusions.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS), by International Organic Accreditation Service. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ioas.org (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
National Organic Rules Backgrounder, by Organic Trade Association. 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.ota.com/standards/nop/norb.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Farming and Certification, by Birthe Thode Jacobsen. Geneva, Switzerland: International Trade Centre, December 2002.
Online information/reviews: This paper contains updated versions of Chapters 1 and 2 of the International Trade Centre study Organic Food and Beverages: World Supply and Major Markets (1999).
Full-text online: http://www.intracen.org/mds/sectors/organic/certify.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Farming: Guide to Community Rules, by European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000.
Full-text online: http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/qual/organic/brochure/abio_en.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Farming Legislation, by CAB International. 2004.
Full-text online: http://www.organic-research.com/LawsRegs/legislation.asp (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View bibliography on Organic Agriculture: Standards and Certification] [Go to: Contents]
[View chapter on Organic Production in Aquaculture]
Aquaculture, by Naturland e.V. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.naturland.de/englisch/n4/seite4_5.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquaculture Enterprises: What Works in Oklahoma,” by Ken Williams. Future Farms 2002: A Supermarket of Ideas Conference Proceedings, November 15 & 16, 2002, compiled by Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture. Oklahoma: Kerr Center for Sustainable Agriculture, [2002?].
Full-text online: http://www.kerrcenter.com/publications/2002_proceedings/aquaculture.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Aquatic Farming: an Organic Inspector’s View,” by Brian H. Ives. Northern Aquaculture 10, no. 7 (July 2004): 3, 10. [NAL Call Number: SH33.N68]
“Assessing the Consequences of Converting to Organic Shrimp Farming,” by Biao Xie, Zhuhong Ding, Guichun Wang, Xiaorong Wang, and Y. Zhang. Proceedings of the 14th IFOAM Organic World Congress, “Cultivating Communities”, August 21-24, 2002, Victoria Conference Centre, Canada, compiled by Robert Thompson. Ottowa, Canada: Canadian Organic Growers, 2002. 134.
“Ecofeeds and the Coming Ecotechnology in Aquaculture,” by Albert G. J. Tacon. Global Aquaculture Advocate 4, no. 2 (2001): 68-69. [NAL Call Number: SH331.5.S87 G56]
“Europe’s Niche Market in Organic Aquafeed Production,” by Z. Merican. Aquafeed International 4, no. 3 (2001): 18-21.
“Farms Go Organic,” by Bernadette Tournay. Fish Farming International 29, no. 9 (2002): 10. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F5]
“Feed World News: Organic Salmon,” Feed International 15, no. 4 (1994): 10-12.
“Feeds and Feeding Systems - Sofrada Goes Organic,” Fish Farming International 28, no. 5 (2001): 13. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F5]
“French Trout Certified Organic,” Seafood International 18, no. 2 (2003): 7. [NAL Call Number: HD9450.1.S421]
“From Catfish to Organic Fish: Making Distinctions About Nature As Cultural Economic Practice,” by B. Mansfield. Geoforum 34, no. 3 (2003): 329-342.
Further Comments of the Organic Trade Association (OTA) for the USDA-AMS-NOP hearings on Organic Production and Handling of Aquatic Animals to be Labeled as Organic, by Tom Hutcheson. Federal Register Docket Number TM-00-03. May 3, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.ota.com/pp/otaposition/frc/fish.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Global Conference To Focus On Organic Farming,” Aquaculture Magazine 29, no. 1 (January/February 2003): 77-78. [NAL Call Number: SH1.C65]
“Global Rise of Aquaculture: A Trigger for Organic and Eco-Labelling Standards for Aquatic Animals,” by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. The Organic Standard 3 (July 2001): 7-11.
“Growing Organic Seafood Sales,” by Dan McGovern. IntraFish 2, no. 5 (August 1997): 14, 16-19.
Full-text online: http://www.intrafish.com/pdf/download/2c95643bf128d4597b2176f78b462154/2004/5/14.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Is ‘Organic’ the Future?” by Laura-Jane Filotrani. Fish Farming International 27, no. 11 (2000): 36-37. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F5]
“Is Salmon Organic? Not Yet,” by Marian Burros. New York Times (May 24, 2000), Section F, Column 1: 2.
OMRI’s Comments on Organic Standards for Aquatic Animals submitted to National Organic Program, by Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI). Federal Register Docket Number TM-00-03. May 17, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.omri.org/fishy.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, edited by Nadia El-Hage Scialbba and Caroline Hattam. Environment and Natural Resources Series, 4. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002.
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E/y4137e00.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture - Are There Interested Growers? “ by G. S. Lockwood. Aquaculture Magazine 27, no. 3 (May/June 2001): 22-26. [NAL Call Number: SH1.C65]
“Organic Aquaculture Association Formed,” Fish Farming International 26, no. 1 (1999): 11. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F5]
“Organic Aquaculture: Completing the First Decade,” by S. Bergleiter. 7th IFOAM International Conference on Trade in Organic Products: 2003 Mainstreaming Organic Trade: New Frontiers, Opportunities and Responsibilities, November 6-8, 2003, Bangkok, Thailand. 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.greennetorganic.com/downloads/IFOAM%20speaker%20presentation%20-PDF/Presentation_Seminar%20E_Stefan%20Bergleiter.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Current Standards and Future Prospects: Chapter 6,” by Albert G. J. Tacon and Deborah J. Brister. Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security, edited by Nadia El-Hage Scialbba and Caroline Hattam. Environment and Natural Resources Series, 4. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2002. [NAL Call Number: QH540 .E68 no. 4]
Full-text online: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y4137E/y4137e06.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
The Organic Aquaculture Directory, by Sbc fishace.
Full-text online: http://www.fishace.demon.co.uk/b2bindex.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Translating Theory into Action,” by S. Bergleiter. Proceedings of the 14th IFOAM Organic World Congress, “Cultivating Communities”, August 21-24, 2002, Victoria Conference Centre, Canada, compiled by Robert Thompson. Ottowa, Canada: Canadian Organic Growers, 2002. 128.
“Organic Farmed Fish? Fish Feeds and Nutrition,” by Ronald W. Hardy. Aquaculture Magazine 28, no. 6 (2002): 60-63. [NAL Call Number: SH1.C65]
“Organic Fish: Bad for You?” by John Dallimore. Fish Farming International 29, no. 6 (2002): 9. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F5]
“Organic Fish Culture,” by Harold Linder. Farm Pond Harvest 32, no. 3 (1998): 24-25, 31-32. [NAL Call Number: SH1.F3]
“Organic Orara Perch,” by John Mosig. Austasia Aquaculture 17, no. 1 (2003): 9-10. [NAL Call Number: SH131.A8]
“Organic Products As High Quality Niche Products: Background and Prospects for Organic Freshwater Aquaculture in Europe,” by S. Bergleiter, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, and European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission. Report of the Ad Hoc EIFAC/EC Working Party on Market Perspectives for European Freshwater Aquaculture, 14-16 May 2001, Brussels, Belgium by Ad Hoc EIFAC/EC Working Party on Market Perspectives for European Freshwater Aquaculture. EIFAC Occasional Paper, 35. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 2001. 84-94. [NAL Call Number: HD9450.5.A3 2001]
Full-text online: http://europa.eu.int/comm/fisheries/doc_et_publ/liste_publi/aquaculture140501.pdf (Papers not yet included in online version) (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Seafood - Gaining Prominence in Europe,” by M. Stern. INFOFISH International 2 (2002): 8-11. [NAL Call Number: HD9450.1.I54]
“Organic Shrimp: First International Meeting,” by Jimmie Hepburn. Fish Farmer 25, no. 2 (2002): 34-35. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F57]
“Organic Shrimp Production,” by S. Bergleiter. Ecology and Farming 27 (May 2001): 22-23.
“Organic Views of Nature: the Debate Over Organic Certification for Aquatic Animals,” by B. Mansfield. Sociologia Ruralis 44, no. 2 (April 2004): 216-232.
“Organically Farmed Salmon Is an Oxymoron,” by D. Staniford. The Organic Standard 3 (July 2001): 14.
“Organics in Aquaculture?” by Jimmie Hepburn. Fish Farmer 22, no. 2 (1999): 9. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F57]
“Orkney Majors on Organic Salmon,” by Nicki Holmyard. Fish Farmer 23, no. 4 (2000): 14-15. [NAL Call Number: SH151.F57]
“Policy Matters: Organic Trout in the UK,” by Jimmie Hepburn. Trout News 25 (December 1997): 19-20.
“The Present Position and Future of Organic Trout,” by A. Small. Trout News 7, no. Jan (January 1999): 15.
“The Public Opinion of Organic Fish,” by Ben DiPietro. IntraFish 2, no. 8 (August 2004): 8.
Full-text online: http://www.intrafish.com/pdf/download/6a2daf07c3abc1068e430e30b217b62e/2004/8/08.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Raising Organic Fish,” by Mike Dolinski. Aquaculture in Alberta (March 1, 2001).
Full-text online: http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/newslett.nsf/all/aqua63?OpenDocument (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“US Organic Aquaculture,” by International Fishmeal and Fish Oil Manufacturers Association (IFOMA). IFOMA Update 110 (April 2001): 3.
“Use of Organic, Low-Foodchain Fish Being Promoted in Aquaculture,” by T. W. Budig. Capitol Roundup (June 26, 2003).
Full-text online: http://www.hometownsource.com/capitol/2003/June/26aquaculture.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Water: Where Organic Standards Have a Place,” by B. Baker. The Organic Standard 3 (2001): 4-6.
[View chapter on U.S. Standards for Organic Aquaculture]
Applying Organic Principles to Aquaculture Systems: Understanding Proposed Organic Certification Standards for Farmed Salmon: Market Trends in Aquaculture, by Nathan Pelletier. June 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/aquaculture-standards.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“The Decision to Develop Aquaculture Standards...or Not?” The Organic Standard 3 (July 2001): 12-13.
Developing Organic Standards for Molluscan Shellfish. Whitepaper. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, March 6-7, 2001, Buena Park, CA, by Robin Downey and Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association. [March 2001?].
Discussion of Fred Kirschenmann’s ‘Of Wildness and Organic’, by James Riddle. October 13, 1999.
Full-text online: http://www.pmac.net/FKWILD2.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Federal Register: Proposed Rules, vol. 65, no. 57, 15579-15580, Thursday, March 23, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/AquaticAnimalsTaskForce/FedRegAquaticAnimalsMar00.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Federal Register: Rules and Regulations, vol. 65, no. 246, 80647-80684, Thursday, December 21, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a001221c.html [Scroll down to Agricultural Marketing Service] (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Murkowski, Stevens Win Organic Labeling Change to Help Alaska Seafood Industry, by Kristen Pugh. April 4, 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.crabgroup.org/adfg/MURKOWSKI_STEVENS.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Opportunities and Challenges to Organic Certification of Aquatic Animal Feeds,” by Albert G. J. Tacon and G. D. Pruder. Final Report of the National Organic Aquaculture Workshop, June 23-24, 2000, Minneapolis, Minnesota, edited by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Social Economic and Ecological Sustainability, 2001. pp. 26-42.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/Workshop/finalrep.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Aquaculture: A New Wave of the Future, by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. 2000.
Full-text online: http://aquanic.org/news/2000/organic.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Meeting Fundamental Organic Certification Requirements Similarities and Differences Between Terrestrial and Aquatic Organisms,” by James Riddle. Final Report of the National Organic Aquaculture Workshop, June 23-24, 2000, Minneapolis, Minnesota, edited by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Social Economic and Ecological Sustainability, 2001. pp. 13-17.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/Workshop/finalrep.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Organic Aquaculture: Moving Towards National Standards,” by Deborah J. Brister. World Aquaculture 32, no. 3 (2001): 51-53. [NAL Call Number: SH1.W62]
“Organic Aquaculture Update: The National Organic Standards Board Aquatic Animal Task Force Recommendation on Operations That Produce Aquatic Animals,” by Deborah J. Brister. Aquaponics Journal (June 2003).
Full-text online: http://www.aquaponicsjournal.com/articleOrganicAquaculture.htm (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, by U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Marketing Service. National Organic Program. No Date.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/archive/OFPA.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Production and Handling of Aquatic Animals to be Labeled as Organic: Comments submitted by Whole Foods Market, Inc., by Whole Foods Market. Federal Register Docket Number TM-00-03. May 11, 2000.
Full-text online: http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/issues/org_aquatic.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Organic Trade Group Decries New Alaskan Effort to Include Wild Fish, by Ken Coons. April 14, 2003.
Full-text online: http://www.seafood.com/news/current/92881.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Philosophy Underlying Certification of Wild Harvested Organisms Used in Aquaculture,” by Fred Kirschenmann. Final Report of the National Organic Aquaculture Workshop, June 23-24, 2000, Minneapolis, Minnesota, edited by Deborah J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute for Social Economic and Ecological Sustainability, 2001. pp. 18-23.
Full-text online: http://www.fw.umn.edu/isees/OrganicAquaculture/Workshop/finalrep.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
“Position Statement on USDA Organic Standards for Aquaculture: Proposed Standards Reflect Environmental and Social Agendas of NGOs,” by Global Aquaculture Alliance. Global Aquaculture Advocate 3, no. 3 (June 2000): 6-7. [NAL Call Number: SH331.5.S87 G56]
Unique Features of Microalgae Culture Systems: Organic Spirulina Production. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, March 6-7, 2001, Buena Park, CA, by Amha Belay. [March 2001?].
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/archives/minutes/March01/attachments/06.pdf (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
[View chapter on National Organic Standards Board (NOSB)]
Aquaculture Working Group Final Report. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, March 6-7, 2001, Buena Park, CA, by Aquatic Animal Task Force. Aquaculture Working Group. February 6, 2001.
Full-text online: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/archives/minutes/March01/attachments/13.pdf OR http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/lscommRMR/reports/aquaculture.html (accessed Dec. 15, 2004).
Aquaculture Working Group Report to the National Organic Standards Board. National Organic Standards Board Meeting, November 15-17, 2000, Washington, DC, by Aquatic Animal Task Force. Aquaculture Working Group. Novem