November 29, 2006
 

US aquaculture industry fights to stick organic label on fish

 

 

With the organic fever sweeping the US, the US aquaculture industry is eager to get in on the action to see how it can get is fish to be labeled organic, according to a report in the New York Times.

 

In the livestock industry, the problem is simple: there's no such thing as a wild chicken, wild hog or wild cattle in the market. But there remains, although it is diminishing, wild catch in the fishing industry sold to the market.

 

Fisherman are lobbying through sympathetic legislators to have their fish labeled organic simply because, nothing can get more organic than those in the wild, they said.

 

Organic foods are supposed to be grown on farms that do not use chemicals and synthetic fertilizers. These farms also had to meet government standards for environmental impact and impact on animals. The label has largely been used on crops and vegetables and went on to chickens.

 

Still, that did not stop pig and cattle farmers to go into such farming and demand their products be allowed to carry the organic label, largely because of the profits and burgeoning demand. Now, it is aquaculture's turn.

 

Still, wild fishes are unlikely to cut it as the term is to be used for agricultural commodities only. However, farm-raised fishes is still in the running.

 

One obstacle standing in the way are the environmentalists who argue that aquaculture is polluting the waters, especially fishes reared in nets and therefore should not be labeled organic.

 

Another difficulty lies in the sheer diversity in the types of fish reared in aquaculture.

 

The main issue lies in the fish diet. Vegetarian fishes can be labeled organic since there is organic feed available. Carnivorous fishes however, could not be labeled as such.

 

Still, the USDA is thinking of ways that such fish could qualify. But environmentalists have insisted that these carnivorous fishes eat fishmeal made from nonorganic fishes and therefore fail the criteria. Fishmeal destroys fishery reserves, are harmful to the environment and therefore cannot be labeled organic, they said.

 

This has pushed fish-farmers further away from the organic market, which has more than tripled from 1997 to 2005, rising from US$3.6 billion to US$13.8 billion.

 

Since authorities are unable to provide the answer, some producers have been getting certification from other countries or third-parties.

 

While most consumers still preferred wild caught fish, a majority also showed partiality to organic fish.

 

The USDA is trying to sort out the impasse for the second time through a task force, the first in 2000 going nowhere.

 

The farmers argued that farm-raised seafood should have a competitive edge if the wild species are to be saved.

 

The task force recommended that farm-raised fish could be labeled organic as long as their diets were almost entirely organic plant feed.

 

It set three types of feed to be given in order for fish to be labeled organic: an entirely organic diet, nonorganic fish before organic fishmeal could be produced or nonorganic fishmeal from sustainable fisheries. 

 

Although these rules, and the labels, would take time to implement, US fish farmers say it would give them an edge over the foreign competition swamping over the US seafood market.

 

Meanwhile, some farmers would have to settle for "natural" fish, fishes raised in pens with no added chemicals.