Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications

Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications

Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications

426 Pages ·2010·3.12 MB ·English

Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications

Cover photographs:


Left: Preparation of trash fish/low-value fish to be fed in a soft-shelled crab farm, Myanmar (courtesy of


U Hla Win).


Right top to bottom: Anchoveta (Engraulis ringens) for fishmeal production, Chimbote City, Peru


(courtesy of N. Sánchez Durand). Feeding of mouse grouper with trash fish/low-value fish in a cage farm,


Lampung bay, Lampung, Indonesia (courtesy of Mohammad R. Hasan). Heading and gutting operation of


anchoveta, Chimbote City, Peru (courtesy of N. Sánchez Durand). Fish as feed inputs for


FAO


FISHERIES AND


AQUACULTURE


aquaculture


TECHNICAL


PAPER


518


Practices, sustainability and implications


Edited by


Mohammad R. Hasan


Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department


Rome, Italy


and


Matthias Halwart


Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department


Rome, Italy


FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS


Rome, 2009 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information


product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the


Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the


legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities,


or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific


companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does


not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to


others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.


The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not


necessarily reflect the views of FAO.


ISBN 978-92-5-106419-1


All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information


product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without


any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully


acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other


commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders.


Applications for such permission should be addressed to:


Chief


Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch


Communication Division


FAO


Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy


or by e-mail to:


copyright@fao.org


© FAO 2009 iii


Preparation of this document


This document was prepared by a group of experts under the leadership of


Dr Mohammad R. Hasan as part of the FAO Aquaculture Management and Conservation


Service (FIMA) project “Towards Sustainable Aquaculture: Selected Issues and


Guidelines” (GCP/INT/936/JPN), implemented with funding from the Government


of Japan. Component 4 of the project addressed the issue of “Use of wild fish and/or


other aquatic species to feed cultured fish and its implications to food security and


poverty alleviation”. It reviewed the status of and trends in the use of wild fish as


aquafeed, the types of uses (fresh or processed) for aquaculture, the relative amount


used for aquaculture and the potential alternative uses, e.g. for human consumption.


To reflect the diversity of the use of wild fish to feed aquaculture species in the various


regions, four regional reviews (Africa and the Near East, Asia and Pacific, Europe, and


Latin America and North America) and three case studies from Latin America were


conducted. On the basis of the regional reviews and case studies, an attempt was made


to develop a global perspective on the status and trends in the use of fish as feed and the


issues and challenges confronting reduction fisheries. The global perspective was further


supported by case studies in China and Viet Nam. In addition, a targeted workshop


entitled Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species as Feed in Aquaculture and its


implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation was convened in Kochi, India,


from 16 to 18 November 2007. The workshop was organized by FIMA of FAO and


was hosted by the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), India.


The report of the workshop was published as a FAO Fisheries Report (www.fao.org/


docrep/fao/011/i0263e/i0263e.pdf).


The manuscripts in this technical paper were reviewed and technically edited by


Dr Mohammad R. Hasan and Dr Matthias Halwart. The manuscripts were edited for


FAO house style and linguistic quality by Dr Richard Arthur. The editors acknowledge


the contributions of Mr Raymon van Anrooy of the FAO Subregional Office for


Central Asia (FAOSEC) and Dr Cecile Brugère of the Development and Planning


Service (FIEP) for their assistance in reviewing some of the manuscripts. Special thanks


go to Mr Ulf N. Wijkström for his comments on all the country reports and global


synthesis. For consistency and conformity, scientific and English common names of fish


species used are from FishBase (www.fishbase.org/home.htm). Most of the photographs


in the manuscripts were provided by the authors of each manuscript. Where this is not


the case, due acknowledgements are made to the contributor(s) or the source(s).


Much gratitude is due to the case study authors, who faced an enormous task


and showed equally enormous patience with the editors. The editors acknowledge


Ms Tina Farmer and Ms Françoise Schatto for their assistance with quality control and


FAO house style, and Mr Juan Carlos Trabucco for layout design. The publishing and


distribution of the document were undertaken by FAO, Rome.


Finally, Mr Jiansan Jia, Chief of the Aquaculture Management and Conservation


Service of the FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department is acknowledged for


providing the necessary support to initiate the study and to finalize the publication.


1 FAO. 2008. Report of the FAO Expert Workshop on the Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species


as Feed in Aquaculture and its Implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation, Kochi, India, 16–18


November 2007. FAO Fisheries Report No. 867. Rome, FAO. 29 pp. iv


Abstract


This technical paper provides a comprehensive review of the use of wild fish as feed


inputs for aquaculture covering existing practices and their sustainability as well as


implications of various feed-fish fisheries scenarios. It comprises four regional reviews


(Africa and the Near East, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Latin America and North


America) and three case studies from Latin America (Chile, Peru and the study on the


use of the Argentine anchoita in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil). The four regional


reviews specifically address the sustainable use of finite wild fish resources and the role


that feed-fish fisheries may play for food security and poverty alleviation in these four


regions and elsewhere. With additional information from case studies in China and Viet


Nam, a global synthesis provides a perspective on the status and trends in the use of


fish as feed and the issues and challenges confronting feed-fish fisheries. Based on the


information presented in the global synthesis, regional reviews and three case studies,


and through the fresh analysis of information presented elsewhere, an exploratory


paper examines the use of wild fish as aquaculture feed from the perspective of poverty


alleviation and food security.


Hasan, M.R.; Halwart, M. (eds).


Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications.


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 518. Rome, FAO. 2009. 407p. v


Contents


Preparation of this document iii


Abstract iv


Contributors vi


Preface viii


Abbreviations and acronyms xiii


Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture – practices, sustainability


and implications: a global synthesis 1


TIM HUNTINGTON AND MOHAMMAD R. HASAN


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in the


Asia-Pacific 63


SENA S. DE SILVA AND GIOVANNI M. TURCHINI


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in Africa


and the Near East 129


T. HECHT AND C.L.W. JONES


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in the


Americas 159


ALBERT G.J. TACON


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in


Europe 209


TIM HUNTINGTON


Current and potential alternate food uses of the Argentine


anchoita (Engraulis anchoita) in Argentina, Uruguay and


Brazil 269


L.S. PASTOUS MADUREIRA, J.P. CASTELLO, C. PRENTICE-HERNÁNDEZ, M.I. QUEIROZ, M.L.


ESPÍRITO SANTO, W.A. RUIZ, P. RAGGI ABDALLAH, J. HANSEN, M.I. BERTOLOTTI, E.


MANCA, M.I. YEANNES, N. AVDALOV AND S. FERNÁNDEZ AMORÍN


Status of and trends in the use of small pelagic fish species for


reduction fisheries and for human consumption in Chile 289


A.S. BÓRQUEZ AND A.J. HERNÁNDEZ


Status of and trends in the use of small pelagic fish species for


reduction fisheries and for human consumption in Peru 325


N. SÁNCHEZ DURAND AND M. GALLO SEMINARIO


The use of wild fish as aquaculture feed and its effects on


income and food for the poor and the undernourished 371


ULF N. WIJKSTRÖM vi


Contributors


P. Raggi Abdallah, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


S. Fernández Amorín, Fisheries Research Institute of the Veterinary Faculty of the La


Republica University, La Paloma campus, Uruguay.


N. Avdalov, INFOPESCA, Centre for Marketing Information and Advisory Services for


Fishery Products in Latin America and the Caribbean, Uruguay.


M.I. Bertolotti, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


A.S. Bórquez, Aquaculture Nutrition Unit, School of Aquaculture, Catholic University of


Temuco, Agro-aquaculture Nutritional Genomic Centre, CGNA, Temuco, Chile.


E-mail: aborquez@uct.cl


J.P. Castello, Fisheries Technology and Pelagic Resources Laboratories, Institute of


Oceanography, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS, Brazil.


Sena S. De Silva, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, PO Box 1040, Kasetsart


Post Office, Bangkok 10903, Thailand.


E-mail: sena.desilva@enaca.org


N. Sánchez Durand, Peruvian Institute of Fishery Technology, Km. 5.2 Carretera a


Ventanilla, Callao, Peru.


E-mail: nsanchez@itp.org.pe


M.L. Espírito Santo, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


M. Gallo Seminario, Peruvian Institute of Fishery Technology, Km. 5.2 Carretera a


Ventanilla, Callao, Peru.


E-mail: mgallo@itp.org.pe


J. Hansen, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


Mohammad R. Hasan, Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service, FAO Fisheries


and Aquaculture Department, Rome, Italy.


E-mail: Mohammad.Hasan@fao.org


T. Hecht, Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University,


Grahamstown, South Africa.


E-mail: T.Hecht@ru.ac.za


A.J. Hernández, Aquaculture Nutrition Unit, School of Aquaculture, Catholic University


of Temuco, Agro-aquaculture Nutritional Genomic Centre, CGNA, Temuco, Chile.


E-mail: ajhernandez@uct.cl


Tim Huntington, FAO Consultant, Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd.,


Windrush, Warborne Lane, Portmore, Nr. Lymington, Hampshire SO41 5RJ, United


Kingdom.


E-mail: tim@consult-poseidon.com


C.L.W. Jones, Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University,


Grahamstown, South Africa.


E-mail: c.jones@ru.ac.za


E. Manca, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


L.S. Pastous Madureira, Fisheries Technology and Pelagic Resources Laboratories, Institute


of Oceanography, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS, Brazil.


E-mail: doclsm@furg.br vii


C. Prentice-Hernández, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


M.I. Queiroz, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS,


Brazil.


W.A. Ruiz, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS,


Brazil.


Albert G.J. Tacon, FAO Consultant, Aquatic Farms Ltd., 49-139 Kamehameha Hwy,


Kaneohe, HI 96744, United States of America.


E-mail: agjtacon@aol.com


Giovanni M. Turchini, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, PO


Box 423, Warrnambool, Victoria, 3280, Australia.


E-mail: giovanni.turchini@deakin.edu.au


Ulf N. Wijkström, FAO Consultant, Skottsfall, S 578 92 Aneby, Sweden.


E-mail: pamus@swipnet.se


M.I. Yeannes, National Council for Technological and Scientific Research, Engineering


Faculty, Mar del Plata University, Argentina. viii


Preface


BACKGROUND


In 2006, global aquaculture production (including aquatic plants) was estimated at


85.9 million tonnes and valued at US$85.9 billion (FAO, 2008a)2. The average annual


percentage growth rate (APR) of the aquaculture sector between 1990 and 2004 was


9.4 percent (FAO, 2008b)3. In 2005, about 28.2 million tonnes or 44.8 percent of


total global aquaculture production (excluding filter-feeding species such as silver carp


and bighead carp) was dependent upon the direct use of feed, either a single dietary


ingredient, farm-made aquafeed or industrially manufactured compound aquafeeds


(FAO, 2007)4.


Fishmeal and fish oil are two major dietary ingredients used in compound aquafeeds.


Total estimated compound aquafeed production in 2006 was about 25.4 million


tonnes (Gill, 2007)5 and about 42 percent of this amount was consumed by non-filter


feeding carps (Tacon and Hasan, 2007)6. In 2006, the total global industrial feed output


exceeded 635 million tonnes to which the aquafeed industry contributed only 4 percent


(Gill, 2007). World reduction fisheries have remained at between 20 and 30 million


tonnes for the last 30 years (FAO, 2008b). Global fishmeal and fish oil production has


remained relatively static over the last quarter century, fishmeal production fluctuating


from a low of 4.57 million tonnes in 1977 to a high of 7.48 million tonnes in 1994 (mean


of 6.07 million tonnes), and fish oil production fluctuating from a low of 0.85 million


tonnes in 2002 to a high of 1.67 million tonnes in 1986 (mean of 1.25 million tonnes)


(Tacon, Hasan and Subasinghe, 2006).


Aquaculture is the largest overall user of fishmeal. Pigs and poultry account for


around a quarter of total usage, with other livestock types account for the remainder.


Ruminants now account for only 1 percent and this is likely to drop. Total estimated


amount of fishmeal and fish oil used in the production of aquafeeds has grown over


three-fold from 0.96 million tonnes to 3.06 million tonnes and from 0.23 million tonnes


to 0.78 million tones, respectively, from 1992 to 2006, (Tacon, Hasan and Subasinghe,


20067; Tacon, 2007). This increase has come from the land-animal sector, particularly


2 FAO. 2008a. FAO. Fishstat Plus: Universal software for fishery statistical time series. Aquaculture


production: quantities 1950–2006; Aquaculture production: values 1984–2006; Capture production:


1950–2006; Commodities production and trade: 1950–2006; Total production: 1970–2006, Vers. 2.30.


FAO Fisheries Department, Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit. (available at www.fao.org/fi/


statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp).


3 FAO. 2008b. Report of the FAO Expert Workshop on the Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species


as Feed in Aquaculture and its Implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation, Kochi, India, 16–18


November 2007. FAO Fisheries Report No. 867. Rome, FAO, 29 pp.


4 FAO. 2007. Fishstat Plus: Universal software for fishery statistical time series. Aquaculture production:


quantities 1950–2005; Aquaculture production: values 1984–2006; Capture production: 1950–2005;


Commodities production and trade: 1950–2005; Total production: 1970–2005, Vers. 2.30. FAO Fisheries


Department, Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit. (available at www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/


FISHPLUS.asp).


5 Gill, C. 2007. World feed panorama: bigger cities, more feed. Feed International, 28(1): 5–9.


6 Tacon, A.G.J. & Hasan, M.R. 2007. Global synthesis of feds and nutrients for sustainable aquaculture


development. In M.R. Hasan, T. Hecht, S.S. De Silva and A.G.J. Tacon (eds.). Study and analysis of feeds


and fertilizers for sustainable aquaculture development, pp. 3–17. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No.


497. Rome, FAO. 510 pp.


7 Tacon, A.G.J., Hasan, M.R. & Subasinghe, R.P. 2006. Use of fishery resources as feed inputs for aquaculture


development: trends and policy implications. FAO Fisheries Circular. No. 1018. Rome, 99 pp.


Cover photographs:


Left: Preparation of trash fish/low-value fish to be fed in a soft-shelled crab farm, Myanmar (courtesy of


U Hla Win).


Right top to bottom: Anchoveta (Engraulis ringens) for fishmeal production, Chimbote City, Peru


(courtesy of N. Sánchez Durand). Feeding of mouse grouper with trash fish/low-value fish in a cage farm,


Lampung bay, Lampung, Indonesia (courtesy of Mohammad R. Hasan). Heading and gutting operation of


anchoveta, Chimbote City, Peru (courtesy of N. Sánchez Durand). Fish as feed inputs for


FAO


FISHERIES AND


AQUACULTURE


aquaculture


TECHNICAL


PAPER


518


Practices, sustainability and implications


Edited by


Mohammad R. Hasan


Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department


Rome, Italy


and


Matthias Halwart


Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department


Rome, Italy


FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS


Rome, 2009 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information


product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the


Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the


legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities,


or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific


companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does


not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to


others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.


The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not


necessarily reflect the views of FAO.


ISBN 978-92-5-106419-1


All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information


product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without


any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully


acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other


commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders.


Applications for such permission should be addressed to:


Chief


Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch


Communication Division


FAO


Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy


or by e-mail to:


copyright@fao.org


© FAO 2009 iii


Preparation of this document


This document was prepared by a group of experts under the leadership of


Dr Mohammad R. Hasan as part of the FAO Aquaculture Management and Conservation


Service (FIMA) project “Towards Sustainable Aquaculture: Selected Issues and


Guidelines” (GCP/INT/936/JPN), implemented with funding from the Government


of Japan. Component 4 of the project addressed the issue of “Use of wild fish and/or


other aquatic species to feed cultured fish and its implications to food security and


poverty alleviation”. It reviewed the status of and trends in the use of wild fish as


aquafeed, the types of uses (fresh or processed) for aquaculture, the relative amount


used for aquaculture and the potential alternative uses, e.g. for human consumption.


To reflect the diversity of the use of wild fish to feed aquaculture species in the various


regions, four regional reviews (Africa and the Near East, Asia and Pacific, Europe, and


Latin America and North America) and three case studies from Latin America were


conducted. On the basis of the regional reviews and case studies, an attempt was made


to develop a global perspective on the status and trends in the use of fish as feed and the


issues and challenges confronting reduction fisheries. The global perspective was further


supported by case studies in China and Viet Nam. In addition, a targeted workshop


entitled Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species as Feed in Aquaculture and its


implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation was convened in Kochi, India,


from 16 to 18 November 2007. The workshop was organized by FIMA of FAO and


was hosted by the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), India.


The report of the workshop was published as a FAO Fisheries Report (www.fao.org/


docrep/fao/011/i0263e/i0263e.pdf).


The manuscripts in this technical paper were reviewed and technically edited by


Dr Mohammad R. Hasan and Dr Matthias Halwart. The manuscripts were edited for


FAO house style and linguistic quality by Dr Richard Arthur. The editors acknowledge


the contributions of Mr Raymon van Anrooy of the FAO Subregional Office for


Central Asia (FAOSEC) and Dr Cecile Brugère of the Development and Planning


Service (FIEP) for their assistance in reviewing some of the manuscripts. Special thanks


go to Mr Ulf N. Wijkström for his comments on all the country reports and global


synthesis. For consistency and conformity, scientific and English common names of fish


species used are from FishBase (www.fishbase.org/home.htm). Most of the photographs


in the manuscripts were provided by the authors of each manuscript. Where this is not


the case, due acknowledgements are made to the contributor(s) or the source(s).


Much gratitude is due to the case study authors, who faced an enormous task


and showed equally enormous patience with the editors. The editors acknowledge


Ms Tina Farmer and Ms Françoise Schatto for their assistance with quality control and


FAO house style, and Mr Juan Carlos Trabucco for layout design. The publishing and


distribution of the document were undertaken by FAO, Rome.


Finally, Mr Jiansan Jia, Chief of the Aquaculture Management and Conservation


Service of the FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department is acknowledged for


providing the necessary support to initiate the study and to finalize the publication.


1 FAO. 2008. Report of the FAO Expert Workshop on the Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species


as Feed in Aquaculture and its Implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation, Kochi, India, 16–18


November 2007. FAO Fisheries Report No. 867. Rome, FAO. 29 pp. iv


Abstract


This technical paper provides a comprehensive review of the use of wild fish as feed


inputs for aquaculture covering existing practices and their sustainability as well as


implications of various feed-fish fisheries scenarios. It comprises four regional reviews


(Africa and the Near East, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Latin America and North


America) and three case studies from Latin America (Chile, Peru and the study on the


use of the Argentine anchoita in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil). The four regional


reviews specifically address the sustainable use of finite wild fish resources and the role


that feed-fish fisheries may play for food security and poverty alleviation in these four


regions and elsewhere. With additional information from case studies in China and Viet


Nam, a global synthesis provides a perspective on the status and trends in the use of


fish as feed and the issues and challenges confronting feed-fish fisheries. Based on the


information presented in the global synthesis, regional reviews and three case studies,


and through the fresh analysis of information presented elsewhere, an exploratory


paper examines the use of wild fish as aquaculture feed from the perspective of poverty


alleviation and food security.


Hasan, M.R.; Halwart, M. (eds).


Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture: practices, sustainability and implications.


FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 518. Rome, FAO. 2009. 407p. v


Contents


Preparation of this document iii


Abstract iv


Contributors vi


Preface viii


Abbreviations and acronyms xiii


Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture – practices, sustainability


and implications: a global synthesis 1


TIM HUNTINGTON AND MOHAMMAD R. HASAN


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in the


Asia-Pacific 63


SENA S. DE SILVA AND GIOVANNI M. TURCHINI


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in Africa


and the Near East 129


T. HECHT AND C.L.W. JONES


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in the


Americas 159


ALBERT G.J. TACON


Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in


aquaculture – a review of practices and implications in


Europe 209


TIM HUNTINGTON


Current and potential alternate food uses of the Argentine


anchoita (Engraulis anchoita) in Argentina, Uruguay and


Brazil 269


L.S. PASTOUS MADUREIRA, J.P. CASTELLO, C. PRENTICE-HERNÁNDEZ, M.I. QUEIROZ, M.L.


ESPÍRITO SANTO, W.A. RUIZ, P. RAGGI ABDALLAH, J. HANSEN, M.I. BERTOLOTTI, E.


MANCA, M.I. YEANNES, N. AVDALOV AND S. FERNÁNDEZ AMORÍN


Status of and trends in the use of small pelagic fish species for


reduction fisheries and for human consumption in Chile 289


A.S. BÓRQUEZ AND A.J. HERNÁNDEZ


Status of and trends in the use of small pelagic fish species for


reduction fisheries and for human consumption in Peru 325


N. SÁNCHEZ DURAND AND M. GALLO SEMINARIO


The use of wild fish as aquaculture feed and its effects on


income and food for the poor and the undernourished 371


ULF N. WIJKSTRÖM vi


Contributors


P. Raggi Abdallah, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


S. Fernández Amorín, Fisheries Research Institute of the Veterinary Faculty of the La


Republica University, La Paloma campus, Uruguay.


N. Avdalov, INFOPESCA, Centre for Marketing Information and Advisory Services for


Fishery Products in Latin America and the Caribbean, Uruguay.


M.I. Bertolotti, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


A.S. Bórquez, Aquaculture Nutrition Unit, School of Aquaculture, Catholic University of


Temuco, Agro-aquaculture Nutritional Genomic Centre, CGNA, Temuco, Chile.


E-mail: aborquez@uct.cl


J.P. Castello, Fisheries Technology and Pelagic Resources Laboratories, Institute of


Oceanography, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS, Brazil.


Sena S. De Silva, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, PO Box 1040, Kasetsart


Post Office, Bangkok 10903, Thailand.


E-mail: sena.desilva@enaca.org


N. Sánchez Durand, Peruvian Institute of Fishery Technology, Km. 5.2 Carretera a


Ventanilla, Callao, Peru.


E-mail: nsanchez@itp.org.pe


M.L. Espírito Santo, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


M. Gallo Seminario, Peruvian Institute of Fishery Technology, Km. 5.2 Carretera a


Ventanilla, Callao, Peru.


E-mail: mgallo@itp.org.pe


J. Hansen, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


Mohammad R. Hasan, Aquaculture Management and Conservation Service, FAO Fisheries


and Aquaculture Department, Rome, Italy.


E-mail: Mohammad.Hasan@fao.org


T. Hecht, Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University,


Grahamstown, South Africa.


E-mail: T.Hecht@ru.ac.za


A.J. Hernández, Aquaculture Nutrition Unit, School of Aquaculture, Catholic University


of Temuco, Agro-aquaculture Nutritional Genomic Centre, CGNA, Temuco, Chile.


E-mail: ajhernandez@uct.cl


Tim Huntington, FAO Consultant, Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd.,


Windrush, Warborne Lane, Portmore, Nr. Lymington, Hampshire SO41 5RJ, United


Kingdom.


E-mail: tim@consult-poseidon.com


C.L.W. Jones, Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University,


Grahamstown, South Africa.


E-mail: c.jones@ru.ac.za


E. Manca, National Institute for Fisheries Research and Development, Mar del Plata,


Argentina.


L.S. Pastous Madureira, Fisheries Technology and Pelagic Resources Laboratories, Institute


of Oceanography, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS, Brazil.


E-mail: doclsm@furg.br vii


C. Prentice-Hernández, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio


Grande RS, Brazil.


M.I. Queiroz, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS,


Brazil.


W.A. Ruiz, Institute of Chemistry, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande RS,


Brazil.


Albert G.J. Tacon, FAO Consultant, Aquatic Farms Ltd., 49-139 Kamehameha Hwy,


Kaneohe, HI 96744, United States of America.


E-mail: agjtacon@aol.com


Giovanni M. Turchini, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, PO


Box 423, Warrnambool, Victoria, 3280, Australia.


E-mail: giovanni.turchini@deakin.edu.au


Ulf N. Wijkström, FAO Consultant, Skottsfall, S 578 92 Aneby, Sweden.


E-mail: pamus@swipnet.se


M.I. Yeannes, National Council for Technological and Scientific Research, Engineering


Faculty, Mar del Plata University, Argentina. viii


Preface


BACKGROUND


In 2006, global aquaculture production (including aquatic plants) was estimated at


85.9 million tonnes and valued at US$85.9 billion (FAO, 2008a)2. The average annual


percentage growth rate (APR) of the aquaculture sector between 1990 and 2004 was


9.4 percent (FAO, 2008b)3. In 2005, about 28.2 million tonnes or 44.8 percent of


total global aquaculture production (excluding filter-feeding species such as silver carp


and bighead carp) was dependent upon the direct use of feed, either a single dietary


ingredient, farm-made aquafeed or industrially manufactured compound aquafeeds


(FAO, 2007)4.


Fishmeal and fish oil are two major dietary ingredients used in compound aquafeeds.


Total estimated compound aquafeed production in 2006 was about 25.4 million


tonnes (Gill, 2007)5 and about 42 percent of this amount was consumed by non-filter


feeding carps (Tacon and Hasan, 2007)6. In 2006, the total global industrial feed output


exceeded 635 million tonnes to which the aquafeed industry contributed only 4 percent


(Gill, 2007). World reduction fisheries have remained at between 20 and 30 million


tonnes for the last 30 years (FAO, 2008b). Global fishmeal and fish oil production has


remained relatively static over the last quarter century, fishmeal production fluctuating


from a low of 4.57 million tonnes in 1977 to a high of 7.48 million tonnes in 1994 (mean


of 6.07 million tonnes), and fish oil production fluctuating from a low of 0.85 million


tonnes in 2002 to a high of 1.67 million tonnes in 1986 (mean of 1.25 million tonnes)


(Tacon, Hasan and Subasinghe, 2006).


Aquaculture is the largest overall user of fishmeal. Pigs and poultry account for


around a quarter of total usage, with other livestock types account for the remainder.


Ruminants now account for only 1 percent and this is likely to drop. Total estimated


amount of fishmeal and fish oil used in the production of aquafeeds has grown over


three-fold from 0.96 million tonnes to 3.06 million tonnes and from 0.23 million tonnes


to 0.78 million tones, respectively, from 1992 to 2006, (Tacon, Hasan and Subasinghe,


20067; Tacon, 2007). This increase has come from the land-animal sector, particularly


2 FAO. 2008a. FAO. Fishstat Plus: Universal software for fishery statistical time series. Aquaculture


production: quantities 1950–2006; Aquaculture production: values 1984–2006; Capture production:


1950–2006; Commodities production and trade: 1950–2006; Total production: 1970–2006, Vers. 2.30.


FAO Fisheries Department, Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit. (available at www.fao.org/fi/


statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp).


3 FAO. 2008b. Report of the FAO Expert Workshop on the Use of Wild Fish and/or Other Aquatic Species


as Feed in Aquaculture and its Implications to Food Security and Poverty Alleviation, Kochi, India, 16–18


November 2007. FAO Fisheries Report No. 867. Rome, FAO, 29 pp.


4 FAO. 2007. Fishstat Plus: Universal software for fishery statistical time series. Aquaculture production:


quantities 1950–2005; Aquaculture production: values 1984–2006; Capture production: 1950–2005;


Commodities production and trade: 1950–2005; Total production: 1970–2005, Vers. 2.30. FAO Fisheries


Department, Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit. (available at www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/


FISHPLUS.asp).


5 Gill, C. 2007. World feed panorama: bigger cities, more feed. Feed International, 28(1): 5–9.


6 Tacon, A.G.J. & Hasan, M.R. 2007. Global synthesis of feds and nutrients for sustainable aquaculture


development. In M.R. Hasan, T. Hecht, S.S. De Silva and A.G.J. Tacon (eds.). Study and analysis of feeds


and fertilizers for sustainable aquaculture development, pp. 3–17. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No.


497. Rome, FAO. 510 pp.


7 Tacon, A.G.J., Hasan, M.R. & Subasinghe, R.P. 2006. Use of fishery resources as feed inputs for aquaculture


development: trends and policy implications. FAO Fisheries Circular. No. 1018. Rome, 99 pp.


Please note: To fully read this free PDF ebook completely for free you need .