|
National Organic Aquaculture Workshop - Final
Report |
Organic
Aquaculture: A New Wave of the Future
|
|||
|
Deborah
J. Brister and Anne R. Kapuscinski
Institute for Social, Economic, and Ecological Sustainability 186 McNeal Hall, 1985 Buford Avenue University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 U.S.A. |
||||
|
Introduction Representatives
from the aquaculture and organic agriculture sectors met this June at the
National Organic Aquaculture Workshop which was hosted by the University of
Minnesota's Institute for Social, Economic and Ecological Sustainability (ISEES).
This was not the first time these sectors had met, but it was the first time
they, along with others from academia, NGO's and government actually worked
with each other, in a remarkably cooperative spirit, towards developing national
(U.S.) organic aquaculture standards. ISEES
Director, Professor Anne Kapuscinski and Organic Aquaculture Project Manager,
Deborah Brister have been interested in bringing these groups together for
over a year since they made recommendations to the USDA National
Organic Standards Board (NOSB) last June (1999). "More input is needed
from the aquaculture sector before final organic aquaculture standards can
be put in place" commented Kapuscinski and Brister in their testimony
to the Board. The NOSB agreed, and with support of the USDA's Agricultural
Marketing Service, Packard Foundation, Minnesota Sea Grant and the U of M's
Extension Service, 43 national and international participants came together
to address issues of concern regarding NOSB’s recently drafted organic aquaculture
standards. The first
day of the workshop, featured presentations and small group breakout sessions
focused on the NOSB draft standards. However, on the second day, participants
decided to start redrafting new general principles for organic aquaculture.
The general principles address: basic conditions, location of production units,
location of collecting areas, health and welfare, spawning, reproduction and
breeding, nutrition, harvesting, transportation of living aquatic organisms
and slaughter. Preliminary
progress motivated workshop participants to continue the discussion of organic
aquaculture general principles with an eye towards the group eventually developing
standards under each principle, so workshop attendees formed a Working Group
to carry on the discussion, and ISEES created an Internet Discussion Room.
The Working Group will be one means by which people interested organic aquaculture
can connect with the NOSB. The Discussion Room website has now posted the
draft general principles with comments from the workshop. The site also has
the ability to store reference documents and articles for Working Group members
to access and consult as needed. What
is the current status of national (U.S.) organic standards? The process
for establishing national organic aquaculture standards has really just begun.
The USDA's National Organic
Program (NOP), established as a result of the 1990 Organic Food Production
Act, has been drafting the national organic standards with the help of the
National Organic Standards Board, a group of 15 individuals representing different
segments of the organic community including producers, certifying agents,
and consumers. So far, the NOP has submitted two proposed rules for organic
crop and terrestrial livestock production, processing, handling and labeling
for public review and many people have submitted comments. The Final Rule
should be published by the end of the year with implementation (after accreditation
of certifiers) by the year 2002. Standards for aquatic animals are currently
not in the Proposed Rule but instead will be amended to the Final Rule once
they are developed. Although the NOSB has discussed several drafts of organic
aquaculture standards, much work needs to be done to make these feasible. What
is "organic?" Organic certification is a process claim, not a product claim. In other words, organic standards regulate the practices and materials used to produce an agricultural product. It does not make any claims about the end product such as nutritional value or food safety (these claims are regulated by the Food Safety and Inspection Service and Food and Drug Administration), however organic producers have to follow the same strict guidelines at the local, state and federal level that all conventional food producers must follow. 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 NOSB 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. Organic
food production encourages the maintenance and sustainability of this system
by restricting the introduction of harmful substances and practices that reduce,
or alter the connectedness of the system’s components. For instance, in terrestrial
livestock, organic production standards now prohibit the use of antibiotics.
Instead, good health management practices such as taking steps to minimize
stress, allowing freedom of movement, providing appropriate living conditions,
and organic feed optimize the health of the animal and reduce the reliance
on drugs, including antibiotics. Interestingly, organic livestock producers
initially did not think this was possible, however with the development of
new farming practices, they eventually decided they no longer needed to use
antibiotics to successfully raise organic livestock. This "raising of
the bar" has enabled organic livestock producers to clearly set their
product apart from conventional terrestrial production and obtain a premium
price for it. Where does aquaculture fit in? The challenge
for organic aquaculture is to follow the same general principles as terrestrial
organic agriculture, a significant challenge, given the basic differences
between terrestrial and aquatic animals. Consider for a moment the difference
in providing treatment to sick animals. Observing sick terrestrial animals
is much easier than observing aquatic animals through water.
Terrestrial animals can be treated individually. Aquatic animals must
be treated as a group. In addition, terrestrial animals can be treated
using a variety of methods. Treatment for aquatic animals is extremely limited,
usually through medicated feed or baths. If aquatic animals go off feed, then
medicated feed is completely ineffective. Within aquaculture, there are also
huge differences between the species themselves. Rearing mussels, for instance,
is vastly different than rearing trout. Despite
these differences, organic livestock and organic aquaculture have important
features in common. Broad general principles such as good nutrition, the maintenance
of animal health and welfare, and recycling of nutrients where possible are
as relevant to aquatic animal production as they are for terrestrial livestock
production. General principles are
the overarching guides for production. The (more specific) standards under
each principle are the rules that organic farmers must follow. The standards
are group or even species-specific so it will be possible to meet the diverse
requirements of different aquaculture species within these standards. Because
aquaculture and organic agriculture are the two fastest growing sectors in
American agriculture today, there will likely be a niche for farmers interested
in going the extra mile for organic aquaculture certification. As any organic
producer will tell you, it is not easy. For example, farmers must keep thorough
records to meet certification requirements. Producers must record all substances
put into the production system. Many substances are restricted entirely (including
genetically engineered organisms) with only a limited number allowed (however
some substances can be petitioned for inclusion). Achieving organic nutrient
management requirements may simply be too difficult for some aquaculture systems.
Thus, it would be unrealistic to say that all aquaculture systems, at least
as we currently know them, would be eligible for organic certification. Even with
the restrictions mentioned above, some farmers are definitely interested in
meeting stricter requirements. And those that meet them can expect higher returns
for their organic product. Repeated studies have suggested that consumers
choose and feel they understand the organic label above all other natural
or eco-friendly labels. Currently there
are over 40 state and independent organic certifiers in the United States
with organic standards that vary from certifier to certifier (very few presently
have aquaculture standards). When national organic standards are in place,
all products making an organic claim will have to meet national organic standards
and may carry the USDA Organic label that consumers trust and are willing
to pay extra for. What
about international organic aquaculture standards? Other
aquaculture standards have been developed, many still in draft form, throughout
the world. These include Germany's Naturland, the UK's Soil Association, and
Sweden's KRAV standards. The International Federation of Organic
Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), a large umbrella organization, has also
drafted organic aquaculture standards and will discuss these at their General
Assembly meeting in Basel Switzerland this September (2000). The Food and
Agricultural Organization/World Health Organization’s international Codex
Alimentarius Commission has finalized organic crop, livestock, processing, labeling,
inspection and certification guidelines. Organic aquatic animal standards
are not yet in place, however when they are, the United States will abide
by them. Interestingly, if U.S. aquaculture
standards are in place soon enough, they will likely influence the Codex Alimentarius
drafts. Where
do we go from here? Many organic
aquaculture issues still need to be resolved. We need to continue to work
through many issues. How we can best encourage and enhance biological cycles
with respect to nutrient management in organic aquaculture production?
How should organic standards address chemical drift?
How can organic aquaculture best parallel the organic feed principles
for terrestrial livestock? What is
the best way to retain the integrity of the organic product from farmer to
consumer? What conversion requirements
will be necessary to move conventional aquaculture systems into organic systems?
And how can we develop organic inspection protocols appropriate for aquaculture?
Arriving at viable answers to these and other questions requires a proactive
and ongoing collaboration of the aquaculture and organic sectors, NGO's, academia
and government. Mac Graham, owner of Star Prairie Trout Farm is optimistic.
"I truly believe that with continued communication, aquaculture will
emerge as the most environmentally friendly and efficient form of agriculture,
and as an ally/partner in organic and environmental issues," commented
Graham following the Minnesota workshop. The USDA's
National Organic Program and the NOSB are now shifting more of their attention
to aquatic animals. It will be up to the aquaculture industry to continue
to advise them and to keep the momentum going towards national organic aquaculture
standards. Contact Mark Keating (Mark.Keating@usda.gov) for questions or
concerns about the National Organic Program, or contact Deborah Brister at
ISEES (612-624-7723 or djb@fw.umn.edu)
for more information on actively participating in the Organic Aquaculture
Working Group. One thing is certain. The best time to influence organic aquaculture
standards is now, before they are finalized. Anne Kapuscinski
is a Professor of Fisheries, Sea Grant Extension Specialist in Aquaculture
and Biotechnology, and Director of ISEES at the University of Minnesota. Prior
to her post at Minnesota, she worked for Weyerhauser Corp. on freshwater prawn
and salmon aquaculture, worked at a salmon ocean ranching demonstration project,
and obtained M.S. and Ph.D. degrees at Oregon State University. In 1997, U.S.
Secretary of Agriculture awarded the USDA's highest individual award for "promoting
sound public policies related to applying biotechnology to aquaculture and
conserving genetic diversity in fish."
Dr. Kapuscinski's research focuses on genetic aspects of aquaculture
and fisheries management. Her outreach work stresses sound public policy in
aquaculture and biosafety of GMOs; and she teaches a course in sustainable
aquaculture. Her expertise is sought regularly by national and state governments,
international organizations, the National Academy of Science, and various
practitioners and observers of aquaculture, fisheries, and sustainable agriculture. Deborah Brister is the Organic Aquaculture Project Manager for ISEES and is a research specialist in the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at the University of Minnesota. Deborah has reared a variety of species including rainbow trout, tilapia, Atlantic salmon, northern pike and walleye in recirculating systems, raceways and integrated aquaculture/hydroponic systems. Deborah received a B.S. in Natural Resources and Environmental Studies at the University of Minnesota and her master’s research (also at the U.of M.) focused on developing an environmental assessment tool for aquaculture in the Great Lakes. Her area of expertise is in aquaculture and environmental policy and will begin her Ph.D. this fall (2000).
|
||||
|
© 1996-2000 Institute for Social, Economic, and Ecological Sustainability, University of Minnesota. ISEES is supported by the Graduate School; College of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences; College of Biological Sciences; College of Natural Resources; and the MacArthur Interdisciplinary Program On Global Change, Sustainability, and Justice at the University of Minnesota. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. |
||||