Happy Valentine’s Day
from CleanFish

Source: Email to Shrimp News International from Polly Legendre (polly@cleanfish.com, http://www.cleanfish.com/blog/) at CleanFish.  Subject: Happy Valentine’s Day from CleanFish.  February 14, 2008.

Vannamei Versus Monodon in India

A Long Discussion from the Shrimp List

The Indian Government is likely to approve the farming of the western white shrimp, Penaeus vannamei, soon!

India’s shrimp production has stagnated at around 150,000 metric tons annually.  The introduction of P. vannamei would help shrimp farmers reduce costs and increase production.

A.J. Tharakan, a member of the board and former national president of the Seafood Exporters Association of India, said, “The Agriculture Ministry appears to be in favor of introducing the new variety.  It will draw up the guidelines...with the National Development Fisheries Board, or NDFB,” which is responsible for the management of India’s fishery resources.

Currently India’s shrimp farmers produce the giant tiger shrimp (P. monodon), which has higher production costs and lower yields than vannamei.  Vannamei costs $2.29 per kilogram to produce—half the cost of monodon!  Farmers can produce 20 tons of small to medium vannamei per hectare, but only 2-3 tons of large monodon per hectare.

The Shrimp List

The prospect of permitting vannamei farming in India stimulated a long discussion on the Shrimp List (a mailing list for shrimp farmers):

Satish (skbodapati@yahoo.com): The giant tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon), the most popular farmed species in India, is falling out of favor with shrimp farmers, not because of crop failures, but because it is expensive to produce and market prices for it have collapsed.

It seems that everything is set for vannamei farming to take off in India.

Sujeet Kumar (dhruva_shining@yahoo.co.in): Yes, it is true that monodon production is suffering, but this does not mean that one should switch to vannamei.  One should keep in mind that vannamei farming is not without problems.  If you research this topic, you’ll discover that wherever vannamei is farmed, disease problems arise.

Many countries farm vannamei.  By switching to it, we would lose our leadership in monodon farming and have to compete with countries like China and Thailand.

We made a mistake a few years back by importing monodon seedstock from Thailand.  It brought whitespot to India.  We should not import vannamei because it isn’t native to our waters.

Monodon farming has suffered from bad management.  Hatcheries don’t follow the best practices.  Farmers try anything that looks promising, without getting the proper guidance.  We all must take responsibility for the current panic with monodon farming.

Krishan Murthy (murthy_hyr60@yahoo.co.in): In Thailand, monodon slow growth syndrome (MSGS) was noticed only after vannamei was introduced.  Researchers say slow growth syndrome is due to IHHNV, but farmers argue that IHHNV has been in Thailand for more than ten years, and that there was no problem with monodon slow growth until vannamei was introduced.

There might be a growth suppressing factor introduced with vannamei.  If so, wherever vannamei is introduced, it could have an adverse effect on native species.  Researchers should look into this and give the farmers an answer.

Dallas Weaver (deweaver@scientifichatcheries.com): There is apparently more than one strain of IHHNV.  One strain I saw in monodon didn’t transfer to vannamei, but showed up on a standard test.  It also didn’t seem to have any impact on either species.

Rajendra Damle (drrsda@hotmail.com): It is very important not to loose focus and mix issues like leadership, sentiments and presumptions into the discussion.  Regarding India’s leadership in monodon farming, even a cursory look at production figures makes it clear that India was never a leader in monodon production.  As a matter of fact, India was a latecomer to shrimp farming.  It was not our leadership, but the preeminence we accorded to monodon over other species because of its suitability and profitability.  This situation has changed dramatically because of whitespot, loose shell syndrome (LSS), falling prices and stiff competition from vannamei in international markets.

The advent of specific pathogen free (SPF) broodstock and the inherent attributes of vannamei, along with advances in its culture technology, have made mind-boggling production possible at very low costs.

High production costs, diminishing selling prices, the absence of quality seed, high incidence of disease, and frequent crop failures will make monodon culture in India unviable sooner or later.

Already, an increasing number of farmers have refrained from stocking this season because of falling prices across India.  It is very important to note that farmers sustained the onslaught of WSSV primarily because monodon was commanding exorbitantly high prices in international markets.  MSGS and LSS have made the situation worse because they strike in the middle and late stages of growout, while whitespot usually strikes in the first month when the farmer has less money invested in his crop.

Vannamei farming has spread to most of Asia.  Until now, no ecological damage, apart from the inconclusive tie to MSGS, has been attributed to it.  There are and always will be pros and cons to every issue, but it is wrong to jump to a hasty conclusion based on hearsay.  To demonize vannamei and say that it would damage the ecology and monodon farming is downright hypocritical and highly irresponsible because WSSV, MSGS and LSS have already caused enough damage to monodon farming in India.  The current situation is on the verge of getting out of control.  It might sound pessimistic, but continuing with monodon will surely spell doom for the Indian shrimp farming industry.  We must acknowledge the fact that nothing is permanent; the days of $10.21 a kilogram for 30-count monodon are long gone and the world has moved on to vannamei.

Also, since vannamei is cheaper to produce, it opens the door to our vast domestic market.  It is high time that we abandon purely dogmatic, bookish and fruitless talk.  We need to do a reality check and make some hard policy decisions without prejudice or presumption.  With proper import regulations and a framework of rules, permission must be given to everyone who wants to culture vannamei without further delay.

P. indicus could have been an alternative to monodon, but it fell out of favor with the Indian farmer long ago.  Time is running out for shrimp farming in India, and vannamei seems to offer a beacon of hope.

Saji Chacko (chacko.saji@gmail.com): I am sure the so-called pro-monodon saviors of the Indian shrimp farming sector are chasing unknown demons.  No farmer is against farming of monodon.  Show us a way to produce monodon successfully and profitably.  Where is the SPF broodstock for monodon?  Has anybody developed a low cost feed for monodon?  Do we have a foolproof mechanism to produce jumbo size monodon?

Job Villaruel (jovi_tech@yahoo.com): Farmers need more information so that they can make these decisions on their own.

Maybe we should look at indicus again.  Farmers still know how to grow it, but now there are no hatcheries for it.

Kalyanaraman (mkalyanaraman2003@yahoo.co.in): The heat generated by the debate on monodon and vannamei is, to a certain extent, melting the ice jam in the Indian shrimp farming industry.

Indian Shrimp farming, characterized by consistently inconsistent production and market price, has shaken the confidence of corporations, entrepreneurs and professionals, both physically and financially.  Outbreaks of incurable diseases have destroyed our professional pride and the farmer’s confidence.  Best management practices, biosecurity and sustainability have become topics of seminars and workshops, but have not been implemented at the farm level.

Avaricious corporations, greedy entrepreneurs, opportunistic professionals, luring chemical suppliers, glorified feed boys, technicians from overseas, eccentric farmers and perplexed regulating authorities—all are responsible in one way or another for the state of affairs today!

In the beginning, indicus was the champion of the Indian shrimp farming industry.  It was replaced by monodon.  Vannamei is in the race now!  Change is nothing new to Indian shrimp farmers.  They have seen nothing but boom and bust.

Scientifically, with regard to susceptibility of diseases (under field conditions), there seems to be very little difference between monodon and vannamei.

Love India!  Grow Shrimp!!  Long Live Indian Shrimp Farming!!!

Jim Wyban (jim.wyban@gmail.com): The safest way to introduce vannamei to India and avoid the risk of exotic disease introduction is to import certified SPF broodstock from the USA.  There is no scientific evidence of any slow growth pathogen resident in USA-produced SPF vannamei.

Exhaustive comparisons of the production economics of vannamei versus monodon in Thailand and elsewhere show a clear and significant advantage (higher production, reliable production and higher profits) by growing vannamei.  Vannamei is now accepted in all world markets, including Japan.  The future of shrimp farming will be based on production of top quality products (clean, safe and nutritious) at a low cost.  The best method for farmers to reduce their production costs and increase reliability is through use of high health PLs produced from domesticated SPF vannamei broodstock.

Kalyanaraman (mkalyanaraman2003@yahoo.co.in): Dr. Jim Wyban, to substantiate your claim on the performance of imported SPF vannamei broodstock, would you please provide the names of some people in Thailand who might provide the following information:

1. How long has Thailand been using the SPF vannamei seed from the USA?

2. Are the yields from this seed consistent?

3. Have any trials been run to determine how SPF seed compares to ordinary seed?

4. Do you have crop summaries that provide the following information?

Stocking density

Size at stocking

Area stocked

Duration of crop

Size at harvest

Survival

Feed Conversion Ratio

Yield

Cost of production per kilogram of shrimp

Market price

Number of crops per year

Jim Wyban (jim.wyban@gmail.com): The following table is from my manuscript that appeared in the May/June 2007 issue of the Global Aquaculture Advocate.  The numbers were generated from many discussions with farmers in Thailand and represent my attempt at quantifying the difference between vannamei and monodon farming in Thailand.

The profits from vannamei farming were almost three times greater than those for monodon.

Eric De Muylder (eric.de.muylder@skynet.be): There are many misconceptions regarding the term “SPF”.  SPF doesn’t guarantee that shrimp are disease free.  It only means that they are free of certain known diseases.  It is possible that SPF vannamei carry diseases that it has been resistant to for ages, and those diseases could affect other species or even the same species from another region that has not been in contact with the pathogens.

I suggest a quarantine with imported vannamei broodstock or PLs and local species in the same tank.  That will show you if the imported broodstock is disease free, which is likely, but also if the local species (monodon, indicus) is suffering from something.  Has anyone on the list done this test?

Dallas Weaver (deweaver@scientifichatcheries.com): The problem with that test is the source of the animals.  Where will you find clean or SPF monodon?  Using wild, apparently healthy animals may just transfer some pathogens to your clean SPF vannamei.

I believe that Jim Wyban has SPF monodon along with his SPF vannamei so his SPF animals have already been tested against monodon and apparently didn’t have anything that would make the monodon status non-SPF.

In terms of vannamei versus monodon, perhaps we should note that vannamei is a real garbage gut that will eat almost anything.  Monodon is a lot more carnivorous and requires higher protein feed.  Full size vannamei will filter 50-micron-size organisms and bacterial/algal flocks out of the water column.  They will also rise off the bottom to eat rotifers in the water column, which gives them an ecological advantage under normal pond rearing conditions.  I don’t understand how they do it, but they can strip the water column of rotifers very quickly.

BONDADA (bon4sri@yahoo.com): Besides the many advantages cited by Jim Wyban and others for vannamei, the biggest reason why it spread to Southeast Asia and the Middle East (Iran) was the availability of SPF broodstock from the USA.

In Saudi Arabia, National Prawn Company has been running a breeding program for indicus for the past five years.  If any private companies or public institutions want to launch SPF indicus in India in collaboration with National Prawn Company, please contact us at bondada@robian.com.sa or gmo@robian.com.sa.

Dallas Weaver (deweaver@scientifichatcheries.com): There seems to be a misunderstanding about the value of SPF and SPR (specific pathogen resistant) broodstock.  If you are running a sloppy system with no controls, contaminated water input from other farms discharges, which contain more pathogen species than there are resistance strains, SPF will do you no good at all.

If you run a minimal water exchange system and filter the input water to remove all organisms larger than 50 microns and have a reasonable water supply, using SPF and SPR broodstock and postlarvae will at least allow you to get a clean start.  If you are good, you will stay clean and produce a bumper crop of very healthy animals.

If you want consistent results, it is best to run a clean system with SPF and SPR seed (SPR if you need resistance to a pathogen endemic in your area that is not removed by filtering or water treatment).

Without SPF and a lot of biosecurity, producing consistent postlarvae is problematic.  Without a reliable supply of postlarvae, the farm’s economics are destroyed.

Most people underestimate the economic significance of reliability.  Just a few failed crops can put a farm out of business and the farm owner into the poorhouse.  It’s a lot more cost effective to cut your risks with SPF seedstock.

BONDADA (bon4sri@yahoo.com): At National Prawn Company in Saudi Arabia, which has been operating a 3,500 hectare shrimp farm since 2004, we compared normal seedstock with SPF seedstock under field conditions.  In 2007, we stocked 630 million SPF indicus fry and 77 million non-SPF fry.  We concluded that biosecurity and SPF fry were the key factors for our company’s sustainability.  In 2007, we produced 12,500 metric tons of shrimp and hope to increase that to 35,000 tons by 2010.

It’s time for hatcheries in India to move away from their dependence on wild broodstock.

Philippe Leger (p.leger@inve.be): With assistance from the National Fisheries Development Board, India is going to set up a specific pathogen free seed multiplication center for monodon in Andhra Pradesh as part of a joint venture with the USA-based Moana Technologies.  The $7.6 million center will be located near Sompeta in Srikakulam District.

In Andhra Pradesh, over the last decade, shrimp have been hit hard by the whitespot virus, shrinking the industry to 24,000 hectares from a high of 78,000 hectares.

Nagaraj Jayaram (nagaaa72@yahoo.co.in): It’s indeed nice to hear that Moana Technologies in partnership with the Indian government is starting an SPF-monodon center in India.  I’ve heard that earlier efforts to produce SPF-monodon have failed.  Why?  Was it because of failed biosecurity during growout or the cost of SPF seedstock?

Eric Pinon (list@serviceaqua.com): Yes, some past ventures have failed, but I think Moana Technologies is different for a number of reasons:

• First, past efforts were made with much less understanding of shrimp genetics and without the vannamei experience as a model.

• Moana Technologies has been working silently on its SPF-monodon project for more that seven years.  Most of its monodon lines have been bred for several generations in captivity.

• Moana is not only producing SPF animals; it is also improving the animals with genetic selection programs.  It is reported to have assembled a monodon shrimp library exceeding 120 SPF genetically different families.  This probably gives them the broadest array of genetic resources of any monodon breeding company in the world.

• I think Moana will be able to protect its genetic lines from poachers.

Here is a long-term investment that’s intended to revive monodon’s popularity as a farmed species.  It’s being carefully monitored by several regional authorities and governments.  It certainly should not be ignored!

Durwood Dugger (duggerdm@bellsouth.net): Folks you’re complicating the SPF issue.  In my opinion the decision to use SPF stock (regardless of the species) is a simple one.  If you have a biosecure culture environment, SPF stock will certainly significantly reduce bad performance, diseases and economic loss.

Ah, but you must have a biosecure environment!  You need to understand biosecurity and something about shrimp viral diseases—particularly whitespot—in order to assess whether purchasing SPF seedstock is economically feasible for a specific farm.  Whitespot is endemic in most crustacean species all over the world, especially in shrimp farming areas.  Its carriers include all kinds of crabs, freshwater shrimp, isopods, and small waterborne crustaceans such as wild penaeid postlarvae, mysid shrimp, and perhaps even copepods—pretty much any crustacean.  If you have an open shrimp farm (no barriers to whitespot carriers) and pump from an estuary with less than 125-micron filtration, chances are you will eventually experience a whitespot infection whether you use SPF stock or not.  If this is typical of your shrimp farm’s description (nonbiosecure), you might be better off putting your resources into extensive and comprehensive disease testing of the broodstock and seedstock from your local hatchery, assuming this option is less expensive than buying certified SPF stock.

If you are inland and away from estuaries and other bodies of water, use well water as your farm’s water source, and don’t have other shrimp farms within ten miles, then SPF stock may be your cheapest insurance.  It can reduce risks and return higher yields.  Basically your seedstock quality, whether SPF or not, is never any better than the risks related to your farms background pathogen levels.  Contemplating using SPF seedstock without having first implemented an effective and well-tested biosecurity plan for your shrimp farm is simply putting the cart before the ox.

Sources: 1. LiveMint.com.  Govt may approve new shrimp variety in bid to hike production (http://www.livemint.com/2008/01/02232527/Govt-may-approve-new-shrimp-va.html).  Ajayan.  January 2, 2008.  2. The Shrimp List.  Subjects: Is it good going for Vannamei in India; Monodon or Vannamei....How does it matter?; Setting up SPF multiplication Centre in India, and Another $0.02.  January 15–February 7, 2008.

Problems Implementing BMPs at Small Shrimp Farms in Indonesia

In Indonesia, government agencies, universities, donor agencies, NGOs and the private sector are implementing best management practices (BMPs) for small-scale shrimp farmers—often with limited success!

An Indonesia/Australia team recently started work on an Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research-funded (ACIAR) project which aims to improve productivity and profitability for small-scale shrimp farmers in Indonesia.  One of its first steps was to enroll four shrimp farming groups in BMP trials, which turned out to be more difficult than expected.

From the team’s viewpoint, it was very important that the first-round trials were successful.  It wanted to demonstrate that BMPs resulted in good crops of high quality shrimp.  Also it did not want to expose the farmers to unacceptable risks or financial losses.  It wanted the first-round farmer groups to be reasonably representative of other groups in their area so that the results would be transferable and so neighboring farmer groups would see the success and adopt similar BMPs.

Some quite localized geographical areas appear to carry a higher risk of crop failure than others.  For example, in one village in Demak district, on the north coast of Central Java, farmers reported that less than 10% of their monodon crops were successful, while in another village only ten kilometers away in the same district, around 30% were successful.  Neither group has direct access to BMP-related information, and most of their losses could be attributed to whitespot disease.  Similar differences were found with farmer groups in East Java and South Sulawesi.  Two factors stood out as likely to be important: (a) the level of biosecurity risk from wild shrimp and (b) presence or absence of problematic soil types, particularly acid sulfate soils and sandy soils.

Consider the Sumber Bagu Group.  Its ponds are on sandy soil within one kilometer of the coast at Tambakbulusan in the Demak District, Central Java.  Seepage losses are around five centimeters a day, and the crop success rate, without any BMP program assistance, is less than 10%.  There are large populations of wild white shrimp (Penaeus indicus) in the local environment and WSSV prevalence in these is estimated at around 60%.  To work with this group, the team proposed a number of nonnegotiable BMPs, including rigorous filtration of intake water and the use of shrimp-free barriers, such as “biofilter” reservoirs or very wide embankments, around monodon-only trial ponds.

The farmers had nonnegotiable issues of their own.  They did not want to eliminate, or even significantly reduce, populations of wild-seeded white shrimp in the proposed biofilter ponds.  Apparently the daily harvest of white shrimp from these ponds provides a regular and essential income for them and their families.

Because this was a very good farmer group, the team was very keen to work with it and tried to find ways around the following issues:

• It was likely that WSSV would get into the trial ponds from adjacent ponds sooner or later during growout.  One option would be to allow white shrimp in adjacent ponds, while stocking trial ponds with vannamei rather than the usual monodon.  The break-even point for vannamei crops is earlier than monodon (around 60 days versus around 90 days for monodon) and full growout periods are 90 and 120 days, respectively.  As part of this option, the team considered weekly monitoring the WSSV status of the vannamei using a rapid pondside test.

• To maintain quality and hence value, vannamei crops need to be harvested and iced very quickly (within hours if possible), but the Sumber Bagu ponds are relatively shallow and must be harvested by cast net (too slow for vannamei quality retention) or by pumps (too expensive for these farmers).  So, even if a vannamei crop survived to a profitable size in the Sumber Bagu ponds it could not be emergency harvested quickly enough to maintain an acceptable quality.

The team reluctantly concluded that the risk of crop losses in the Sumber Bagu ponds (and presumably in similar small-scale ponds elsewhere in Indonesia) was unacceptably high and therefore it should not offer BMP program participation at this time!

Source: Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific Webpage.  Shrimp: Implementing BMP programs in the real world of small-scale shrimp farming—who are we able to help? (http://www.enaca.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1714).  Submitted by Richard Callinan, Project Coordinator, ACIAR project FIS2005/169.  Posted by Simon Wilkinson.  February 7, 2008.

Country Reports

Brunei

Monodon and Stylirostris

About 460 hectares have been allocated for shrimp farming in the Penyatang River area, and the department of fisheries has already awarded a 100-hectare site to a company that plans to farm giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon.

Another shrimp farm in Brunei is exporting western blue shrimp, P. stylirostris, to the USA, Japan and Korea.

Source: BruneiDirect.com.  Brunei Fisheries Sector Gets Shot in the Arm (http://www.brudirect.com/DailyInfo/News/Archive/Feb08/010208/nite35.htm).  Hadthiah P.D. Hazair.  February 1, 2008.

India/Maldives

Wanted: Larval Capture Officer

The government of India has a position open for a larval capture officer in the Maldives, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, about seven hundred kilometers (435 miles) southwest of Sri Lanka.

Salary: $1,000 [a month?], plus commission.

Closing Date: February 29, 2008.

Qualifications:

1. Master’s degree in marine science.

2. Bachelor’s degree in biology, chemistry, botany or zoology.

Description: Larval rearing, nauplii production and PCR tests at the Andhra Pradesh Shrimp Seed Production Supply and Research Centre in India.

Contact: Dusmant Maharana (phone 09861878702, email dusmant_maharana@yahoo.co.in).

Source: AquaNic (The Aquaculture Network Information Center, a gateway to the world’s electronic aquaculture resources, http://aquanic.org/index.htm).  Jobs Directory (http://www.aquanic.org/Text/job_serv.htm) In cooperation with the WAS Employment Service.  Search jobs (http://aquanic.org/jobs/search.asp).  Larval Capture Officer (http://aquanic.org/jobs/jobinfo.asp?jobid=2741).  Posted February 11, 2008.

India

114 Shrimp Exporters Dropped from Second USA Dumping Review

The USA Department of Commerce has dropped 114 Indian shrimp exporters from its second round review on the dumping tariffs—because:

• Confirmed statements of no shipments during the period of review

• Inability to locate certain companies

• The timely withdrawal of review requests by petitioners

• The duplication of some names in the review notice

The second review will cover exports for a period of one year, from February 1, 2006, to January 31, 2007.  The USA Department of Commerce will examine in detail the shipments of two mandatory respondents: Falcon Marine Exports and Devi Marine Food Exports.

After the first review in September 2007, Commerce cut India’s duty from 10.54 percent to 7.22 percent.

Companies that don’t respond to the review could receive very high tariff rates.  After the first review, the 15 Indian companies that did not respond faced tariffs of 82.3 percent.

Source: Business Standard.  114 shrimpers dropped from US dumping review (http://www.business-standard.com/common/news_article.php?leftnm=lmnu6&subLeft=11&autono=312183&tab=r).  George Joseph.  February 1, 2008.

Japan

Shrimp Prices from Around Asia

In Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand, prices for giant tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon) stayed high before the Chinese New Year (February 7, 2008).

In Indonesia, shrimp fishermen are getting around $11.60 a kilo for 16/20 count P. monodon, an increase of nearly a dollar from early January 2008.

Prices of other large, wild shrimp have dropped because of competition from lower-priced P. vannamei.  For example, the fishermen’s price for flower shrimp (P. semisulcatus) in India is staying around $10.00 per kilo for 16/20 count animals.

Industry analysts point out that some shrimp fishermen could be compelled to sell below cost amid soaring fuel prices, suggesting that some will drop out of the fishing business.

In Japan, in the wake of the recent Chinese food scare, analysts say that some traders are apparently beginning to refrain from spot buying of P. vannamei, the most popular farmed species in China.  Thailand has plenty of vannamei for sale, but its production costs are higher than those in China, which means prices for Thai vannamei could rise.

Source: Seafood.com (an online, subscription-based, fisheries news service).  Chinese seafood scare hitting prices of vannamei in Japan, as traders choose black tiger shrimp.  Editor and Publisher, John Sackton (phone 781-861-1441, email jsackton@seafood.com).  February 7, 2008.

United States

Florida—OceanBoy Farms For Sale

OceanBoy Farms is selling its two shrimp farms in Hendry County, either together or individually.

Michael Warner, chairman of OceanBoy and its majority investor, says OceanBoy “is an ideal opportunity for someone who has the capital to take it to the next level.”

OceanBoy’s 900-acre Little Cypress farm, which opened in 2003, has 24, four-acre, lined ponds and a hatchery that can produce more than 300 million postlarvae a month.  Currently, specific pathogen free Penaeus vannamei and P. setiferus) are produced at the hatchery.

Included in the sale are administrative offices, a packing plant and freezer, a cholesterol research center, a feed barn and all related equipment.  The farm’s water, with a salinity of five parts per thousand, originates from four, 300-meter-deep, artesian wells.

OceanBoy’s LaBelle farm, which opened in 2001, consists of 15, two-and-a-half-acre, lined ponds; a 7.4-acre water treatment pond; 15 juvenile nurseries/raceways and a 300-meter-deep, five parts per thousand saline well. The company ceased operations at the farm, which was used for R&D, in late 2005 when it transferred most of its equipment to the Little Cypress farm.

Source: Seafood Currents (a free online newsletter from Seafood Business, www.seafoodbusiness.com).  OceanBoy Farms For Sale (http://divcom-seafood.informz.net/admin31/content/template.asp?sid=6947&ptid=163&brandid=3138&uid=752859429&mi=262488).  Seafood Business Staff.  February 20, 2008.

United States

Florida—Shrimp Improvement Systems

Shrimp Improvement Systems (SIS), primarily an exporter of specific pathogen free shrimp broodstock (Penaeus vannamei), will be selling SPF postlarvae in the USA and parts of Latin America throughout 2008.  SIS is owned by Indonesia’s PT Central Proteinaprima (CP Prima), arguably the largest shrimp farming operation in the world.

Information: Lorenzo Juarez, General Manager, Shrimp Improvement Systems, LLC, (and President-elect of the World Aquaculture Society), 88005 Overseas Highway 10-166, Islamorada, FL 33036 USA (phone 305-852-0872, ext. 23, cell 305-394-3597, fax 305-852-0874, email ljuarez@shrimpimprovement.com).

Source: Lorenzo Juarez, at the World Aquaculture Society Meeting, in Orlando, Florida, USA, on February 11, 2008.

United States

Hawaii—Kona Bay Marine Resources

Kona Bay Marine Resources, Inc., the Hawaii-based company that is a leading supplier of disease-free shrimp broodstock (Penaeus vannamei), is entering the shrimp production business and will grow its products on the site of the former Ceatech USA shrimp farm on Kauai.

Source: Email from Intrafish.com (newsletter@intrafish.com, an online, subscription-based news service) to Shrimp News International.  The Wave/Top Story/News Headline Only/World’s first hydropower shrimp farm opens in Hawaii.  February 14, 2008.

United States

Washington, DC—Shrimp Imports Drop in 2007

In 2007, for the first time since 1996, USA shrimp imports dropped from the previous year, down 5.7 percent to 1.23 billion pounds.  Even in 2005, when the Department of Commerce placed tariffs on shrimp, imports increased 2.2 percent to 1.17 billion pounds.

Shrimp imports from China fell 29 percent to 106.7 million pounds, the biggest drop among the top 15 suppliers to the United States.  In June 2007, the USA Food and Drug Administration put shrimp from China on automatic detention due to the increased presence of banned antibiotics and fungicides, slowing imports considerably.  Through the first half of 2007, shrimp imports from China were up 7.9 percent to 61.2 million pounds.  Due to the drop, China slipped from the number two supplier to the United States in 2006 to the number four supplier in 2007, trailing Thailand, Ecuador and Indonesia.

Shrimp imports from India, the number seven supplier in 2006, also tumbled significantly, down 23.8 percent to 45.8 million pounds.  India is one of six Asian and Latin American countries the USA Department of Commerce hit with shrimp tariffs in 2005.

Shrimp imports from Thailand, by far the number one supplier, fell only marginally, down 2.8 percent to 415.2 million pounds.

Imports represent about 90 percent of the USA shrimp supply.  Shrimp has been America’s favorite seafood since 2001. USA per capita shrimp consumption reached a record 4.4 pounds in 2006.

Source: Seafood Currents (an online newsletter from Seafood Business, www.seafoodbusiness.com).  U.S. Shrimp Imports Drop in 2007 (http://divcom-seafood.informz.net/admin31/content/template.asp?sid=6908&ptid=154&brandid=3138&uid=752859429&mi=260509).  Seafood Business Staff.  February 15, 2008.

United States

Washington State—Aquaculture Certification Council

In an editorial on February 1, 2008, John Sackton, editor and publisher of Seafood.com, an online, subscription-based, fisheries news service, defended the Aquaculture Certification Council’s (ACC) science-based, certification program and questioned the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) development of a separate set of standards.

Sackton said:

At issue is WWF’s decision to pursue its own independent development of aquaculture sustainability standards when the Global Aquaculture Alliance (GAA), through ACC, an independent certification group set up by GAA, has already developed aquaculture certification standards covering hatcheries, feed production, individual farms and processing plants.

The GAA shrimp standards are compliant with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ guidelines for certification and have the same level of support among buyers as the Marine Stewardship Council’s label on wild fishery products.

In a media interview on why the WWF was pursuing its own aquaculture standards, WWF’s Jose Villalon said, “After an exhaustive assessment of the standards and certification schemes available in the marketplace, we concluded that there was not one standard that addressed specifically the environmental and social impacts of aquaculture.  ...We decided there was a real vacuum in the standards development community to address science performance based standards that focus on metrics for compliance with environmental and social issues.”  Later in the interview he said the WWF process of aquaculture dialogues was “the only game in town right now.”

Sackton continues: These are false statements.  Anyone looking at the GAA’s existing standards for shrimp...will see that specific measurements are used in areas such as effluent, water discharge and quality.

The real issue for WWF is labor and social standards.  It is proposing that no certification be granted unless the specific social issues in a given aquaculture country or industry meet their criteria.  It further says this must be measured with metrics.  Does it mean minimum wage?  A certain level of employment?  Local ownership?

There is a very good reason why the GAA standards are science based, and why that is the key criteria.  It is to prevent the marketplace, where the goal is to gain consumer confidence and ensure the sustainability of the industry, from becoming a battleground for ideology.  Most retailers dread getting involved in an ideology fight, because they cannot win.  All they can do is anger part of their customer base.

Buyers who see aquaculture certification as important to their brand should avoid WWF’s aquaculture certification program like the plague until WWF finds a way to cooperate with existing standards-based programs.  WWF should not deny their existence or efficacy.

Source: Seafood.com (an online, subscription-based, fisheries news service).  WWF follows up stinky fish with false statements about aquaculture standards (Editorial Comment).  Editor and Publisher, John Sackton (phone 781-861-1441, email jsackton@seafood.com).  February 1, 2008.

Classified Advertisements
How To Advertise