2 Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture – Practices, sustainability and implications
SUMMARY
With around three quarters of the world’s capture fisheries fully or overexploited,
aquaculture is seen as the main source for future growth of fish production. Given this
finite state of affairs, this paper examines the role of “feed” fisheries in fish and animal
farming and considers whether the direct human consumption of these resources might be
preferable on environmental, food security and livelihood grounds. This synthesis draws
on four regional analyses and a number of country case studies.
There are marked differences among regions regarding the sourcing and use of fish-based
protein for feeds. In South America and Europe high-performance compounded feeds
derived from target feed stocks are utilized, although Asian demand for these resources is
increasingly causing South American and European aquaculture producers to substitute
fishmeal with plant-based alternatives. Asian aquaculture – apart from the intensive culture
of marine shrimp – still largely depends upon “trash fish” and farm-made diets due to their
availability and low cost, characteristics which are considered by farmers to outweigh their
poor growth and environmental performance. With the exception of Egyptian mariculture,
most of Africa’s culture of herbivorous/omnivorous species uses locally made fishmeal.
In some key feed fisheries and particularly in South America, there is considerable
scope to increase the proportion of feedfish used for human consumption to address food
security concerns. However, this switch depends upon the development of low-cost,
easily conserved products that are accessible by the poor in inland rural areas. In Asia,
there is some scope for greater use of low-value fish for human consumption, but again
affordability and required product preservation are limitations.
In terms of food security and livelihood maintenance, such a switch would be
particularly beneficial to South American populations. However, the situation in Asia is
less clear cut, as cheap and abundant trash fish allow small-scale aquaculture development
and the accompanying livelihood opportunities. In summary, there is no single “answer”
as to whether more “feedfish” should be used for human consumption. Solutions to this
issue require a regional approach that examines all the consequences – economic, social and
environmental – to ensure that inappropriate policy changes are not rushed through on the
basis of simplistic assertions.