234 Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture – Practices, sustainability and implications
content. The protein in fishmeal is readily digested by poultry, and it contains all
the essential amino acids necessary for adequate growth and production, especially
the growth-limiting amino acid lysine. However, as with pig diets, the quality of the
fishmeal can seriously affect protein digestion and biological value. Inclusion of fishmeal
in poultry diets at about 4 percent results in improved feed conversion efficiency and
growth rates. Laying performance is also improved by feeding fishmeal.3.4 Contribution of feed fisheries to the European economy
3.4.1 Direct employment
The industrial fishing sector is economically very small relative to the EU fisheries as
a whole. It accounts for only 0.5 percent of the sector’s employment and 2.1 percent
of the sector’s value added (Megapesca, 1998). Table 17 summarizes the economic
significance of the fishmeal and oil sector within the EU. The sector contribution
to EU gross value added is €137 million. Approximately 2 220 people are employed
directly in the sector. More specifically, the level of economic dependency (value
added) on feed-fish fisheries accounts for €137 million or 87 percent of the total and as
such is significantly greater than the economic value generated from fish offal.
Of the 2 222 workers in the EU dependent upon feed-fish catching and processing,
around 64 percent are dependent on feed-fish supplies (fish catching and processing
feedfish) and 35 percent on the trimmings sector (Table 18). Employment in the
production of feed-fish related meal tends to be less labour intensive than in offal
production (Frid et al., 2003).3.4.2 Interdependence of the catching sector
Table 17 illustrates the relatively low levels of dependency on feed fisheries in the
context of the EU fishing fleet. However, some countries, most noticeably Sweden
and Denmark, have fleets that are fully or partly dependent on feed fisheries. Reducing
feed fisheries in these countries would have a direct impact on a significantly greater
number of vessels than those 60 vessels that are strongly dependent on the fishery. The
Danish Research Institute of Food Economics (FOI) explored the potential impact on
the Danish fishery sector (Andersen and Løkkegaard, 2002) in the event of (a) a ban
on sand-eel fishing (scenario 1) and (b) a ban on all industrial fishing (scenario 2). The
assessment took account of changes in turnover and costs resulting from a loss of catch
and a reduction in fishing effort. Because of the inter-linkages between human and
industrial fishing activity, a ban would not only eliminate the 60 dedicated industrial
vessels, it would also result in the removal of 125 vessels under scenario 1 and 194
vessels under scenario 2. This would result in a loss of employment of between 479
(scenario 1) and 750 workers (scenario 2). Applying a similar rational for the Swedish
fleet would probably see the loss of 88 and 136 jobs, albeit that there are different
species dependencies.- SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES OF REDUCTION FISHERIES AND FEEDFISH AS FEED
INPUTS FOR AQUACULTURE AND ANIMAL FEED
4.1 Review of the impacts of feed fisheries on ecosystems
4.1.1 Direct effects of feed fisheries
The removal of large numbers of individuals of fish from an ecosystem may directly
impact their prey, predators and the viability of target and bycatch populations. The
physical effect of fishing activity will also affect the ecosystem directly through the
disturbance of habitats (Auster et al., 1996; Langton and Auster, 1999) and the death
and injury of non-target species (Kaiser and Spencer, 1995).