50 Fish as feed inputs for aquaculture – Practices, sustainability and implications
economic point of view. However, when one factors in the hidden ecological costs of
bottom trawling, this is less certain.
As discussed above, in Africa the major issue appears to be the possible impact of
increased demand for small pelagic fish for fish or animal feed, or indeed for export,
particularly on lakeside communities traditionally dependant upon these stocks for
their own subsistence needs. However, on a wider basis, the potential for increased
utilization of the prolific marine forage-fish stocks for aquaculture in Africa and the
significant socio-economic gains this might bring are recognized.
In summary, there is no single “answer” as to whether more use of feedfish should
be made for human consumption. To anwer this question requires a regional approach
that examines all the consequences – economic, social and environmental – of policy
change to ensure that inappropriate solutions are not rushed through on the back of
simplistic assertions.8.2 Recommendations
Not withstanding the above, a number of recommendations can be made, which, if
acted upon, would help ensure that the moderate forecasted growth in aquaculture
can continue – against a background of increased global demand for fishmeal and
fish oils – and that the industry improve its environmental performance, in particular
with regard to the sustainable sourcing of raw materials for aquafeeds. These include
recommendations provided by De Silva and Turchini (2009), Hecht and Jones (2009),
Huntington (2009) and Tacon (2009):- Improve the management of feed fisheries through a combination of greater
political will and cooperation, as well as the gradual adoption of the ecosystem
approach as implementation mechanisms evolve. This could take the form of the
provision of technical and other assistance to major feed fisheries through greater
cooperation and the strengthening of relevant regional fisheries management
organizations. The piloting of innovative management approaches such as the
certification of responsibly managed feed fisheries might provide a market
incentive to influence fishmeal and fish oil purchasing. - Address barriers to the sourcing and use of sustainable fishmeal and fish oils
by (i) adopting feed fisheries sustainability criteria to guide buyers; (ii) improving
traceability of materials, especially if blended during manufacture; (iii) encouraging
sustainable purchasing strategies through the use of environmental management
systems; and (iv) branding of aquafeeds and aquaculture products produced using
sustainable raw materials. - Further develop plant and other substitutes for fishmeal and fish oil inclusion
in aquafeeds. These substitutes must be cost-effective alternatives to fish-based
products, be acceptable to consumers and not raise sustainability issues in their
own right. In Asia, affordable alternatives to trash fish/farm-made aquafeeds
for small-scale aquaculture that have both improved growth and environmental
performance should be developed. - Develop food products for direct human consumption from species that are
currently reduced to fishmeal and fish oil. These products should be economically
competitive, appeal to domestic and export markets and be resistant to the cyclical
nature of fishmeal and oil commodity pricing. In South America, the focus should
be on canned, marinated and boneless minced fish products, with the latter having
particular potential to address regional food security needs. In Asia, this requires
the continued development of techniques to convert existing trash-fish species
into low-cost products for direct consumption. - Investigate markets for the direct consumption of feedfish and their by-
products. In Europe, an investigation might focus on emerging markets and in
particular markets in the Russian Federation, Romania, Poland and Ukraine,