Monday, 19 September 2016

Global Fish Reduction to Fishmeal and Fish Oil - Daniel Pauly/Tim Cashion, Updated Feb 23, 2017

(Note the links at the bottom, and that I give you the updated numbers of forage fish killed to feed fish farm fish in this post: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/10/fish-farms-kill-billions-of-wild-fish.html. The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salon.  

The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salmon; 67.8 million forage fish killed to feed one farm to harvest; 5.76 Billion killed to feed an industry the size of BC's to harvest. The larger figures at the bottom are those if one uses the commonly found conversion rate of forage fish to fish feed of 5, to 1. I have been convinced that it is too high).

This paper allows attribution of actual fish farm landings, as in how much the Norwegian-style fish farm system has responsibility for collapsing world fish stocks to feed carnivore fish for first world mouths, rather than direct human consumption by third world mouths.
This means Marine Harvest, Cermaq and Grieg Seafood. 

Answer to come, but for now the abstract::
Globally, the production of fishmeal and fish oil(FMFO)has been reliant on dedicated fisheries since at least the 1950s. While these products formerly found diverse uses, they are now usedalmost entirely for livestock and aquaculture production (Tacon and Metian 2008). There has also been a growth in the practice of direct feeding of fish to aquaculture operations for various taxa (Funge-Smithet et al.2005).Both of these uses are for purposes other than direct human consumption (DHC) and have been criticized as wasteful and unethical (Naylor and Burke 2005;Tacon and Metian 2009b). On the other hand, the market possibility and complete use of all fisheries landings for DHC has been contested (Wijkstr√∂m 2009,2010). However, this debate has also been marked by a lack of clarity around what fish are used for fishmeal and fish oil production and for direct feeding, outside of a few major species that have come to characterize the sector,such as the Peruvian anchoveta (Engraulis ringens). 
 Furthermore, as the fishmeal/oil sector is thought to represent close to 1/3 of global capture
fisheries in recent years (Alderet al. 2008;Tacon and Metian 2009a), understanding its dynamics is important to guide future fisheries policy and fisheries research. We aim to characterize the role of non-DHC fisheries in global capture fisheries, including both reduction fisheries for fish meal and oil and fisheries for ‘trash fish’ (i.e., direct feed). Thus,
we provide a global coverage of reduction/feed fisheries for each fishing entity (i.e., fishing country or flag country) from 1950-2010, based on the reconstructed global catch database of the Sea Around Us (Pauly and Zeller 2016). This will enable us to analyze a sector of capture fisheries that is relatively poorly understood in its global extent and development, and permits the documentation of current trends within reduction fisheries. Additionally our focus on the full time period back to 1950 enables us to develop an understanding of
the use of fisheries landings almost since the beginning of post-WWII industrial fisheries. 

                                                      ***************
The point is that the killing of 282 fish to feed one fish for human consumption in a vastly different consumption from human consumption of the 282 fish, and the industry, far from being able to claim the communications spin that they are 'saving dwindling stocks' by replacing them with farmed fish, is patently incorrect.

Account for the 282 dead fish, plus the salmonids killed by fish farms, some 50% of such fish in the area that fish farms operate, and the deficit is huge. For example, my estimate for the BC industry being that 14.4 billion fish are killed to feed one harvest of farmed fish in BC PLUS the 50% of wild fish they kill. (I will put the link from my site here shortly). 

                                                ********************

This is the NOFIMA report from Norway on the issue: https://www.nofima.no/filearchive/rapport-53-2011_5.pdf. More to come.

This is the Daniel Pauly/Tim Chashion document: http://www.seaaroundus.org/doc/publications/books-and-reports/2016/End_Use_Reconstruction_Report.pdf..  A reduction fishery means using the fish for fish meal and/or fish oil for aquaculture or other agricultural use, distinct from direct human consumption.

In brief, from the Pauly document, the Norway situation is this: "Norway has the largest reduction fisheries in Europe.The data are based on published national fishery statistics from 1961, 1968, 1975, 1984, 1992, 1999, and 2000 - 2010 (Central Bureau of Statistics 1960; Director General of Fisheries 1968, 1979; Statistics Norway 1979,1984,1996, 1997, 2002; www.ssb.no), in addition to other supplemental sources that document changes in these fisheries for Norway and the North Atlantic fisheries in general. Landings are often aggregated for different uses to include fishmeal and oil production and animal feed in one category, however, fishmeal production is the dominant use, and this was addressed for some taxa detailed below.For an overview of the fisheries of Norway since 1950, please see Nedreaas et al.(2015)." This quote is from page 19.

This is the most important document on reduction fisheries in the world. Lots of work went into finding the figures, accounting for different uses, and interpolating data when not available. The major tables start on page 74 to 76. You can go directly to these and read the results. 

No comments:

Post a Comment