Aquaculture Factsheet

Background

Aquaculture is the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of fish, shellfish, algae, and other organisms in all types of water environments. Aquaculture production is steadily on the rise, in part responding to increasing demand for seafood which is expected to double by 2050.

By 2016, fishes raised in aquaculture systems already accounted for more than half of the seafood consumed by humans. Aquaculture has many problems that legislation should focus on addressing, including harms to aquatic animals, the environment, and consumers.

Aquaculture practices occur in many environments including the middle of the ocean, protected bays, manmade ponds, and indoor facilities. The methods of confining aquatic animals for aquaculture include floating cages, net enclosures, earth ponds, and constant water circulation systems.

Aquaculture can contribute to the decline of wild aquatic animal populations given that many animals are taken from the wild in order to feed the animals in aquaculture facilities. Additionally, aquaculture has many negative impacts on the environment, humans, and wild aquatic animals.

Animal Suffering

Aquatic animals raised in aquaculture suffer in every stage of the process, from breeding, to rearing, to transportation and slaughter. Significant suffering results from overcrowded enclosures, which leads to injuries and disease, the inability to access food, water quality degradation, and psychological stress. The captive animals live in high concentrations of waste and with parasites from which they cannot escape. These animals are also frequently transferred from one enclosure to another causing additional stress and injury. When aquaculture producers deem the animals ready for market, they deprive them of food to ready them for transportation. The aquatic animals then undergo stressful transport and then painful slaughter with no anaesthesia or requirements for a swift, painless, or humane death.

Harms to the Environment and Wild Animal Welfare

Aquaculture results in significant harms to wild aquatic animals and their environment. Fish raised in aquaculture facilities are typically carnivorous, so the aquaculture system feeds them by catching other wild aquatic animals, which further depletes wild populations. Farmed fish are also fed soy, which contributes to deforestation. Aquaculture facilities have also had significant escapements, including hundreds of thousands of animals in single events, into the wild environment. These escaped animals can potentially breed with wild populations and pass along maladaptive traits or diseases. Aquatic animals can also become invasive and outcompete native aquatic animal populations. Aquaculture facilities sometimes kill wildlife (birds, fishes, and marine mammals) who try to enter into net enclosures or feed on the animals there. Aquaculture enclosures have also destroyed vital habitats, such as mangroves, and their accumulation of excrement and feed have contributed to declines in wild aquatic animal populations and the degradation of habitats, affecting many species. Lastly, the use of antimicrobials on fish farms to treat diseases is of significant concern given the adverse impacts of antimicrobials on animal and human health.

Key Considerations

When evaluating, drafting or comparing laws and policies related to the use of antimicrobials, local context, political feasibility and the regulatory environment all influence what one considers “Better Practice.” With that caveat in mind, the following considerations indicate better and worse practices for laws and policies seeking to regulate the aquaculture industry.

1. Animal Welfare Standards

Like all animals, fish have specific needs. At the moment, however, regulations regarding the welfare of aquatic animals, including fish, are almost nonexistent. The very minimal protections afforded to terrestrial farmed animals generally don’t apply to aquatic farmed animals. For example, the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act in the US only applies to cattle, horses, mules, sheep, and swine, and does not include aquatic animals, thus denying them even the minimal protection of a quick and painless death. Similarly, the EU Slaughter Regulation and the EU General Farming Directive exclude fish from most of their provisions. Specifically, the Directive excludes fishes from the requirement of addressing their physiological and ethological needs. This exemption means that aquaculture producers do not have to provide enclosures that allow for free movement or provide medical care to sick or injured animals.

Expanding the care requirements for animals raised in aquaculture should include space requirements and stocking densities in line with best welfare practices, simulation of natural habitats in captivity settings, the ability to engage in natural behaviours, stimulation and habitats designed to allow for positive welfare, and the provision of medical care when needed. Care requirements should also be created based on each species’ unique needs and behaviours, and should include regular checks on physical, behavioural, and environmental indicators of welfare.

A positive example of the existence of fish welfare standards can be found in Norwegian law, which provides minimum space requirements (25kg/m3) for fish in aquaculture – even though such space requirement should be increased to ensure the proper welfare of animals.

2. Environmental Standards

Aquaculture causes significant adverse impacts on the environment throughout the production cycle. For this reason, the law should stringently regulate aquaculture facilities’ impact on the environment, by requiring a licensing system conditional on a positive environmental assessment and which prohibits building aquaculture facilities in locations where the ecosystem is fragile. The legislation should further provide mandatory reporting systems to alert government health officials in case of disease spread in fish.

For example, the Norwegian Aquaculture Act requires aquaculture companies to apply for permits in order for them to operate. In their applications for a permit, companies must detail how their operations will comply with environmental standards. Facilities are not allowed in environmentally protected areas or certain areas of shallow water due to the accumulation of salt and waste that collects in these operations. The Norwegian Aquaculture Act further provides inspections requirements, which allows the government to fine the companies which do not comply the environmental regulations, and even shut down or relocate companies if an inspector concludes a facility is causing detrimental impacts to the land or wild aquatic organisms.

Chile also requires facilities to obtain a permit before engaging in production activities and avoid placement in protected areas, as per the General Fisheries and Aquaculture Law. The government conducts an Environmental Impact Assessment for all placements, which considers the facility’s impacts on human health, soil, water, air, and other human activity.

The General Fisheries and Aquaculture Law further regulates the import of aquatic animals to mitigate the spread of disease to endemic species and the negative environmental impacts if the non-native animals escape into the wild. If disease occur at an aquaculture facility, the Regulation on High Risk Diseases of Living Aquatic Species provides detailed steps to prevent disease from spreading to other facilities and enacts veterinary procedures to stop the outbreak.

The United States also regulates discharges from large aquaculture facilities termed, concentrated aquatic animal production facilities (CAAP). A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems Permit provides the government with the ability to regulate the amount of discharge coming from CAAPs to ensure the safety of water quality. The government may issue fines for permit violations and can even issue civil or criminal litigation if wilful violations occur.

3. Regulation on Antimicrobial Use

Given intensive aquaculture systems’ reliance on antimicrobials to avoid the spread of animal diseases, legislation regulating aquaculture activities should provide specific rules prohibiting the routine use of antibiotics.

Norway ‘s Act Relating to Veterinarians and Other Animal Health Personnel states that a person can only obtain antibiotics for an animal with a veterinarian or aquamedicine biologist’s prescription. If a pharmacy believes that a veterinarian or aquamedicine biologist is abusing their power, the pharmacy is obligated to report the individual.

The EU has also required stricter antibiotic usage for all farmed animals, including animals raised in aquaculture. To receive medicated feed, facilities must have a veterinarian enter the premises for a health inspection of the animals. If a veterinarian deems the request as valid, the veterinarian may write a prescription for the medicated feed.

References

References

Adam Vaughn, Global Demand for Fish Expected to Almost Double by 2050, New Scientist (Sept. 15, 2021).

Conner Bailey & Nhuong Tran, Aquatic CAFOs: Aquaculture and the Future of Seafood Production, in Global Meat Social and Environmental Consequences of the Expanding Meat Industry (Bill Winders & Elizabeth Ransom, eds.) 55 - 74 (2019).

Mark Borthwick, Welfare Issues in Farmed Atlantic Salmon, Fish Welfare Initiative (2020), available online

Simon Funge-Smith and Michael J. Phillips, Aquaculture Systems and Species, FAO (2000).

J.A. Lines & J. Spence, Humane Harvesting and Slaughter of Farmed Fish, Revue Scientifique et Technique (2014).

Kathryn White et al., At a Crossroads: Will Aquaculture Fulfill Its Promise of the Blue Revolution?, SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse (2004).

Sarah Zielinski, Most Fish Turned into Fishmeal Are Species that We Could Be Eating, Sci. News (Feb. 27, 2017).

Brendan F. Wringe et al., Extensive Hybridization Following a Large Escape of Domesticated Atlantic Salmon in the Norwest Atlantic, Communications Biology (2018).

Asian Carp Overview, National Park Services. U.S. Department of Interior (June 24, 2019).

Rebecca J. Goldburg et al., Marine Aquaculture in the United States, PEW Oceans Commission (2021).

Carol Seals Price and James A. Morris, Jr., Marine Cage Culture & The Environment, NOAA (Dec. 2013).

Michael Souza, Problems Inherent to Aquaculture, Treehugger (Aug. 22, 2019).

Dr. Joseph Mercola, Most Toxic Food in the World? Farmed Salmon., Children’s Health Def. (Feb. 2, 2022).

Celia A. Hoga et al., A Review on the Use of Hormones in Fish Farming: Analytical Methods to Determine Their Residues, Journal of Food (2018).

Kathryn White et al., At a Crossroads: Will Aquaculture Fulfill Its Promise of the Blue Revolution?, SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse (2004).

Andy Nelson, Norwegian Salmon Industry Reports Lowest Antibiotic Use Ever, Supermarket Perimeter (Nov. 19, 2021).

Author: Natassia Tuhovak, Animal Law Clinic Intern, Animal Law Clinic, Lewis & Clark Law School

Supervisor: Kathy Hessler