**Response to NOSB Livestock Committee Proposal**

**on Aquaculture Feed**

**Submitted by the Aquaculture Working Group**

**May 4, 2008**

At the recommendation of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB),
and after public notice in the Federal Register, the National Organic
Program (NOP) on May 26, 2005 appointed a 12 member Aquaculture Working
Group (AWG) of an Aquatic Animal Task Force. It was the purpose of AWG
to draft production, handling and labeling standards for organic
aquaculture.

On January 13, 2006 the AWG submitted to NOP an Interim Final
Report.[^1] NOP then sought public comments on this report.[^2] Numerous
public comments were received and posted.[^3] The report was then
officially received by NOSB at the April 17-19, 2006, meeting, and the
NOSB Livestock Committee was asked to develop recommendations for the
full NOSB to consider for transmission to the Secretary of Agriculture.
The AWG report was termed "interim" because AWG continued to work on
draft standards for organic bivalve molluscs.

On September 8, 2006, the Livestock Committee invited further public
comments on issues that emerged during their review of the Interim Final
Report and public comments that had been received earlier.[^4] The
issues for which further public comments were invited concerned:

1.  Species or Production-Method Specific Standards

2.  Impact on the Environment

3.  Differences between Organic and Conventional Aquaculture Standards

4.  Use of Fish Meal and Fish Oil

5.  Sources of Fish Meal and Fish Oil

6.  Slaughter By-products in Aquaculture Feed.

Additional written and oral public comments were received to these
issues. Responses by AWG to these issues were [*Aquatic Animals Task
Force: Aquaculture
Questions*](http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/PublicComments/Oct06/LCAquaticAnimalsTaskForceResponsetoInvitation.pdf)
and [*Aquatic Animals Task Force: Response to Invitation --
Species*](http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/PublicComments/Oct06/LCAquaticAnimalsTaskForceResponsetoInvitationSpecies.pdf)
.

At the March 2007 meeting of NOSB, the text of the AWG Interim Final
Report was approved, with several exceptions and amendments. Appendix A
attached to this document contains the entire recommendations of AWG for
§ 205.252 Aquaculture feed .

Of particularly importance in the context of this present submission by
AWG concerns the parts of the Interim Final Report regarding § 205.252
Aquaculture feed that were withheld at the March 2007 meeting for
further consideration by NOSB. The withheld paragraphs are italicized in
Appendix A.

At the November 2007 NOSB meeting, a full day was devoted to a symposium
on the subjects of fish meal and oil from wild marine resources and on
the allowance for use of net pens. Scientists and advocates of various
positions on these subjects made presentations and were questioned by
NOSB members during panel discussions. Poster reports were invited,
accepted, and reviewed. The symposium provided background information
for the Livestock Committee in development of their present
recommendations.

It is the purpose of this submission to present responses of AWG to the
recent report of the NOSB Livestock Committee Report and Recommendations
of April 4, 2008, and to submit to NOSB for their consideration the
recommendations of the Aquaculture Working Group.

**Withheld Proposed Conditions**

The following paragraphs proposed in the AWG Interim Final Report were
with­­held by NOSB in March 2007 for further consideration:

> \(b\) Fish meal from wild fish used as a feed additive or supplement
> may not exceed 12%
>
> by weight of feed, and fish oil from wild fish used as a feed
> ingredient may not exceed
>
> 12% by weight of feed as averages over the production cycle of the
> fish.
>
> \(c\) Wild fish and wild aquatic animals used for producing fish meal
> and oil for aquaculture may not be certified or labeled as organic for
> human consumption unless allowed elsewhere in this rule. Whole,
> chopped, or minced wild fish that does not qualify in this section may
> not be used as feed.
>
> \(d\) Fish meal or fish oil may not be sourced from any fishery
> classified by relevant
>
> state/provincial, national, or international fisheries authorities as
> follows: "at risk of reduced reproductive capacity;" "suffering
> reduced reproductive capacity;" "harvested outside precautionary
> limits;" "over-exploited;" "depleted;" "overfished;" "overfishing is
>
> occurring;" or any other comparable classification, or at significant
> risk of those conditions within the next recruitment cycle.
>
> \(i\) Fish meal and fish oil from wild fish and other wild aquatic
> animals may be used as
>
> additives and supplements for organic aquaculture or livestock feeds
> as provided in this
>
> section for seven years after the date when organic standards for
> farmed aquatic animals
>
> are promulgated, and must be derived from wild sources that are in
> compliance with (c)
>
> and (d) may be used as supplements and additives under one of the
> following:
>
> \(1\) wild fish, provided that the amount of such wild fish that goes
> into feeding the aquatic animals cannot exceed one pound of wild fish
> product fed for every pound live weight of cultured of aquatic animals
> at harvest; or
>
> \(2\) carcasses, viscera, and trimmings from the processing of wild
> fish and other wild aquatic animals that are destined for human
> consumption. The portions of processed wild fish destined for human
> consumption may not be certified or labeled as organic unless provided
> elsewhere in this rule.

**Aquaculture Working Group Recommendation**

After reviewing the Livestock Committee report, along with discussions
during numerous telephone conference calls with the Livestock Committee,
the Aquaculture Working Group believes that the originally proposed §
205.252 Aquaculture feed contained in our Interim Final Report
represents the most practical approach. It is consistent with the
Organic Food Production Act, established organic principles, and the
need to fully meet the nutritional requirements of aquatic animals.

The AWG believes that what was originally proposed is more practical for
organic aquaculture production and that the Livestock Committee
proposal, as discussed below, has drawbacks.

> **Therefore, the Aquaculture Working Group recommends that the entire
> text of § 205.252 Aquaculture Feed contained in the Interim Final
> Report and copied as Appendix A in this document be retained without
> amendment and passed by NOSB for recommendation to NOP for inclusion
> in the Final Rule.**

**Livestock Committee Minority Position**

An earlier draft proposal by the Livestock Committee included the
following statement that is indicated in their report as a Minority
Position:

> "Fish meal and fish oil from wild caught fish and other wild aquatic
> animals produced from sustainable food grade fisheries or
> sustainably-managed forage fisheries could be allowed in the following
> step-wise levels: no more that 12% each during year 1 through 5 after
> this regulation is implemented, no more than 6% each during year 6
> through 8, and no more than 3% each during year 9 through year 10,
> with the percentages being on average, over the production cycle of
> the aquatic animals life."

If NOSB does not concur with our recommendation above and favors the
minority position, AWG proposes that paragraph (b) from the AWG Interim
Report be amended to read:

> \(b\) Fish meal and fish oil from wild caught fish and other wild
> aquatic animals produced from sustainable food grade fisheries or
> sustainably-managed forage fisheries are allowed in the following
> step-wise levels: a maximum of 12% each during year 1 through 5 after
> this regulation is implemented, a maximum of 6% each during year 6
> through 8, and a maximum of 3% each during year 9 through year 10,
> with the percentages by weight of feed being averages over the
> production cycle of the fish.

**Livestock Committee Report and Proposal**

The Aquaculture Working Group appreciates the Livestock Committee's
concerted efforts to consider the AWG recommendations, including the
policy issues concerning our proposed transition period for use of fish
meal and fish oil from wild caught fish. We also appreciate the
recognition by the Livestock Committee in the preamble to their report
that:

> • "Aquatic species are considered livestock (7USC6502, sec 2103).
> Organic systems should promote the natural behaviors of livestock \[*§
> 205.239* (a)\]. Many aquatic species require a piscivorous diet to
> maintain health and this should be the goal of the nutrition provided
> for such organically managed aquatic animals \[*§205.238*(a)(2)\]."
>
> And, that "fish feed derived from terrestrial animal or plant sources,
> or fresh water fish are not considered an acceptable alternative for a
> variety of reasons to marine-based fish." (Although the AWG accepts
> inclusion of some terrestrial and freshwater feed ingredients as part
> of compound feeds.)

Also, that:

> • "While some species of aquatic animals may appear to thrive on
> terrestrial plant sources of feed, the specific composition of the
> nutritional needs of aquatic animals is not completely understood and
> there is a risk of undermining the health and well-being of aquatic
> animals which would be inhumane to the animals and potentially
> economically unsustainable for the industry. This path would in all
> likelihood also result in a greater need for supplementation with
> synthetic amino acids."

However, after careful consideration of the Livestock Committee
proposal, AWG objects to the inclusion of the italicized sentence:

> \(a\) Feeds and feeding practices must meet the minimum nutritional
> requirements of the aquatic animal. *Fish meal and oil from carcasses,
> viscera, and trimmings from the processing of foreign certified
> organic farmed aquatic animals will be considered organic for use in
> fish feed only.*

AWG objections to this provision arise from several considerations. Many
foreign certification standards, such as those of Naturland and the
British Soil Association, allow the use of antibiotics and other
substances prohibited under the Act and organic principles in this
country, and are specifically prohibited under the aquaculture standards
proposed by AWG that have been passed by NOSB.

The AWG believes the language of the Act is plainly written:

> 6505 COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS.
>
> \(b\) Imported Products. Imported agricultural products may be sold or
> labeled as organically produced if the Secretary determines that such
> products have been produced and handled under an organic certification
> program that provides safeguards and guidelines governing the
> production and handling of such products that are at least equivalent
> to the requirements of this chapter.

AWG suggests that many foreign aquaculture standards do not meet the
test of "at least equivalent to the requirements of this chapter." We
also suggest that there could be new significant administrative burdens
placed upon the Secretary under this provision.

Without the transition period in the AWG recommendation, we have major
concerns about the availability of sufficient quantities of fishmeal and
fish oil to support the emergence of many organic aquaculture sectors
should this provision be adopted.

For example, while fishmeal and oil from organically farmed trout may
someday be available, it cannot be use to feed other farmed trout under
proposed standards. Organic tilapia production may produce small amounts
of oil, but probably not enough to provide for the emergence of a viable
organic farmed trout, striped bass, or salmon industry.

Although algal oils have been tested successfully for shrimp production,
the feasibility of fish oil substitutes produced from organically
produced algae remains uncertain for many finfish. Issues include
commercial availability of adequate quantities of certified algal meal,
and whether feeds with algae oil will be as palatable as those with fish
oils. It is also possible that other components in natural fish oil are
essential for the growth and health of salmon and other fish that are
not available in oil producing algae. Natural fish oil may impart
important taste qualities that may be unavailable in algae meal.

Further advances in nutritional science for a wide range of aquatic
animals either now in farmed production, or that are future candidates,
are necessary before fish oil replacement with algal meal can be
determined to be practical for a wide range of species. Therefore, to
allow for the development of new science and technology, we strongly
support a transition period during which some fish oil and fish meal
from wild sources is allowed, as in the AWG's recommendation..

**Conclusions and Recommendations**

The Aquaculture Working Group, after careful study of the Livestock
Committee majority and minority reports, proposes that our original
language on aquaculture feed be adopted by NOSB and recommended to NOP
for inclusion in the Final Rule. We believe that the Livestock Committee
proposal to allow the inclusion of fish meal and oil produced under
foreign organic certification programs is risky and may not be practical
if the Secretary must issue a determination about the equivalence of
each foreign program.

The Aquaculture Working Group further believes that NOSB and NOP have
gathered much important scientific information, made thorough and
diligent reviews of the many issues involved with the use of fish meal
and oil from wild marine resources, and have carefully considered many
possible alternatives. AWG suggests that now is the time to move ahead
with rulemaking. Since early 2006 there have been numerous opportunities
for public comments and other material input and numerous public
comments have been received and carefully considered.

We request that NOSB adopt our proposal (copied as Appendix A) without
amendment and that NOP move expeditiously into rulemaking for a
transition period allowing inclusion of fish meal and oil in aquaculture
feeds, as well as rulemaking for the aquaculture recommendations of NOSB
that were passed at the March 2007 NOSB meeting.

The AWG is appreciative of the full consideration that the NOSB and the
Livestock Committee have given to aquaculture standards over the past
three years. We look forward to the next steps to make organic
aquaculture a reality with the USDA organic label in the United States.

Respectfully submitted;

Aquaculture Working Group of the Aquatic Animals Task Force

> Sebastian Belle
>
> Robert A. Bullis, DVM
>
> Ralph Elston, PhD
>
> Rebecca Goldburg, PhD
>
> Ronald H. Hardy, PhD
>
> John A. Hargreaves, PhD
>
> George S. Lockwood, Chair
>
> Robert A. Mayo
>
> Christopher L. Nelson
>
> Bart Reid
>
> Albert G.J. Tacon, PhD
>
> Kwamena K. Quagrainie, PhD

**Appendix A**

> **§ 205.252 Number range CHAPTERAquaculture feed*.***
>
> \(a\) Feeds and feeding practices must meet the minimum nutritional
> requirements of the aquatic animal. However, fish meal and fish oil
> produced from wild fish and other wild aquatic animals that do not
> qualify as provided in this section cannot be used in organic
> production of aquatic animals.
>
> *(b) Fish meal from wild fish used as a feed additive or supplement
> may not exceed 12% by weight of feed, and fish oil from wild fish used
> as a feed ingredient may not exceed 12% by weight of feed as averages
> over the production cycle of the fish.*
>
> *(c) Wild fish and wild aquatic animals used for producing fish meal
> and oil for aquaculture may not be certified or labeled as organic for
> human consumption unless allowed elsewhere in this rule. Whole,
> chopped, or minced wild fish that does not qualify in this section may
> not be used as feed.*
>
> *(d) Fish meal or fish oil may not be sourced from any fishery
> classified by relevant state/provincial, national, or international
> fisheries authorities as follows: "at risk of reduced reproductive
> capacity;" "suffering reduced reproductive capacity;" "harvested
> outside precautionary limits;" "over-exploited;" "depleted;"
> "overfished;" "overfishing is occurring;" or any other comparable
> classification, or at significant risk of those conditions within the
> next recruitment cycle.*
>
> \(e\) Use of fish meal and fish oil and minimize the environmental
> impact of released nutrients on receiving waters and adjoining
> ecosystems as documented in the Organic System Plan.
>
> \(f\) Aquatic animals must be provided with their natural foods
> consistent with the need to optimize health and growth of the aquatic
> animal. This includes live foods and the sources of ingredients in
> formulated feeds as allowed in the rule.
>
> \(g\) Feeds for aquaculture products for human consumption may not
> contain lipids from sources other than fish oil or omega-3 fatty acids
> produced by organic microorganisms or plants, except that other lipids
> from organic sources may be provided in feeds for aquatic animals that
> have a specific dietary requirements for such ingredients to the
> extent necessary to meet the minimum requirement for that lipid in
> that aquatic animal.
>
> \(h\) Aquaculture feeds must be composed of feed ingredients that are
> certified organic, except that nonsynthetic substances and synthetic
> substances allowed under § 205.603 may be used as feed additives and
> supplements.
>
> *(i) Fish meal and fish oil from wild fish and other wild aquatic
> animals may be used as additives and supplements for organic
> aquaculture or livestock feeds as provided in this section for seven
> years after the date when organic standards for farmed aquatic animals
> are promulgated, and must be derived from wild sources that are in
> compliance with (c) and (d) may be used as supplements and additives
> under one of the following:*
>
> *(1) wild fish, provided that the amount of such wild fish that goes
> into feeding the aquatic animals cannot exceed one pound of wild fish
> product fed for every pound live weight of cultured of aquatic animals
> at harvest; or*
>
> *(2) carcasses, viscera, and trimmings from the processing of wild
> fish and other wild aquatic animals that are destined for human
> consumption. The portions of processed wild fish destined for human
> consumption may not be certified or labeled as organic unless provided
> elsewhere in this rule.*
>
> \(j\) Aquaculture feeds may include fish meal and fish oil derived
> from organically raised aquatic animals or algae without limitation
> according to an Organic System Plan, providing the meal and oil is
> produced from aquatic animals of a different genus than the aquatic
> animal being fed.
>
> \(k\) Silage and lipids produced from organic fish that is
> enzyme-processed, or produced with acids and bases that are
> organically certified or approved in § 205.605 for fish emulsion or
> other purposes, may be certified organic and incorporated into organic
> aquaculture feeds without limitation.
>
> \(l\) Organic aquaculture feeds may include meals and oils containing
> essential fatty acids produced by processes allowed in organic
> production.
>
> \(m\) For fish meal and fish oil from wild fish used in organic feeds,
> levels of unavoidable residual environmental contaminants, including
> persistent bioaccumulative toxins (PBTs) and mercury, cadmium, lead,
> arsenic and tin must be less than or equal to the lowest levels found
> in commercially available fish meal and fish oil, provided, however,
> that the comparable products are classes of fish meal and fish oil
> allowed in this section, and do not include those produced with
> volatile organic solvents not allowed under § 205.603. Fish oil must
> be treated with activated carbon, which may include synthetic
> activated carbon, or any process using water as a solvent, for removal
> of contaminants.
>
> \(n\) Nutritional pigment compounds that have been produced and
> handled in accordance with organic requirements and allowed by the
> U.S. Food and Drug Administration for inclusion in aquaculture feeds
> may be used.
>
> \(o\) Manure from organic terrestrial animals that is composted in
> compliance with § 205.203 may be used to fertilize aquaculture ponds
> in an organic production system. Composted manure must not be applied
> within 30 days of harvest of aquatic products for human consumption.
> Manure, whether composted or not, shall not be applied to aquaculture
> production systems other than ponds.
>
> \(p\) The producer of organic aquatic animals shall not:

(1) incorporate or introduce any type of antibiotic or hormone in feeds,
    the water supply, or the environment;

(2) provide feed supplements or additives in amounts above those needed
    for adequate nutrition and health maintenance of the species at its
    specific stage of life;

(3) feed by-products from mammalian or poultry slaughter;

(4) use feedstuffs extracted with synthetic solvents not approved on the
    National List;

(5) use feed, feed additives, and feed supplements in violation of the
    U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; or

(6) use any genetically modified organism, or any organism produced by
    any other excluded method provided in § 205.2 Terms defined, or
    product thereof, as a feed ingredient.

\[Those paragraphs withheld by NOSB for further consideration are
italicized.\]

[^1]: <http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/TaskForces/AATFInterimFinalReport.pdf>

[^2]: <http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/TaskForces/AATFInterimaFinalReportPubComnt.pdf>

[^3]: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/PublicComments/AqaucultureWorkingGroupInterim/PublicCommentsAquaWGInterim.html

[^4]: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/lscommRMR/recommendations/Oct06MeetingRecs/LC-FNLInvitationAWG090806.pdf