Eating habits encouraging, fish supply a huge problem 

Senior Biologist and Certified Fisheries Professional
Fisheries Technology Associates, Inc.

A recent article in Fish Farming News about America’s eating habits gives us reason to celebrate. According to the article, on average each and every Americans now consumes 16.3 pounds of fisheries products per year. That’s a new record and a healthy 1-year increase of nearly 3/4 of a pound. This per capita consumption is much smaller than in many other parts of the world (per capita consumption exceeds 100 pounds per year in some Asian nations). But considering Americans’ long-time love affair with beef, this confirms to me that they are getting the message about the health benefits of fish.

From our perspective as aquaculturists, even more impressive than the increase in consumption per person is the overall absolute increase. Not only are we eating more per person, but our population is expanding relatively rapidly. No doubt immigration, in particular by people with a higher predisposition to eat fish, is playing a big part in the increase per capita and in total consumption. It’s a double-edged sword, with both edges cutting in our favor.

Now the bad news. Imported fish and seafood satisfy fully 78 percent of our total consumption. The domestic fishing fleet and domestic aquaculture only account for 22 percent of the total. As you may have read from me in the past, the volume and value of these imports are growing and are second only to petroleum. These facts never cease to stagger me!

Domestic aquaculture development faces a key turning point. We have all felt the "brick wall" that we often work against here in the U.S. We also understand that the vast majority of resistance to aquaculture development is unwarranted and unwise. In essence, we are watching a monumental financial and economic opportunity—an opportunity to create jobs and reduce our enormous trade deficit—slip through our fingers.

Economist and Nobel prize-winner Peter Drucker recently stated, "Aquaculture, not the Internet, represents the most promising investment opportunity of the 21st century." I admit to being easily persuaded by his comment, but I see no evidence to the contrary. Why should the lion’s share of aquaculture’s investment and economic benefits fall to foreign producers while our sole benefit is consumption? The arguments that we proceed with domestic aquaculture development at the expense of our environment are patently untrue. Indeed, aquaculture often can be an environmental enhancement!

We have two avenues open to us as proponents and developers of aquaculture: land-based systems and marine systems. I have no doubt that the numbers of land-based systems will continue to grow as technology improves and we focus more on integrating aquaculture with other existing commercial activities (e.g., utilizing waste heat) or agricultural activities (e.g., production of valuable plants in fields or greenhouses). Integrated approaches conserve water, heat, nutrients, and other resources, and redefine "wastes" as valuable potential raw materials. It’s these and other so-called sustainable methods that will move us into the future.

The future of marine-based systems, however, is in question. Dr. Michael Rubino, the new National Aquaculture Coordinator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), made the case quite well: "The people at NOAA working on aquaculture feel that there is the opportunity of a generation to make a difference. We’re not using the open ocean (for aquaculture), but other nations will…If it’s not done here, it will be done elsewhere and we’ll import most of our seafood…The expansion of marine aquaculture won’t happen without support (from the industry) and a constituency that produces a good product and shows it can be done sustainably."

The message to us from Dr. Rubino is clear. Without our help, marine aquaculture will not develop. Our help can come in many forms—political pressure, technical innovation, public relations campaigns, and other activities that require our input, both collectively and individually.

With the elections behind us as well as the accompanying pre-election decision-making paralysis, this is the perfect opportunity for legislators to make what in their eyes might be the "tough choices." Congress and the federal government must pave the way for us with reasonable and restrained regulations, and create an atmosphere that allows us to flourish. Let’s make it our mission to ease their burden and show them that aquaculture development, including marine-based development, is really a "no-brainer" and in everyone’s best interest.

Aquaculture is not the Great Satan it’s touted by some to be. Far from it, and with agreement by thoughtful people who know such as Peter Drucker and Michael Rubino, aquaculture is the opportunity of a lifetime.