|
The Changing
Shape of US Farm-Raised Catfish
By Adam Anson
With financial pressure mounting from all directions, how the US catfish
industry might wriggle free from this dangerous predicament is under
intense debate. Adam Anson, writing for TheFishSite, reports.
Over the course of the 20th century the humble
farm-raised catfish has risen to become a much loved staple food for many US
consumers. Providing a cheaper alternative to other fish, catfish became
popular for its mild and slightly sweet flavour, its nutritious content and
its environmental credentials.
Having been first commercially produced in the 1960's,
the US catfish industry saw rapid expansion in both the 1980's and 1990's.
Production and processing industries flourished in four main states:
Mississippi, Alabama; Louisiana and Arkansas; and the industry soon
established itself as the largest of all US aquaculture industries - today
accounting for nearly half of all annual aquaculture sales.
By the year 2001, catfish farms covered 113,000 acres of land in Mississippi
alone, by 2003 the industry reached annual sales of 660 million pounds to a
value of US$425 million. It is believed that the industry created a
positive economic impact in Mississippi totalling billions of dollars and is
the primary source of economic activity and employment in a number of
Mississippi counties.
However, since those peak days the industry has been steadily declining. By
July 2009, the number of acres used for catfish farming had fallen to
70,000. The reasons for this collapse are complex and numerous. On the one
hand it can be said that an unfortunate series of events conspired against
the industry, but on the other it may be argued that the industry was not
well enough prepared for challenges that could have been preempted.
Catfish prices bottomed out in 2007 at 64 cents a pound, but by the 2nd
quarter of 2008, according to USDA figures, they had leapt back up to 83
cents per pound. Unfortunately, just as hope had arrived the economic
recession hit the industry with further woe. By June 2009 prices were back
down to 76 cents per pound. Furthermore, demand had suffered in the wake of
money-conscious consumption. In late 2008/2009 production had fallen by 5-10
per cent.
There was no profit for catfish farmers in 2008 and many say that, under
current conditions, there is no possibility of profit in the future.
The Inside/Out On Industry Issues
Whilst the industry has suffered within itself - due to
poor harvests, flooding and high energy prices - the main factors of its
downfall have come from external competing forces. One such force has come
from the rapidly expanding US biofuels industry, or to be more precise, the
production of ethanol. Ethanol has raised the demand for crops such as corn
which has in turn increased the value of many animal feeds. This has led to
the price of corn and soybeans, which comprise a large and essential
quantity of catfish diets, to rise.
Three years ago the value of one tonne of catfish feed
was $240, today it stands at $350. The increased cost of production cannot
be so easily passed off to the consumer due to competing catfish imports
from foreign countries which already out compete US catfish on the market.
The Chinese catfish industry poses such a threat in these times due to the
low production costs of its catfish, brought about by cheap labour,
favourable currency conditions and governmental support. However, many US
producers say that the Chinese product lacks food safety integrity. The US
Food and Drugs Administration has rejected dozens of tonnes of tainted fish,
because they have detected antibiotic residues which are banned in the US.
A similar predicament has arisen from Viet Nam, which also steals a greater
share of the US catfish market each year. Complaints against the Vietnamese
imports have been wide-ranging, but safety concerns mainly boil down to the
fact that Vietnamese catfish are reared in cages down the Mekong Delta. An
area of land so submerged in water that animal excrement, factory pollution
and farm runoffs inevitably contaminate the environment in which the catfish
is produced.
Proponents of US fish argue that the conditions which their domestic fish
are reared in are bound by stricter production standards. The Catfish
Institute says: "US Farm-Raised Catfish is raised in environmentally
controlled, clay-based ponds, filled with fresh water pumped from
underground wells and filtered by alluvial aquifers." It also adds that they
are not given any added hormones. "Under normal growing conditions, US
Farm-Raised Catfish is antibiotic-free; only in rare instances when
medication is required to treat an illness is US Farm-Raised Catfish treated
with a necessary dose of antibiotics."
In light of these differences, US catfish farmers say that market conditions
are unfairly against them.
A Catfish by Any Other Name Would Taste Just as Sweet
In order to ensure that the US catfish remains above and
beyond foreign catfish by nutrition, taste and safety standards the industry
has attempted to separate it from its rivals. This has led to some
intriguing results. Many Southern US states are now required to say where
the fish that they sell is grown. More recently, Roger Barlow, president of
the Catfish Institute in Mississippi said that US catfish will be called
Delecata, to emphasise their quality. The Delecata (catfish) will also be a
grade-A filleted piece of fish says Mr Barlow.
The US tried this trick the other way round when in 2002, after years of
arguing, they pushed through a labelling law which forced Vietnamese fish to
be sold under new names such as tra, basa and pangasius, claiming that the
Vietnamese product was not actually a catfish at all. Further trade
disruptions came in 2003 when the US won an antidumping law against
Vietnamese fish sold in the US. This authorised the US to put tariffs on up
to 64 per cent of Vietnamese fish. Yet still, Vietnamese catfish pose an
evermore serious threat to the domestic industry.
Today, almost a third of the Mississippi regions catfish growers have packed
up their businesses believing that in these tough market conditions there is
no hope for the industry, but a new labelling law may soon change all that.
Recent reports have said that Tom Vilsack, Secretary of United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA), is debating whether to change the name of
the Vietnamese basa, tra and pangasius back to catfish so that they can be
pushed through stricter food safety initiatives.
It is believed that some politicians are struggling to move the catfish
inspection programme from the National Fisheries Service to the USDA. This
would subject catfish to the same stringent requirements that the US has on
meat and poultry. In effect, it would could block Vietnamese imports for
many years to come. However, of all fish only catfish has been singled out
for this change.
In response to this proposal, eight senators are believed to have recently
voiced their opposition in fear that such a move could lead to trade wars
with Vietnam. The Vietnamese catfish industry is struggling itself due to
internal management and marketing issues. Such a move could spell disaster
for the industry and the Vietnamese may not take the decision lightly. The
eight senators believe that if the US were to impose restrictions on
Vietnamese catfish, then the Vietnamese would respond by imposing trade
restrictions on US beef exports.
August 2009
http://www.thefishsite.com
|