WASHINGTON, June 30, 2010 - Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that disaster assistance will be issued starting today to livestock, honeybee and farm-raised fish producers that suffered losses in 2008 because of disease, adverse weather or other conditions. The aid will come from the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP).
“American farmers, ranchers and producers should have protection from market disruptions and disasters,” Vilsack said. “The assistance announced today will be particularly helpful to beekeepers whose bees suffered from Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) and will also assist other producers facing economic challenges.”
More than $10 million in disaster assistance, including more than $6 million to compensate beekeepers for 2008 losses will be issued starting today, June 30. Under the program, producers are compensated for losses that are not covered under other Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance Payment programs established by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, specifically Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP), Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP), and Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments (SURE) Program. ELAP benefits related to 2009 losses are expected to be issued later this summer.
ELAP eligibility provisions have been amended for both honeybee and farm-raised fish producers. The modifications include allowing honeybee and farm-raised fish producers who did not replace their honeybees or fish that were lost due to a natural disaster to be eligible for ELAP payments based on the fair market value of the honeybees or fish that were lost. For more information about USDA Farm Service Agency disaster assistance programs, please visit your FSA county office or http://www.fsa.usda.gov/elap
Friday, July 9, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
More about Foreign Fish
This is most likely the shortest blog in history. I don't have anything to say except I hope you can stomach this and be sure to tell all of your friends and relatives about this.
Check out this web site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0F8x4i5GYE&feature=related
Check out this web site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0F8x4i5GYE&feature=related
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Food Safety Rules to Emege from Fight Over Imported Catfish
By Kimberly Kindy
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The whiskered, bottom-feeding catfish is one of the lowliest creatures on Earth. But for months, catfish have been at the center of an intense Washington lobbying effort pitting domestic producers against importers.
At issue is how catfish will be regulated and whether Vietnamese imports pose a health risk to American consumers. U.S. catfish producers used a multimillion-dollar lobbying effort to persuade Congress in 2008 to tighten regulation of the single species of fish, a program expected to incur $5 million to $16 million in start-up costs with its launch next year.
The battle has sparked threats of a trade war from Vietnam, which wants its fish excluded from the regulations. The Vietnamese ambassador to the United States, Le Cong Phung, has called Congress hypocritical for changing the rules on catfish to give an advantage to domestic producers.
Under the farm bill passed in 2008, catfish inspections are moving to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which has spent 18 months crafting regulations. The rules, which are still secret, might be approved by the Office of Management and Budget as early as Tuesday. All other fish remain under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration.
Domestic catfish producers argue that tougher regulation -- which would increase onsite inspections and testing -- would force foreign producers to adhere to safety standards more in line with those that domestic producers must follow.
"We are just looking to be on the same playing field," said Joey Lowery, president of the Mississippi-based Catfish Farmers of America.
But some aquaculture experts have jeered at the wrangling.
"It's laughable. Why single catfish out? No one is eating raw catfish sushi. This is a very, very low-risk product," said Byron Truglio, a retired consumer safety officer with the FDA's Division of Seafood Safety, who advised the USDA on its inspection program.
The catfish wars have been brewing since 2002, when Congress passed a farm bill barring Vietnamese fish farmers from labeling their fish as catfish. The Vietnamese fish is from the genus Pangasius; the law mandated that only fish in the Ictaluridae family, which is produced in the United States and is commonly called channel catfish, could bear the catfish label. The two fish have a similar taste.
"That fish and ours are as close taxonomically as a house cat and a cow," said Henry Gantz, former president of the Catfish Institute, a trade group representing domestic producers.
By 2008, when another farm bill made its way through Congress, Americans were eating slightly less domestically produced catfish than they had in 2002. But consumption of Pangasius -- which is typically called basa at fish markets -- had skyrocketed. Price was a factor. Wholesale, basa sells for $1.75 to $2 per pound, while channel catfish goes for a dollar more.
Domestic trade groups tried a new tactic. They argued that a more rigorous catfish inspection program was needed to improve foreign farming practices, especially in Vietnam. Though they had fought in 2002 to bar Pangasius from bearing the catfish label, by 2008 they did an about-face, calling it "imported catfish" that should be included in the USDA program.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R), whose home state of Mississippi is the nation's catfish capital, led the charge, helping to insert bill language that called for the USDA to include catfish and "amenable species." Cochran also provided a $16 million earmark.
The domestic producers cited food-safety concerns. The FDA has found banned pesticides and antibiotics in some catfish imported from Vietnam, but no deaths have been linked to imported catfish. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show that fish in general account for 3 percent of the nation's salmonella-related deaths.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who has faced intense pressure from all sides, has been charged with sorting out the issues. Vilsack declined to answer questions posed by The Washington Post. (USDA officials said that because the department is still developing the program, details are confidential.)
A draft copy of the rules obtained by The Post shows that the USDA decided that Vietnamese fish should be included in the new program, a move likely to generate fierce opposition from importers.
The draft also states that the catfish regulatory program would save an estimated 36 lives annually from salmonella-related deaths. The safety claims -- which are not supported by CDC data -- were ratcheted down in later drafts, according to sources familiar with the rulemaking work.
USDA officials would not say whether the safety claims are in the final version they submitted to the Office of Management and Budget.
If the rules are posted as expected this month, foreign catfish producers predicted fireworks.
"The industry is going to speak loudly," said Gavin Gibbons, spokesman for the National Fisheries Institute, which represents foreign producers. "We will highlight some of the absurdities that account for this broad definition of catfish and the lobbying effort that was behind it."
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The whiskered, bottom-feeding catfish is one of the lowliest creatures on Earth. But for months, catfish have been at the center of an intense Washington lobbying effort pitting domestic producers against importers.
At issue is how catfish will be regulated and whether Vietnamese imports pose a health risk to American consumers. U.S. catfish producers used a multimillion-dollar lobbying effort to persuade Congress in 2008 to tighten regulation of the single species of fish, a program expected to incur $5 million to $16 million in start-up costs with its launch next year.
The battle has sparked threats of a trade war from Vietnam, which wants its fish excluded from the regulations. The Vietnamese ambassador to the United States, Le Cong Phung, has called Congress hypocritical for changing the rules on catfish to give an advantage to domestic producers.
Under the farm bill passed in 2008, catfish inspections are moving to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which has spent 18 months crafting regulations. The rules, which are still secret, might be approved by the Office of Management and Budget as early as Tuesday. All other fish remain under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration.
Domestic catfish producers argue that tougher regulation -- which would increase onsite inspections and testing -- would force foreign producers to adhere to safety standards more in line with those that domestic producers must follow.
"We are just looking to be on the same playing field," said Joey Lowery, president of the Mississippi-based Catfish Farmers of America.
But some aquaculture experts have jeered at the wrangling.
"It's laughable. Why single catfish out? No one is eating raw catfish sushi. This is a very, very low-risk product," said Byron Truglio, a retired consumer safety officer with the FDA's Division of Seafood Safety, who advised the USDA on its inspection program.
The catfish wars have been brewing since 2002, when Congress passed a farm bill barring Vietnamese fish farmers from labeling their fish as catfish. The Vietnamese fish is from the genus Pangasius; the law mandated that only fish in the Ictaluridae family, which is produced in the United States and is commonly called channel catfish, could bear the catfish label. The two fish have a similar taste.
"That fish and ours are as close taxonomically as a house cat and a cow," said Henry Gantz, former president of the Catfish Institute, a trade group representing domestic producers.
By 2008, when another farm bill made its way through Congress, Americans were eating slightly less domestically produced catfish than they had in 2002. But consumption of Pangasius -- which is typically called basa at fish markets -- had skyrocketed. Price was a factor. Wholesale, basa sells for $1.75 to $2 per pound, while channel catfish goes for a dollar more.
Domestic trade groups tried a new tactic. They argued that a more rigorous catfish inspection program was needed to improve foreign farming practices, especially in Vietnam. Though they had fought in 2002 to bar Pangasius from bearing the catfish label, by 2008 they did an about-face, calling it "imported catfish" that should be included in the USDA program.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R), whose home state of Mississippi is the nation's catfish capital, led the charge, helping to insert bill language that called for the USDA to include catfish and "amenable species." Cochran also provided a $16 million earmark.
The domestic producers cited food-safety concerns. The FDA has found banned pesticides and antibiotics in some catfish imported from Vietnam, but no deaths have been linked to imported catfish. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show that fish in general account for 3 percent of the nation's salmonella-related deaths.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who has faced intense pressure from all sides, has been charged with sorting out the issues. Vilsack declined to answer questions posed by The Washington Post. (USDA officials said that because the department is still developing the program, details are confidential.)
A draft copy of the rules obtained by The Post shows that the USDA decided that Vietnamese fish should be included in the new program, a move likely to generate fierce opposition from importers.
The draft also states that the catfish regulatory program would save an estimated 36 lives annually from salmonella-related deaths. The safety claims -- which are not supported by CDC data -- were ratcheted down in later drafts, according to sources familiar with the rulemaking work.
USDA officials would not say whether the safety claims are in the final version they submitted to the Office of Management and Budget.
If the rules are posted as expected this month, foreign catfish producers predicted fireworks.
"The industry is going to speak loudly," said Gavin Gibbons, spokesman for the National Fisheries Institute, which represents foreign producers. "We will highlight some of the absurdities that account for this broad definition of catfish and the lobbying effort that was behind it."
Friday, February 12, 2010
New Jobs Bills
Bipartisanship fleeting as jobs bill proposed
Democrats pare version forged with the GOP
Globe Wire Services / February 12, 2010
The jobs proposal
What’s in
▸Hiring tax credits - Exempts businesses hiring unemployed workers in 2010 from the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for those hires and provides an additional $1,000 tax credit for workers retained for a full year. Cost: $13 billion.
▸Highway programs - Reauthorizes the highway trust fund to use gasoline taxes to help state and local governments pay for highway and transit projects. Deposits an additional $20 billion into the trust fund.
▸Equipment write-offs - Permits businesses to write off equipment purchases as a business expense.
▸Build America Bonds - Expands the Build America Bonds program, subsidizing interest costs for bonds issued by states and local governments for large infrastructure projects. Cost: $2 billion.
What’s out
▸Tax extenders - Extending through 2010 a variety of popular tax breaks that expired at the end of 2009, including a deduction for sales and property taxes and a business tax credit for research and development.
Cost: $31 billion.
▸Unemployment assistance - Extending through May 31 assistance for the long-term jobless and a 65 percent health insurance subsidy. Cost: $3 billion.
▸Medicare payments - Giving doctors a seven-month reprieve from a 21 percent cut in Medicare payments that would otherwise go into effect March 1. Extends other Medicare provisions. Cost: $10 billion.
▸Patriot Act - Extending for a year several provisions of the Patriot Act.
▸Farm aid - Help for farmers affected by heavy rains, floods, and other weather-related disasters.
Cost: about $1.5 billion.
The rapprochement lasted about four hours.
By evening, Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada had a new bill and a renewed message. Instead of supporting a plan that some said was bloated with special interest money, Democratic leaders proposed a stripped-down version they contended was strictly focused on the number one priority for Americans: jobs.
Gone were provisions sought by several industries, including health care and biofuel, and supported by senators from both sides of the aisle.
Gone, too, was a spirit of bipartisanship. Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa and Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, had earlier hailed the original draft as an essential two-party effort to respond to a troubled economy. “We believe they reflect a balanced set of member views and priorities,’’ the two senators said in a joint statement, which warned colleagues not to significantly alter the plan if they wanted bipartisan support.
The White House added, “The president is gratified to see the Senate moving forward in a bipartisan manner on steps to help put Americans back to work.’’
Yet, stung by criticism of several of the draft’s proposals, Democratic leaders balked. Their latest bill keeps several popular provisions, including a new tax break negotiated with Republicans for companies that hire unemployed workers and for small businesses that purchase new equipment. The bill also would renew highway programs and help states and local governments finance large infrastructure projects.
The bipartisan agreement is off. But Democrats said they now have a package focused solely on creating jobs, and they’re all but daring Republicans to vote against it.
“Our side isn’t sure that the Republicans are real interested in developing good policy and to move forward together,’’ said Senator Thomas Carper, Democrat of Delaware.
Said Reid: “Republicans are going to have to make a choice. I don’t know in logic what they could say to oppose this.’’
The original, bigger bill got a decidedly mixed reception at a raucous luncheon meeting of Democrats, many of whom were uncomfortable with supporting a measure containing so many provisions unrelated to creating jobs, including loans for chicken producers and aid to catfish farmers.
The centerpiece of Reid’s new bill is a $13 billion payroll tax credit for companies that hire unemployed workers. The idea, by Senators Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, would exempt businesses hiring unemployed workers this year from the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for those hires.
It also would provide an additional $1,000 tax credit for workers retained for a full year and deposit an additional $20 billion into the federal highway trust fund - money that would have to be borrowed. There’s also $2 billion to subsidize bond issues by state and local governments for large infrastructure projects.
But Republicans are irate at the strong-arm tactics and said Reid had gone back on a deal reached with some of the Senate’s heaviest hitters, including minority leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
“Needless to say, Senator Hatch is deeply disappointed that the majority leader has abandoned a genuine bipartisan compromise only hours after it was unveiled in favor of business-as-usual partisan gamesmanship,’’ said Antonia Ferrier, Hatch spokeswoman.
Democrats pare version forged with the GOP
Globe Wire Services / February 12, 2010
The jobs proposal
What’s in
▸Hiring tax credits - Exempts businesses hiring unemployed workers in 2010 from the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for those hires and provides an additional $1,000 tax credit for workers retained for a full year. Cost: $13 billion.
▸Highway programs - Reauthorizes the highway trust fund to use gasoline taxes to help state and local governments pay for highway and transit projects. Deposits an additional $20 billion into the trust fund.
▸Equipment write-offs - Permits businesses to write off equipment purchases as a business expense.
▸Build America Bonds - Expands the Build America Bonds program, subsidizing interest costs for bonds issued by states and local governments for large infrastructure projects. Cost: $2 billion.
What’s out
▸Tax extenders - Extending through 2010 a variety of popular tax breaks that expired at the end of 2009, including a deduction for sales and property taxes and a business tax credit for research and development.
Cost: $31 billion.
▸Unemployment assistance - Extending through May 31 assistance for the long-term jobless and a 65 percent health insurance subsidy. Cost: $3 billion.
▸Medicare payments - Giving doctors a seven-month reprieve from a 21 percent cut in Medicare payments that would otherwise go into effect March 1. Extends other Medicare provisions. Cost: $10 billion.
▸Patriot Act - Extending for a year several provisions of the Patriot Act.
▸Farm aid - Help for farmers affected by heavy rains, floods, and other weather-related disasters.
Cost: about $1.5 billion.
The rapprochement lasted about four hours.
By evening, Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada had a new bill and a renewed message. Instead of supporting a plan that some said was bloated with special interest money, Democratic leaders proposed a stripped-down version they contended was strictly focused on the number one priority for Americans: jobs.
Gone were provisions sought by several industries, including health care and biofuel, and supported by senators from both sides of the aisle.
Gone, too, was a spirit of bipartisanship. Senator Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa and Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, had earlier hailed the original draft as an essential two-party effort to respond to a troubled economy. “We believe they reflect a balanced set of member views and priorities,’’ the two senators said in a joint statement, which warned colleagues not to significantly alter the plan if they wanted bipartisan support.
The White House added, “The president is gratified to see the Senate moving forward in a bipartisan manner on steps to help put Americans back to work.’’
Yet, stung by criticism of several of the draft’s proposals, Democratic leaders balked. Their latest bill keeps several popular provisions, including a new tax break negotiated with Republicans for companies that hire unemployed workers and for small businesses that purchase new equipment. The bill also would renew highway programs and help states and local governments finance large infrastructure projects.
The bipartisan agreement is off. But Democrats said they now have a package focused solely on creating jobs, and they’re all but daring Republicans to vote against it.
“Our side isn’t sure that the Republicans are real interested in developing good policy and to move forward together,’’ said Senator Thomas Carper, Democrat of Delaware.
Said Reid: “Republicans are going to have to make a choice. I don’t know in logic what they could say to oppose this.’’
The original, bigger bill got a decidedly mixed reception at a raucous luncheon meeting of Democrats, many of whom were uncomfortable with supporting a measure containing so many provisions unrelated to creating jobs, including loans for chicken producers and aid to catfish farmers.
The centerpiece of Reid’s new bill is a $13 billion payroll tax credit for companies that hire unemployed workers. The idea, by Senators Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, would exempt businesses hiring unemployed workers this year from the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax for those hires.
It also would provide an additional $1,000 tax credit for workers retained for a full year and deposit an additional $20 billion into the federal highway trust fund - money that would have to be borrowed. There’s also $2 billion to subsidize bond issues by state and local governments for large infrastructure projects.
But Republicans are irate at the strong-arm tactics and said Reid had gone back on a deal reached with some of the Senate’s heaviest hitters, including minority leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
“Needless to say, Senator Hatch is deeply disappointed that the majority leader has abandoned a genuine bipartisan compromise only hours after it was unveiled in favor of business-as-usual partisan gamesmanship,’’ said Antonia Ferrier, Hatch spokeswoman.
New Feed Study
Arkansas:
UAPB feed study could help catfish farmers boost bottom line
AgFax.Com - Your Online Ag News Source
Share
By: Bobbie Crockett
PINE BLUFF (February 11) – Catfish farmers in Arkansas and elsewhere have seen higher feed costs eat away at their profits. A 2009 feed study by the Aquaculture/Fisheries Center of Excellence at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff could help producers make better choices about fish diets.
Catfish farmers have been dealing with higher feed costs driven by higher soybean, corn and wheat prices. The previous five-year average cost of feed was $235 per ton, but in 2008 most farmers paid between $375 and $425 a ton. To try to reduce those costs, the Arkansas-based feed mill ARKAT Nutrition Inc. along with Aquaculture/Fisheries Center nutritionist Dr. Rebecca Lochmann, are testing traditional diets along with some new catfish feed formulations. Dr. Carole Engle, center director and aquaculture economist, is doing economic analysis on the results of the studies.
“Feed prices have been going up, but catfish prices remain static so farmers asked if we could use cheaper diets and still get good yield,” Dr. Lochmann said.
The pond study, conducted May 2009 to October 2009, focused on catfish that were fed three different 28 percent protein diets: premium, standard or sub-optimal.
The Aquaculture/Fisheries Center tested their performance to give producers good information with which to make decisions. Less costly, but still reliable feed could translate into an improved bottom line for fish farmers across Arkansas and beyond, Dr. Lochmann said.
According to study results, harvested fish that ate the premium diet, weighed more, on average, than fish that ate either the standard diet or sub-optimal diet. The average weight of fish that ate the standard diet was higher than the fish that ate the sub-optimal diet. However, all of the fish were of marketable size.
The most important finding in terms of profit, was that yield of fish that ate the premium diet was similar to that of fish that ate the standard diet. However, the yield of the fish fed the premium diet was significantly higher than the yield of those fed the sub-optimal diet.
At the beginning of the study, the estimated costs of the diets were $344 a ton for the premium; $317 a ton for the standard and $307 a ton for the sub-optimal. A partial budget analysis showed a savings of $91 per acre from using the standard diet rather than the premium diet.
“This study showed that you can cut feed costs somewhat and still maintain your profitability,” Dr. Lochmann said.
UAPB feed study could help catfish farmers boost bottom line
AgFax.Com - Your Online Ag News Source
Share
By: Bobbie Crockett
PINE BLUFF (February 11) – Catfish farmers in Arkansas and elsewhere have seen higher feed costs eat away at their profits. A 2009 feed study by the Aquaculture/Fisheries Center of Excellence at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff could help producers make better choices about fish diets.
Catfish farmers have been dealing with higher feed costs driven by higher soybean, corn and wheat prices. The previous five-year average cost of feed was $235 per ton, but in 2008 most farmers paid between $375 and $425 a ton. To try to reduce those costs, the Arkansas-based feed mill ARKAT Nutrition Inc. along with Aquaculture/Fisheries Center nutritionist Dr. Rebecca Lochmann, are testing traditional diets along with some new catfish feed formulations. Dr. Carole Engle, center director and aquaculture economist, is doing economic analysis on the results of the studies.
“Feed prices have been going up, but catfish prices remain static so farmers asked if we could use cheaper diets and still get good yield,” Dr. Lochmann said.
The pond study, conducted May 2009 to October 2009, focused on catfish that were fed three different 28 percent protein diets: premium, standard or sub-optimal.
The Aquaculture/Fisheries Center tested their performance to give producers good information with which to make decisions. Less costly, but still reliable feed could translate into an improved bottom line for fish farmers across Arkansas and beyond, Dr. Lochmann said.
According to study results, harvested fish that ate the premium diet, weighed more, on average, than fish that ate either the standard diet or sub-optimal diet. The average weight of fish that ate the standard diet was higher than the fish that ate the sub-optimal diet. However, all of the fish were of marketable size.
The most important finding in terms of profit, was that yield of fish that ate the premium diet was similar to that of fish that ate the standard diet. However, the yield of the fish fed the premium diet was significantly higher than the yield of those fed the sub-optimal diet.
At the beginning of the study, the estimated costs of the diets were $344 a ton for the premium; $317 a ton for the standard and $307 a ton for the sub-optimal. A partial budget analysis showed a savings of $91 per acre from using the standard diet rather than the premium diet.
“This study showed that you can cut feed costs somewhat and still maintain your profitability,” Dr. Lochmann said.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Happy New Year! Catch Up Time
Aquaculture Grant Program Keeps Catfish Producers Afloat, Bolsters Industry
Catfish farmers in the Mississippi Delta Region hit hard by soaring feed costs have been provided some relief to stop their businesses from drying up.
Nearly 350 Mississippi fish farmers received funding through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Aquaculture Grant Program this year. Supported with funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the program provided financial assistance during the most demanding part of the growing season for catfish.
“The grant money couldn’t have come at a better time for us,” said Turner Arant, one of the first fish farmers in Mississippi. “With 19 ponds we use a lot of feed and it’s getting harder and harder [to maintain].”
Arant’s family-run farm opened its first pond in 1962. This year he closed a few of them because production and maintenance costs became too great. “We are concentrating on fewer ponds, trying to be as efficient as we can,” he said.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 authorized up to $50 million to USDA to implement the Aquaculture Grant Program administered by the Farm Service Agency. The statewide program was coordinated by the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce, or MDAC, with cooperation from the state Farm Service Agency.
Through the grant program, a feed credit system was instituted that allowed farmers to receive up to $100,000 in credit on feed purchased in 2008. MDAC set up an account at a mill chosen by the farmer and the farmer would call to place an order when feed was needed. The mill would send an invoice to MDAC for payment, which was dispersed after statements were cross-checked and confirmed.
“The program is doing exactly what it was designed to do — help stimulate the aquaculture industry,” said Andy Prosser, director of market development and public relations at MDAC. “This is being done by keeping existing farmers in business, keeping aquaculture related jobs secure and helping an industry remain viable.”
The Mississippi Delta is home to the largest catfish production in the United States. With 87,300 acres of production and 5,000 catfish produced per acre, the grants allowed many farmers to stay in business.
“I was worried I would have to lay off folks and this is a rural area; if they don’t work for me I don’t know where they would go,” said second generation fish farmer Kent Toler, who raises fingerlings to stock fish farms around the country.
Toler said the grant money kept him from having to layoff 22 employees, some who have been with him from the beginning of his operation more than 20 years ago.
“People don’t realize that we can lose our whole operation overnight. If the oxygen level drops too fast and we can’t get the aerators going fast enough a whole pond of fish can be lost in just a few hours,” said Toler. “We don’t have insurance for that, it’s just the way the business is, so this grant money really helped ease our minds for a bit.”
Joe Olgesby agreed, but added that the cost of feed isn’t the only thing going up. “When the cost of feed doubles in a year all the other costs go up too, including diesel to run the equipment and hauling costs,” said Olgesby, whose Mississippi farm includes row crops as well as fish. “The grant allowed us to level out our cash flow for a couple of months. With the USDA payment limit, I went through my feed allowance in about two weeks but it was two weeks I was able to take care of other things.”
According to the USDA Agricultural Statistics Board more than 343,666 tons of feed were delivered in Mississippi in 2008, with an estimated cost of about $330 per ton. Three years ago, feed cost about $240 per ton. But feed buying in Mississippi is a cash-only operation forcing producers to secure a line of credit with the bank.
“The farmer orders his feed, we get it to him and run a charge against his line of credit,” said Lester Myers, owner and operator of Delta Western Feed Mill. “The jump in feed costs, fuel costs and transportation costs all hit at the same time, but the price of catfish didn’t double so the banker didn’t see how to increase the line of credit. In reality it got tighter because the margin of profit was cut substantially,” he said.
Myers said the increase in price for feed has caused his company to implement cost-cutting measures. Each day Myers shuts down some of his larger equipment between 3-7 p.m., which are peak hours for electricity use. This has helped save customers $2 on each ton of feed.
Overall, Myers said the grants have benefitted the aquaculture business. “This program was a real blessing to the industry,” he said. “Allowing a farmer to feed for a month on the grant money allowed his line of credit to rebuild. These farmers sell fish all the time, but if you are spending more than what is coming in, well it doesn’t take long until you are out of business.”
Catfish farmers in the Mississippi Delta Region hit hard by soaring feed costs have been provided some relief to stop their businesses from drying up.
Nearly 350 Mississippi fish farmers received funding through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Aquaculture Grant Program this year. Supported with funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the program provided financial assistance during the most demanding part of the growing season for catfish.
“The grant money couldn’t have come at a better time for us,” said Turner Arant, one of the first fish farmers in Mississippi. “With 19 ponds we use a lot of feed and it’s getting harder and harder [to maintain].”
Arant’s family-run farm opened its first pond in 1962. This year he closed a few of them because production and maintenance costs became too great. “We are concentrating on fewer ponds, trying to be as efficient as we can,” he said.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 authorized up to $50 million to USDA to implement the Aquaculture Grant Program administered by the Farm Service Agency. The statewide program was coordinated by the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce, or MDAC, with cooperation from the state Farm Service Agency.
Through the grant program, a feed credit system was instituted that allowed farmers to receive up to $100,000 in credit on feed purchased in 2008. MDAC set up an account at a mill chosen by the farmer and the farmer would call to place an order when feed was needed. The mill would send an invoice to MDAC for payment, which was dispersed after statements were cross-checked and confirmed.
“The program is doing exactly what it was designed to do — help stimulate the aquaculture industry,” said Andy Prosser, director of market development and public relations at MDAC. “This is being done by keeping existing farmers in business, keeping aquaculture related jobs secure and helping an industry remain viable.”
The Mississippi Delta is home to the largest catfish production in the United States. With 87,300 acres of production and 5,000 catfish produced per acre, the grants allowed many farmers to stay in business.
“I was worried I would have to lay off folks and this is a rural area; if they don’t work for me I don’t know where they would go,” said second generation fish farmer Kent Toler, who raises fingerlings to stock fish farms around the country.
Toler said the grant money kept him from having to layoff 22 employees, some who have been with him from the beginning of his operation more than 20 years ago.
“People don’t realize that we can lose our whole operation overnight. If the oxygen level drops too fast and we can’t get the aerators going fast enough a whole pond of fish can be lost in just a few hours,” said Toler. “We don’t have insurance for that, it’s just the way the business is, so this grant money really helped ease our minds for a bit.”
Joe Olgesby agreed, but added that the cost of feed isn’t the only thing going up. “When the cost of feed doubles in a year all the other costs go up too, including diesel to run the equipment and hauling costs,” said Olgesby, whose Mississippi farm includes row crops as well as fish. “The grant allowed us to level out our cash flow for a couple of months. With the USDA payment limit, I went through my feed allowance in about two weeks but it was two weeks I was able to take care of other things.”
According to the USDA Agricultural Statistics Board more than 343,666 tons of feed were delivered in Mississippi in 2008, with an estimated cost of about $330 per ton. Three years ago, feed cost about $240 per ton. But feed buying in Mississippi is a cash-only operation forcing producers to secure a line of credit with the bank.
“The farmer orders his feed, we get it to him and run a charge against his line of credit,” said Lester Myers, owner and operator of Delta Western Feed Mill. “The jump in feed costs, fuel costs and transportation costs all hit at the same time, but the price of catfish didn’t double so the banker didn’t see how to increase the line of credit. In reality it got tighter because the margin of profit was cut substantially,” he said.
Myers said the increase in price for feed has caused his company to implement cost-cutting measures. Each day Myers shuts down some of his larger equipment between 3-7 p.m., which are peak hours for electricity use. This has helped save customers $2 on each ton of feed.
Overall, Myers said the grants have benefitted the aquaculture business. “This program was a real blessing to the industry,” he said. “Allowing a farmer to feed for a month on the grant money allowed his line of credit to rebuild. These farmers sell fish all the time, but if you are spending more than what is coming in, well it doesn’t take long until you are out of business.”
Monday, December 21, 2009
Get Rid of Some of the Red Tape
Walk into any supermarket in America, and you’ll find a large part of the seafood section stocked with imported frozen fish. Chances are that few – if any – of those imported fish were ever inspected by the U.S. government to ensure they met health and safety standards. Last year 5.2 billion pounds of seafood were imported into the United States. One of the best keptsecrets in Washington is that only 2 percent of that imported seafood was actually inspected.
Congress approved a law on June 18, 2008 that would have helped fix the problem by ultimately subjecting all imported catfish and related species to the same tough standards and protections as beef and poultry. One year and five months later, American consumers are still waiting for that protection. While we’re waiting, thousands of pounds of contaminated, imported catfish and related fish are slipping through the Food and Drug Administration’s weak safety net. Just last month, the Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries examined catfish and related fish imported from five Asian countries and discovered that one out of every three of those imported fish tested positive for harmful Fluoroquinolones drugs that are banned for use in fish in the United States because of health and safety dangers to consumers. Those imported fish from China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia and Thailand would have landed on Alabama dinner plates if state authorities had not intervened. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for inspecting all imported seafood. But, fully 98 percent of all foreign seafood imported into the United States makes it to the grocery shelves and restaurant tables with no FDA inspections, according to the Government Accountability Office. Concerns over the FDA’s low inspection rates prompted the U.S. Congress last year to approve a provision in 2008 Farm Bill shifting regulation of catfish from the FDA to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) which inspects and oversees the quality of all beef, poultry and pork sold in America. The USDA has stronger legal authority, more thorough inspections systems and tougher health and safety requirements over the food it oversees. “The legislative language in the 2008 Farm Bill leaves no ambiguity in its intent that all catfish, domestic and imported, meet the highest USDA standards – at least equal to the guarantees already accorded to beef and poultry,” Sens. Blanche L. Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) wrote in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack in October. “Like you, we feel strongly about ensuring the health and safety of American consumers.”
The implementation of that law shifting catfish regulation to the USDA has been stuck in the Washington federal bureaucracy for the past 18 months. The USDA has debated whether to inspect all catfish and catfish-like products or just catfish from certain countries. The government bean counters – the Office of Management and Budget – is now debating how much it will cost to inspect all, or just some of the imported catfish and catfish products. While all this has been going on in Washington, Alabama isn’t the only government that has stopped the sale of contaminated imports. Countries in Europe and the Middle East have banned
Vietnamese catfish-like products because of health and safety concerns that they are raised in the Mekong River, which is polluted with raw sewage and toxic chemicals.
Even the Vietnamese government has sounded alarm bells over the conditions of its fast-growing catfish farming industry. In just the last few weeks, Vietnam’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development admitted difficulties in monitoring and managing the quality of feed, water environment and fish products and called for better systems to detect disease outbreaks.
The Catfish Farmers of America is urging the Washington bureaucracy to cut through the red tape and impose rigorous USDA inspections and regulations on all catfish – domestic and imported. U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish is already rated one of the safest, nutritious and environmentally-friendly fish in the world by organizations such as the Audubon Society, Environmental Defense Fund and Food and Water Watch.
Americans are trying to eat healthier and are more safety-conscious than ever before about what they feed their families. We encourage our federal government to ensure that American consumersare getting the healthiest and safest catfish possible when they go to their grocery shelves or sit down to dinner at a restaurant.
Why should American families be at risk one more day?
Joey Lowery
President
Catfish Farmers of America
1-501-454-1810
jlowery@wildblue.net
www.uscatfish.com
Congress approved a law on June 18, 2008 that would have helped fix the problem by ultimately subjecting all imported catfish and related species to the same tough standards and protections as beef and poultry. One year and five months later, American consumers are still waiting for that protection. While we’re waiting, thousands of pounds of contaminated, imported catfish and related fish are slipping through the Food and Drug Administration’s weak safety net. Just last month, the Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries examined catfish and related fish imported from five Asian countries and discovered that one out of every three of those imported fish tested positive for harmful Fluoroquinolones drugs that are banned for use in fish in the United States because of health and safety dangers to consumers. Those imported fish from China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia and Thailand would have landed on Alabama dinner plates if state authorities had not intervened. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for inspecting all imported seafood. But, fully 98 percent of all foreign seafood imported into the United States makes it to the grocery shelves and restaurant tables with no FDA inspections, according to the Government Accountability Office. Concerns over the FDA’s low inspection rates prompted the U.S. Congress last year to approve a provision in 2008 Farm Bill shifting regulation of catfish from the FDA to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) which inspects and oversees the quality of all beef, poultry and pork sold in America. The USDA has stronger legal authority, more thorough inspections systems and tougher health and safety requirements over the food it oversees. “The legislative language in the 2008 Farm Bill leaves no ambiguity in its intent that all catfish, domestic and imported, meet the highest USDA standards – at least equal to the guarantees already accorded to beef and poultry,” Sens. Blanche L. Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) wrote in a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack in October. “Like you, we feel strongly about ensuring the health and safety of American consumers.”
The implementation of that law shifting catfish regulation to the USDA has been stuck in the Washington federal bureaucracy for the past 18 months. The USDA has debated whether to inspect all catfish and catfish-like products or just catfish from certain countries. The government bean counters – the Office of Management and Budget – is now debating how much it will cost to inspect all, or just some of the imported catfish and catfish products. While all this has been going on in Washington, Alabama isn’t the only government that has stopped the sale of contaminated imports. Countries in Europe and the Middle East have banned
Vietnamese catfish-like products because of health and safety concerns that they are raised in the Mekong River, which is polluted with raw sewage and toxic chemicals.
Even the Vietnamese government has sounded alarm bells over the conditions of its fast-growing catfish farming industry. In just the last few weeks, Vietnam’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development admitted difficulties in monitoring and managing the quality of feed, water environment and fish products and called for better systems to detect disease outbreaks.
The Catfish Farmers of America is urging the Washington bureaucracy to cut through the red tape and impose rigorous USDA inspections and regulations on all catfish – domestic and imported. U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish is already rated one of the safest, nutritious and environmentally-friendly fish in the world by organizations such as the Audubon Society, Environmental Defense Fund and Food and Water Watch.
Americans are trying to eat healthier and are more safety-conscious than ever before about what they feed their families. We encourage our federal government to ensure that American consumersare getting the healthiest and safest catfish possible when they go to their grocery shelves or sit down to dinner at a restaurant.
Why should American families be at risk one more day?
Joey Lowery
President
Catfish Farmers of America
1-501-454-1810
jlowery@wildblue.net
www.uscatfish.com
Monday, November 30, 2009
Struggling To Survive
By Jeff Moore • For the Daily World • November 29, 2009
Competition from overseas has held fish prices in check during the last decade, while production costs have increased steadily with inflation and rising costs of feed.
As a result, catfish pond acreage in the U.S. has declined by more than a third in the last decade.
Those that remain are fighting back against imports by waging a campaign to establish U.S. catfish as a superior product.
Farmers have backed federal and state labeling laws requiring restaurants and grocery stores to label their catfish by country of origin, a move they hope will help jumpstart domestic production.
"We're like a frog in the bottom of a barrel right now," said Steve Stephens, president of the Louisiana Catfish Farmers Association. "We're looking for anything right now that can help us."
Catfish is the leading aquaculture industry in the United States, with about 500 million pounds processed domestically in 2008.
About 95 percent of the nation's catfish comes from Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Louisiana.
Soaring feed prices and an influx of cheap imports have cut into catfish production in recent years.
Production peaked at 660 million pounds in 2003, but has been decreasing ever since, according to Catfish Farmers of America.
Catfish production has dropped off at an even faster rate in Louisiana, from 65.7 million pounds of catfish in 1999 to 19.9 million pounds in 2008.
Louisiana currently has about 4,400 acres of catfish ponds, down about 10,000 acres since 1999.
"We've lost a lot of producers in the last five years," said Stephens. "With the economics like they are, the biggest factor is low prices."
For Stephens, the downturn started three years ago, when rising prices for soybeans, corn, and wheat caused feed prices to skyrocket.
Catfish prices, meanwhile, have lagged around 70 cents a pound for the past decade, with imports from countries like Vietnam and China keeping prices low.
Stephens said his own North Louisiana farm has faced "huge losses" over the past two years, forcing him to scale back his farming operation by 50 percent.
"Just about everybody I know in this business is cutting back," he said.
The situation isn't much better for wild-caught catfish, the production of which has also dropped substantially this decade.
Henderson Mayor Sherbin Collette has been fishing commercially in the Atchafalaya Basin for most of his life, and has never seen market conditions as tough as they are now.
"Imports hurt everything — shrimp, crawfish, catfish, you name it," Collette said. "It's crippled us to a point where we're barely surviving."
Collette faces additional challenges as a commercial fisherman — including competition from catfish farms.
Wild-caught fish sell for a lower price — about 45-50 cents a pound — and are often passed over by wholesalers in favor of pond-raised fish, Collette said.
"There's no market for wild fish," he said.
Collette sells most of his catch to local seafood restaurants and individual customers out of a shop near his home. But it's getting tough to make a living, he said.
"I hope I never have to stop, because this is my first love," he said.
Some relief may come in the form of new laws passed during this year's Legislative session.
The Louisiana Catfish Marketing Law, sponsored by state Rep. Noble Ellington, D-Winnsboro, requires restaurants and retailers to label any catfish they sell with the country of origin.
Castille said agriculture officials are currently developing a certification program to implement the law, and should begin performing inspections early next year.
State Rep. Fred Mills, D-St. Martinville, authored a separate bill that seeks to launch a "public safety marketing campaign" to warn consumers of possible health hazards of eating Chinese seafood and touting the benefits of state-grown and caught seafood.
Also created was a Seafood Safety Task Force to further study Chinese seafood and report back to the Legislature.
Catfish farmers have long complained that substandard aquaculture is practiced in Asian countries.
Vietnam has built a burgeoning industry raising catfish in ponds and cages along the Mekong River.
"Most of these fish are raised in pens in polluted areas," Stephens said. "They can bring that filet, even after shipping, for half of what we're trying to do it at a loss right now."
The industry is also trying to address imports by adding catfish to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety program. The USDA currently regulates all meat products, but does not inspect seafood. The inspection of seafood is now administered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Competition from overseas has held fish prices in check during the last decade, while production costs have increased steadily with inflation and rising costs of feed.
As a result, catfish pond acreage in the U.S. has declined by more than a third in the last decade.
Those that remain are fighting back against imports by waging a campaign to establish U.S. catfish as a superior product.
Farmers have backed federal and state labeling laws requiring restaurants and grocery stores to label their catfish by country of origin, a move they hope will help jumpstart domestic production.
"We're like a frog in the bottom of a barrel right now," said Steve Stephens, president of the Louisiana Catfish Farmers Association. "We're looking for anything right now that can help us."
Catfish is the leading aquaculture industry in the United States, with about 500 million pounds processed domestically in 2008.
About 95 percent of the nation's catfish comes from Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Louisiana.
Soaring feed prices and an influx of cheap imports have cut into catfish production in recent years.
Production peaked at 660 million pounds in 2003, but has been decreasing ever since, according to Catfish Farmers of America.
Catfish production has dropped off at an even faster rate in Louisiana, from 65.7 million pounds of catfish in 1999 to 19.9 million pounds in 2008.
Louisiana currently has about 4,400 acres of catfish ponds, down about 10,000 acres since 1999.
"We've lost a lot of producers in the last five years," said Stephens. "With the economics like they are, the biggest factor is low prices."
For Stephens, the downturn started three years ago, when rising prices for soybeans, corn, and wheat caused feed prices to skyrocket.
Catfish prices, meanwhile, have lagged around 70 cents a pound for the past decade, with imports from countries like Vietnam and China keeping prices low.
Stephens said his own North Louisiana farm has faced "huge losses" over the past two years, forcing him to scale back his farming operation by 50 percent.
"Just about everybody I know in this business is cutting back," he said.
The situation isn't much better for wild-caught catfish, the production of which has also dropped substantially this decade.
Henderson Mayor Sherbin Collette has been fishing commercially in the Atchafalaya Basin for most of his life, and has never seen market conditions as tough as they are now.
"Imports hurt everything — shrimp, crawfish, catfish, you name it," Collette said. "It's crippled us to a point where we're barely surviving."
Collette faces additional challenges as a commercial fisherman — including competition from catfish farms.
Wild-caught fish sell for a lower price — about 45-50 cents a pound — and are often passed over by wholesalers in favor of pond-raised fish, Collette said.
"There's no market for wild fish," he said.
Collette sells most of his catch to local seafood restaurants and individual customers out of a shop near his home. But it's getting tough to make a living, he said.
"I hope I never have to stop, because this is my first love," he said.
Some relief may come in the form of new laws passed during this year's Legislative session.
The Louisiana Catfish Marketing Law, sponsored by state Rep. Noble Ellington, D-Winnsboro, requires restaurants and retailers to label any catfish they sell with the country of origin.
Castille said agriculture officials are currently developing a certification program to implement the law, and should begin performing inspections early next year.
State Rep. Fred Mills, D-St. Martinville, authored a separate bill that seeks to launch a "public safety marketing campaign" to warn consumers of possible health hazards of eating Chinese seafood and touting the benefits of state-grown and caught seafood.
Also created was a Seafood Safety Task Force to further study Chinese seafood and report back to the Legislature.
Catfish farmers have long complained that substandard aquaculture is practiced in Asian countries.
Vietnam has built a burgeoning industry raising catfish in ponds and cages along the Mekong River.
"Most of these fish are raised in pens in polluted areas," Stephens said. "They can bring that filet, even after shipping, for half of what we're trying to do it at a loss right now."
The industry is also trying to address imports by adding catfish to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety program. The USDA currently regulates all meat products, but does not inspect seafood. The inspection of seafood is now administered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Have a laugh, a little late, but still good
For this Thanksgiving, think outside the bird. Serve catfish.
STAR BREAK
But seriously, fellow patriots, the Catfish Farmers of America warn that billions of imported foreign catfish are coming into this country and only 2 percent are inspected for, say, Mad Catfish Disease.
STAR BREAK
And when the Indians helped the pilgrims prepare Thanksgiving dinner, the catfish did not come from Vietnam.
STAR BREAK
Let me suggest a slogan for the Catfish Farmers of America: "Safe sex -- safe catfish -- safe America."
STAR BREAK
But seriously, fellow patriots, the Catfish Farmers of America warn that billions of imported foreign catfish are coming into this country and only 2 percent are inspected for, say, Mad Catfish Disease.
STAR BREAK
And when the Indians helped the pilgrims prepare Thanksgiving dinner, the catfish did not come from Vietnam.
STAR BREAK
Let me suggest a slogan for the Catfish Farmers of America: "Safe sex -- safe catfish -- safe America."
Friday, November 20, 2009
Contaminated Asian Catfish Discovered by Alabama Labs
Nov 19, 2009 10:19 AM, From Catfish Farmers of America
The Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries halt on the sale of imported Asian catfish and related fish contaminated by banned drugs underscores the urgency of implementing a congressionally-approved law for tough USDA inspections and regulations of imported catfish and catfish-like products, according to the Catfish Farmers of America.
The contaminated catfish products tested positive for antibiotic fluoroquinolones banned for use in fish or other seafood products sold in the United States because of the health and safety danger to consumers.
Alabama’s findings come as USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack is weighing a decision on how to implement a law approved by Congress last year shifting responsibility for the inspection and regulation of imported and domestic catfish and related fish from the FDA to the USDA. That law requires that catfish and catfish-like products meet the same stringent USDA health and safety standards as beef, poultry and pork.
“The contamination found in the Asian fish tested by Alabama authorities demonstrates the urgency of this health and safety issue,” said Joey Lowery, president of the Catfish Farmers of America. “We need Sec. Vilsack to enact this law now in the most comprehensive manner possible. It will help ensure that all imported catfish and catfish relatives meet the toughest regulations and inspections that will protect American consumers and make certain that imported fish meet the same standards for quality and safety as our U.S. farm-raised catfish.”
Last year, the FDA inspected only 2 percent of the 5.2 billion pounds of seafood imported into the United States, according to the Government Accountability Office.
Congress, responding to evidence of problems with the quality of imported catfish and related fish, voted as part of the 2008 farm bill to move inspections and regulation of those fish to the USDA.
Vilsack, who has made food safety one of his top priorities, is now considering whether to require that all domestic and imported catfish and related fish — including basa, pangasius and swai from Southeast Asia — meet USDA standards, or only domestic and Chinese catfish.
Chinese catfish represented only 29.7 percent of all foreign catfish products imported into the United States in 2008. Imports from Vietnam totaled 52.2 percent of foreign catfish-like products sold in America, and another 12.3 percent were from Thailand.
“Applying USDA regulations to only Chinese imports will not provide the protection American consumers need,” Lowery said.
The Alabama laboratory test results found the high percentages of contamination among the catfish relatives imported from Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand and China.
Among the 2 percent of seafood inspections conducted by the FDA in the first nine months of this year, authorities found Vietnamese basa — a catfish-like fish — contaminated with salmonella and illegal veterinary drugs, according to the FDA’s Import Refusals data base. Fully 98 percent of all seafood imports entering the United States from foreign countries are not inspected, according to Lowery.
“There is absolutely no way to determine whether all these imports are safe from contamination or harmful chemicals that aren’t allowed here in the U.S.,” said Lowery. “We want USDA approval that every catfish product imported into America meets the same rigorous standards for quality and safety as our U.S. farm-raised catfish.”
Alabama Commissioner Ron Sparks, in calling a halt to the sale of contaminated imported Asian catfish and related fish, said contaminated fish “will never make it to the dinner plates in Alabama.”
“Our question is: Why should the rest of American consumers have to wait for the same protection from their government?” said Lowery.
The Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries halt on the sale of imported Asian catfish and related fish contaminated by banned drugs underscores the urgency of implementing a congressionally-approved law for tough USDA inspections and regulations of imported catfish and catfish-like products, according to the Catfish Farmers of America.
The contaminated catfish products tested positive for antibiotic fluoroquinolones banned for use in fish or other seafood products sold in the United States because of the health and safety danger to consumers.
Alabama’s findings come as USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack is weighing a decision on how to implement a law approved by Congress last year shifting responsibility for the inspection and regulation of imported and domestic catfish and related fish from the FDA to the USDA. That law requires that catfish and catfish-like products meet the same stringent USDA health and safety standards as beef, poultry and pork.
“The contamination found in the Asian fish tested by Alabama authorities demonstrates the urgency of this health and safety issue,” said Joey Lowery, president of the Catfish Farmers of America. “We need Sec. Vilsack to enact this law now in the most comprehensive manner possible. It will help ensure that all imported catfish and catfish relatives meet the toughest regulations and inspections that will protect American consumers and make certain that imported fish meet the same standards for quality and safety as our U.S. farm-raised catfish.”
Last year, the FDA inspected only 2 percent of the 5.2 billion pounds of seafood imported into the United States, according to the Government Accountability Office.
Congress, responding to evidence of problems with the quality of imported catfish and related fish, voted as part of the 2008 farm bill to move inspections and regulation of those fish to the USDA.
Vilsack, who has made food safety one of his top priorities, is now considering whether to require that all domestic and imported catfish and related fish — including basa, pangasius and swai from Southeast Asia — meet USDA standards, or only domestic and Chinese catfish.
Chinese catfish represented only 29.7 percent of all foreign catfish products imported into the United States in 2008. Imports from Vietnam totaled 52.2 percent of foreign catfish-like products sold in America, and another 12.3 percent were from Thailand.
“Applying USDA regulations to only Chinese imports will not provide the protection American consumers need,” Lowery said.
The Alabama laboratory test results found the high percentages of contamination among the catfish relatives imported from Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand and China.
Among the 2 percent of seafood inspections conducted by the FDA in the first nine months of this year, authorities found Vietnamese basa — a catfish-like fish — contaminated with salmonella and illegal veterinary drugs, according to the FDA’s Import Refusals data base. Fully 98 percent of all seafood imports entering the United States from foreign countries are not inspected, according to Lowery.
“There is absolutely no way to determine whether all these imports are safe from contamination or harmful chemicals that aren’t allowed here in the U.S.,” said Lowery. “We want USDA approval that every catfish product imported into America meets the same rigorous standards for quality and safety as our U.S. farm-raised catfish.”
Alabama Commissioner Ron Sparks, in calling a halt to the sale of contaminated imported Asian catfish and related fish, said contaminated fish “will never make it to the dinner plates in Alabama.”
“Our question is: Why should the rest of American consumers have to wait for the same protection from their government?” said Lowery.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
USDA Delay Harmful
Nov 17, 2009 10:39 AM, By David Bennett, Farm Press Editorial Staff
Currently, the USDA takes on the inspection of meat and poultry imported into the United States. However, it does not inspect imported seafood, leaving that to the Food and Drug Administration.
In a case of something written into the 2008 farm bill that’s yet to be enacted, U.S. catfish producers are pointing at the USDA’s failure to inspect seafood imports.
Currently, the USDA takes on the inspection of meat and poultry imported into the United States. However, it does not inspect imported seafood, leaving that to the Food and Drug Administration.
The USDA is shirking its responsibility, say critics. That’s because, behind a strong push by U.S. aquaculture interests during the farm bill debate, Congress shifted regulation of catfish products from the FDA to the USDA.
To the chagrin of U.S. catfish producers, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack — despite claims that food safety is among his top priorities — has failed to place all catfish products under USDA jurisdiction.
“We got that in the 2008 farm bill,” says a frustrated Joey Lowery, president of Catfish Farmers of America and a catfish farmer in northeast Arkansas’ Jackson County. “It seemed like a natural for the catfish industry to be under the USDA, as they already inspect all the meat, poultry and dairy products.
“And catfish farming is no different than any other type. It’s the largest aquaculture industry in the country.”
A USDA inspection regime would be “a way to elevate the quality of our product. I can tell you all day long how good the product is and we can spend a lot of money on promotion. But being validated through USDA inspection will do a lot more for catfish.”
This is not the first time U.S. catfish producers have warned inspections are too lax (for more, see Catfish import ban bolsters farmers’ claims).
With the FDA’s paltry inspection numbers for imported seafood, Lowery says, the U.S. populace is likely unwittingly consuming unhealthy products.
“FDA has had the job of inspecting seafood. Part of that is checking imports from China, Vietnam and other countries that export fish to the United States. China ships channels cats to us, just like those we grow. Vietnam ships in basa, tra, and pangasius which are sometimes referred to as ‘Vietnamese catfish.’”
Over the past four years, “something like one of every four shipments inspected has been turned back by our inspectors. But FDA inspections only look at around 2 percent of the imported shipments! And last year, there was something like 5.2 billion pounds of seafood that came into the country.”
Extrapolate the high percentage of FDA rejections along with the low number of inspections and Lowery’s concern is evident.
“Ending in May of 2009, in a one-year period, FDA refused entry to 14 shipments of Vietnamese tra and basa. That’s a bit over one rejection per month. But, again, they’re only inspecting 2 percent of the shipments. So the odds aren’t really good on the other 98 percent.
“In my view, one bad shipment that makes its way into the United States is unacceptable. USDA inspections — which are stringent and a daily deal — should take care of that.”
A big problem: how to define “catfish.” As with inspection of imported fish, this is not a new issue for catfish producers (for more, see Call it basa, call it tra, it ain't genuine catfish and U.S., Vietnam in word battle over catfish).
“So, do officials use the narrow definition of ‘catfish’ and inspect only channels? Or do we deal with broader definitions which would encompass the Vietnamese fish? Obviously, we’re pushing for the broader language.”
Cases of illegal import mislabeling also continue (for more, see LDAF stops sale of mislabeled catfish) . But even if the imported product is labeled correctly, says Lowery “the U.S. marketers are still marketing these fish as a substitute for U.S. farm-raised catfish. If they want to be a substitute, they must adhere to the same standards we have to.”
When might the USDA take on seafood inspections?
“Right now, this is in USDA’s hands and they’ll make a recommendation,” says Lowery. “It will then go to OMB (the Office of Budget and Management) for 60 to 90 days. OMB will then come out with a rule. After that, there will be a 60-day public comment period. Following that, within 30 days a final rule will be issued.”
So it could be next spring before a final ruling is announced?
“That’s what I’m thinking, yes. It’s about a 180-day process after it leaves USDA.”
Asked how Southern catfish farmers have done in 2009, Lowery says, “Feed costs have been a big issue for catfish growers. With commodity prices, the feed price has been jacked up.”
Fuel has been a bit cheaper than in 2008. “But our input costs are very high — just like with row-crop producers. Like everyone else, we’ve had a lot of rain and that probably prevented some feeding of fish. We haven’t been able to secure a good price to stabilize things and make operations profitable.”
Like other industry leaders, Lowery “unfortunately” sees “some more catfish acreage going out of production. There’s a good possibility that will happen. I know some farmers that had some under-stock they are feeding. When those fish are sold, they’ll probably be done.”
The U.S. catfish industry needs “something positive to happen, something to hang our hat on. Getting the right inspection language would be a big boost, I think.”
The current tough economy “has had an effect on people eating out, and we’ve probably lost around 25 percent of production in the industry in the last couple of years. We peaked out at around 600 million pounds. In 2008, the high was a little over 500 million pounds. This year, processed weight will probably be under 500 million — maybe 450 million to 500 million pounds.”
Currently, the USDA takes on the inspection of meat and poultry imported into the United States. However, it does not inspect imported seafood, leaving that to the Food and Drug Administration.
In a case of something written into the 2008 farm bill that’s yet to be enacted, U.S. catfish producers are pointing at the USDA’s failure to inspect seafood imports.
Currently, the USDA takes on the inspection of meat and poultry imported into the United States. However, it does not inspect imported seafood, leaving that to the Food and Drug Administration.
The USDA is shirking its responsibility, say critics. That’s because, behind a strong push by U.S. aquaculture interests during the farm bill debate, Congress shifted regulation of catfish products from the FDA to the USDA.
To the chagrin of U.S. catfish producers, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack — despite claims that food safety is among his top priorities — has failed to place all catfish products under USDA jurisdiction.
“We got that in the 2008 farm bill,” says a frustrated Joey Lowery, president of Catfish Farmers of America and a catfish farmer in northeast Arkansas’ Jackson County. “It seemed like a natural for the catfish industry to be under the USDA, as they already inspect all the meat, poultry and dairy products.
“And catfish farming is no different than any other type. It’s the largest aquaculture industry in the country.”
A USDA inspection regime would be “a way to elevate the quality of our product. I can tell you all day long how good the product is and we can spend a lot of money on promotion. But being validated through USDA inspection will do a lot more for catfish.”
This is not the first time U.S. catfish producers have warned inspections are too lax (for more, see Catfish import ban bolsters farmers’ claims).
With the FDA’s paltry inspection numbers for imported seafood, Lowery says, the U.S. populace is likely unwittingly consuming unhealthy products.
“FDA has had the job of inspecting seafood. Part of that is checking imports from China, Vietnam and other countries that export fish to the United States. China ships channels cats to us, just like those we grow. Vietnam ships in basa, tra, and pangasius which are sometimes referred to as ‘Vietnamese catfish.’”
Over the past four years, “something like one of every four shipments inspected has been turned back by our inspectors. But FDA inspections only look at around 2 percent of the imported shipments! And last year, there was something like 5.2 billion pounds of seafood that came into the country.”
Extrapolate the high percentage of FDA rejections along with the low number of inspections and Lowery’s concern is evident.
“Ending in May of 2009, in a one-year period, FDA refused entry to 14 shipments of Vietnamese tra and basa. That’s a bit over one rejection per month. But, again, they’re only inspecting 2 percent of the shipments. So the odds aren’t really good on the other 98 percent.
“In my view, one bad shipment that makes its way into the United States is unacceptable. USDA inspections — which are stringent and a daily deal — should take care of that.”
A big problem: how to define “catfish.” As with inspection of imported fish, this is not a new issue for catfish producers (for more, see Call it basa, call it tra, it ain't genuine catfish and U.S., Vietnam in word battle over catfish).
“So, do officials use the narrow definition of ‘catfish’ and inspect only channels? Or do we deal with broader definitions which would encompass the Vietnamese fish? Obviously, we’re pushing for the broader language.”
Cases of illegal import mislabeling also continue (for more, see LDAF stops sale of mislabeled catfish) . But even if the imported product is labeled correctly, says Lowery “the U.S. marketers are still marketing these fish as a substitute for U.S. farm-raised catfish. If they want to be a substitute, they must adhere to the same standards we have to.”
When might the USDA take on seafood inspections?
“Right now, this is in USDA’s hands and they’ll make a recommendation,” says Lowery. “It will then go to OMB (the Office of Budget and Management) for 60 to 90 days. OMB will then come out with a rule. After that, there will be a 60-day public comment period. Following that, within 30 days a final rule will be issued.”
So it could be next spring before a final ruling is announced?
“That’s what I’m thinking, yes. It’s about a 180-day process after it leaves USDA.”
Asked how Southern catfish farmers have done in 2009, Lowery says, “Feed costs have been a big issue for catfish growers. With commodity prices, the feed price has been jacked up.”
Fuel has been a bit cheaper than in 2008. “But our input costs are very high — just like with row-crop producers. Like everyone else, we’ve had a lot of rain and that probably prevented some feeding of fish. We haven’t been able to secure a good price to stabilize things and make operations profitable.”
Like other industry leaders, Lowery “unfortunately” sees “some more catfish acreage going out of production. There’s a good possibility that will happen. I know some farmers that had some under-stock they are feeding. When those fish are sold, they’ll probably be done.”
The U.S. catfish industry needs “something positive to happen, something to hang our hat on. Getting the right inspection language would be a big boost, I think.”
The current tough economy “has had an effect on people eating out, and we’ve probably lost around 25 percent of production in the industry in the last couple of years. We peaked out at around 600 million pounds. In 2008, the high was a little over 500 million pounds. This year, processed weight will probably be under 500 million — maybe 450 million to 500 million pounds.”
Delta Catfish May Soon Be Checked by USDA
MS DELTA (WLBT) - The Delta's Catfish industry hopes it will soon be checked for safety by the USDA.
The Delta Council Board Of Directors, a group of agricultural and business interests endorsed a proposal to add catfish to the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety Inspection Program.
The proposal is supported by the Catfish Farmers Of America. Catfish farmers also want the Obama administration to include Vietnamese imports as catfish so they also can be covered by the new inspections. The USDA regulates all meat products but not seafood . Those inspections are conducted by the food and drug administration.
The Delta Council Board Of Directors, a group of agricultural and business interests endorsed a proposal to add catfish to the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety Inspection Program.
The proposal is supported by the Catfish Farmers Of America. Catfish farmers also want the Obama administration to include Vietnamese imports as catfish so they also can be covered by the new inspections. The USDA regulates all meat products but not seafood . Those inspections are conducted by the food and drug administration.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Catfish Farmers Want Stricter Regulations
by Hanna Raskin (Subscribe to Hanna Raskin's posts)
Posted Nov 13th 2009 11:00AM
Just as Southeastern oyster producers are clamoring for the government to stay out of their business, catfish farmers have launched a new ad campaign asking for more regulation of their industry.
"All catfish should be treated equally!," proclaims the Catfish Farmers of America's full-page ad targeting the USDA. The trade group's ads began appearing late last month in major publications, including the Washington Post.
Catfish farmers contend imported seafood should be held to the same stringent standards now applied to imported beef, poultry and pork. Unlike those commodities, which are inspected by the USDA, imported seafood is the domain of the FDA. According to government reports, only 2 percent of the 5.2 billion pounds of seafood that entered the U.S. last year was inspected.
"People are taking it for granted that everything's inspected, and they need to know what's going on," CFA president Joey Lowery says. "This is something that shouldn't even be negotiable, food safety for the American people."
The catfish industry has spent the better part of the last decade lobbying legislators behind-the-scenes and orchestrating letter-writing campaigns for increased inspections, but Lowery says the new ads represent the most aggressive stratagem yet. A CFA release claims that's because lawmakers have "reached a critical point."
Congress last year voted to shift catfish inspection authority to the USDA, but the bill didn't specifically define catfish. The Department of Agriculture is now considering whether its inspectors will be looking at all catfish-like fish or just those grown in channels. American catfish farmers are enthusiastically backing the broad definition.
"The only country raising channel fish is China," grumbles Lowery. "If the narrow definition is put in place, inspections will not be very effective."
Only 27 percent of imported catfish are channel fish, Lowery adds.
If the USDA endorses the narrow definition, the decision will provide a fitting cap for what industry insiders generally agree has been a miserable few years for catfish farmers. In a release issued by the University of Arkansas to mark National Catfish Month this past August, extension aquaculture specialist Steve Pomerleau was quoted as calling the last two years the "most difficult" in the industry's history. Rising feed prices and increased competition from abroad have conspired to put many farmers out of business.
"We've lost acreage, we've lost producers," Lowery says.
Still, Lowery is hoping he'll be able to add a notch to the industry's win column after Secretary Tom Vilsack decrees what counts as catfish.
"We're making it harder on ourselves to prove the quality of our product," Lowery says of the request featured in the group's newspaper ads. "Anyone coming in should adhere to those same standards
Posted Nov 13th 2009 11:00AM
Just as Southeastern oyster producers are clamoring for the government to stay out of their business, catfish farmers have launched a new ad campaign asking for more regulation of their industry.
"All catfish should be treated equally!," proclaims the Catfish Farmers of America's full-page ad targeting the USDA. The trade group's ads began appearing late last month in major publications, including the Washington Post.
Catfish farmers contend imported seafood should be held to the same stringent standards now applied to imported beef, poultry and pork. Unlike those commodities, which are inspected by the USDA, imported seafood is the domain of the FDA. According to government reports, only 2 percent of the 5.2 billion pounds of seafood that entered the U.S. last year was inspected.
"People are taking it for granted that everything's inspected, and they need to know what's going on," CFA president Joey Lowery says. "This is something that shouldn't even be negotiable, food safety for the American people."
The catfish industry has spent the better part of the last decade lobbying legislators behind-the-scenes and orchestrating letter-writing campaigns for increased inspections, but Lowery says the new ads represent the most aggressive stratagem yet. A CFA release claims that's because lawmakers have "reached a critical point."
Congress last year voted to shift catfish inspection authority to the USDA, but the bill didn't specifically define catfish. The Department of Agriculture is now considering whether its inspectors will be looking at all catfish-like fish or just those grown in channels. American catfish farmers are enthusiastically backing the broad definition.
"The only country raising channel fish is China," grumbles Lowery. "If the narrow definition is put in place, inspections will not be very effective."
Only 27 percent of imported catfish are channel fish, Lowery adds.
If the USDA endorses the narrow definition, the decision will provide a fitting cap for what industry insiders generally agree has been a miserable few years for catfish farmers. In a release issued by the University of Arkansas to mark National Catfish Month this past August, extension aquaculture specialist Steve Pomerleau was quoted as calling the last two years the "most difficult" in the industry's history. Rising feed prices and increased competition from abroad have conspired to put many farmers out of business.
"We've lost acreage, we've lost producers," Lowery says.
Still, Lowery is hoping he'll be able to add a notch to the industry's win column after Secretary Tom Vilsack decrees what counts as catfish.
"We're making it harder on ourselves to prove the quality of our product," Lowery says of the request featured in the group's newspaper ads. "Anyone coming in should adhere to those same standards
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Catfish Farmers Seek Inclusion
By DAVID WEBB davidwebb@ddtonline.com
Tuesday, November 10, 2009 12:54 PM CST
STONEVILLE — No matter where or how it is grown, all food produced for human consumption should be subject to rigorous safety inspections, according to U.S. catfish farmers and their advocates.
The Delta Council’s Board of Directors passed a aquaculture resolution at its 75th anniversary midyear board of directors meeting last week seeking inclusion of the catfish industry in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s food safety inspection program.
The resolution calls upon the agency and the Mississippi congressional delegation to work with the catfish industry to immediately authorize new oversight of aquaculture products.
“We want the USDA to treat catfish just like it does beef, pork and poultry,” said John Phillips, chairman of the Delta Council executive committee, at the Nov. 6 meeting.
The measure is supported by Catfish Farmers of America, which has asked Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to enact legislative provisions in the 2008 farm bill to ensure that domestic and imported catfish meet health and safety standards. The USDA currently regulates all meat products, but it does not inspect seafood.
The inspection of imported seafood is now administered by the Food and Drug Administration, but it reportedly inspected only 2 percent of all seafood, including catfish, in 2008, according to the catfish farmers association.
Only catfish and other species within the catfish family would be shifted from the purview of the FDA to the USDA under the proposal backed by the Delta Council and the catfish farmers group.
The U.S. reportedly imported 5.2 billion pounds of seafood in 2008.
The catfish farmers group complains that seafood processing lobbying groups, such as the National Fisheries Institute, are trying to get USDA inspections limited to “channel” catfish raised on domestic catfish farms and imported from China. That would leave out Vietnam’s species of “tra” and “basa,” which is from the catfish family.
The group claims that catfish grown in Vietnam comes from the Mekong River Delta, which reportedly is muddy and polluted with dangerous chemicals, and that one in five shipments inspected by the FDA in 2008 was refused entry to the U.S. because of contamination by illegal substances.
U.S. catfish farmers have long complained that substandard aquaculture is practiced in Asian countries. But critics of the group claim its motivation has more to do with profits than concerns about consumer safety.
Concerns have been raised that the catfish fight could lead to Vietnam purchasing smaller amounts of beef from the U.S. It is now the third-largest importer of American beef.
Joey Lowery, president of Catfish Farmers of America, said that his group’s only motivation is consumer safety.
“U.S. consumers currently believe that their seafood is subject to the same rigorous inspection standards as those imposed on meat and poultry products,” Lowery said in a letter published on the group’s Website. “However, that is not the case under the existing Food and Drug Administration standards, and the domestic catfish industry is dedicated to fighting for increased consumer food safety.”
Tuesday, November 10, 2009 12:54 PM CST
STONEVILLE — No matter where or how it is grown, all food produced for human consumption should be subject to rigorous safety inspections, according to U.S. catfish farmers and their advocates.
The Delta Council’s Board of Directors passed a aquaculture resolution at its 75th anniversary midyear board of directors meeting last week seeking inclusion of the catfish industry in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s food safety inspection program.
The resolution calls upon the agency and the Mississippi congressional delegation to work with the catfish industry to immediately authorize new oversight of aquaculture products.
“We want the USDA to treat catfish just like it does beef, pork and poultry,” said John Phillips, chairman of the Delta Council executive committee, at the Nov. 6 meeting.
The measure is supported by Catfish Farmers of America, which has asked Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to enact legislative provisions in the 2008 farm bill to ensure that domestic and imported catfish meet health and safety standards. The USDA currently regulates all meat products, but it does not inspect seafood.
The inspection of imported seafood is now administered by the Food and Drug Administration, but it reportedly inspected only 2 percent of all seafood, including catfish, in 2008, according to the catfish farmers association.
Only catfish and other species within the catfish family would be shifted from the purview of the FDA to the USDA under the proposal backed by the Delta Council and the catfish farmers group.
The U.S. reportedly imported 5.2 billion pounds of seafood in 2008.
The catfish farmers group complains that seafood processing lobbying groups, such as the National Fisheries Institute, are trying to get USDA inspections limited to “channel” catfish raised on domestic catfish farms and imported from China. That would leave out Vietnam’s species of “tra” and “basa,” which is from the catfish family.
The group claims that catfish grown in Vietnam comes from the Mekong River Delta, which reportedly is muddy and polluted with dangerous chemicals, and that one in five shipments inspected by the FDA in 2008 was refused entry to the U.S. because of contamination by illegal substances.
U.S. catfish farmers have long complained that substandard aquaculture is practiced in Asian countries. But critics of the group claim its motivation has more to do with profits than concerns about consumer safety.
Concerns have been raised that the catfish fight could lead to Vietnam purchasing smaller amounts of beef from the U.S. It is now the third-largest importer of American beef.
Joey Lowery, president of Catfish Farmers of America, said that his group’s only motivation is consumer safety.
“U.S. consumers currently believe that their seafood is subject to the same rigorous inspection standards as those imposed on meat and poultry products,” Lowery said in a letter published on the group’s Website. “However, that is not the case under the existing Food and Drug Administration standards, and the domestic catfish industry is dedicated to fighting for increased consumer food safety.”
Monday, November 9, 2009
Alabama issues stop sale order on Asian catfish
UNITED STATES
Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 03:10 (GMT + 9)
Commissioner Ron Sparks of the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries announced on Wednesday a Stop Sale on catfish and basa products imported from Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, China and Vietnam due to positive results for the antibiotic fluoroquinolones.
A total of 40 samples of basa type products and catfish were tested from the five Asian countries, out of which 18 product samples yielded positive results for fluoroquinolones.
Fluoroquinolones and quinolones are chemotherapeutic bactericidal drugs used to kill bacteria by interfering with their DNA replication. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not allow the use of fluoroquinolones in seafood.
Sparks has issued nine orders of suspension from sale or movement for 486 cases of product weighing 8,840 lbs. These products were either voluntarily destroyed or returned to the importer after the Alabama Department notified the FDA of the drug traces.
The Alabama Department’s detection reporting limit is 1 part per billion (ppb) or greater. In the results, 17 samples were in the 1-5ppb range and one sample tested greater than 50ppb.
The basa type products tested were swai, sutchi and pangasius. Out of 19 Vietnamese samples, 12 tested positive; both Cambodian samples tested positive; one of three Indonesian samples tested positive; one of seven Thai samples tested positive; and one Chinese sample tested positive.
Also, one of eight samples of Chinese channel catfish tested positive.
Product samples continue to be collected and tested. Enforcement action will be implemented as necessary.
“The Automatic Stop Sale Order criteria established in April of 2007 is still in effect,” stated Sparks. “This series of tests that we have just completed indicates the importance of the continuation of the Stop Sale Order.”
By Natalia Real
editorial@fis.com
www.fis.com
Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 03:10 (GMT + 9)
Commissioner Ron Sparks of the Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries announced on Wednesday a Stop Sale on catfish and basa products imported from Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, China and Vietnam due to positive results for the antibiotic fluoroquinolones.
A total of 40 samples of basa type products and catfish were tested from the five Asian countries, out of which 18 product samples yielded positive results for fluoroquinolones.
Fluoroquinolones and quinolones are chemotherapeutic bactericidal drugs used to kill bacteria by interfering with their DNA replication. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not allow the use of fluoroquinolones in seafood.
Sparks has issued nine orders of suspension from sale or movement for 486 cases of product weighing 8,840 lbs. These products were either voluntarily destroyed or returned to the importer after the Alabama Department notified the FDA of the drug traces.
The Alabama Department’s detection reporting limit is 1 part per billion (ppb) or greater. In the results, 17 samples were in the 1-5ppb range and one sample tested greater than 50ppb.
The basa type products tested were swai, sutchi and pangasius. Out of 19 Vietnamese samples, 12 tested positive; both Cambodian samples tested positive; one of three Indonesian samples tested positive; one of seven Thai samples tested positive; and one Chinese sample tested positive.
Also, one of eight samples of Chinese channel catfish tested positive.
Product samples continue to be collected and tested. Enforcement action will be implemented as necessary.
“The Automatic Stop Sale Order criteria established in April of 2007 is still in effect,” stated Sparks. “This series of tests that we have just completed indicates the importance of the continuation of the Stop Sale Order.”
By Natalia Real
editorial@fis.com
www.fis.com
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Alabama Bans Asian Catish For Contamination
by Dan Flynn | Nov 05, 2009
A Stop Sale order on imported catfish and basa product from Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, China and Vietnam has been re-imposed by the State of Alabama.
Commissioner Ron Sparks of the Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries announced the state-imposed ban at a press conference in Montgomery late Wednesday afternoon.
The announcement was certain to delight domestic catfish farmers who have punched buttons at both the state and federal levels to limit foreign fish imports to the United States.
Sparks said the Asian fish products tested positive for fluoroquinolones.
Quinolones and fluoroquinolones are chemotherapeutic bactericidal drugs, used for eradicating bacteria by interfering with DNA replication.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not allow the use of fluoroquinolones in fish or seafood.
Alabama tested 40 samples of basa type products and catfish from the five countries; 18 samples came back positive for fluoroquinolones.
Commissioner Sparks has issued nine suspensions from sale or movement orders for 486 cases of product (8,840 lbs).
This product has been either voluntarily destroyed or returned to the importer of record after the Department has notified the FDA.
The Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries detection reporting limit for fluoroquinolones is 1 part per billion (ppb) or greater.
Seventeen samples were in the 1-5ppb range and one sample tested greater than 50ppb. Product samples continue to be collected and tested and enforcement action will be implemented as necessary.
With the action, Alabama continues "Automatic Stop Sale Order" criteria established in April 2007.
"This series of tests that we have just completed indicates the importance of the continuation of the Stop Sale Order," Sparks said.
Test Results:
Basa Type Products (swai, sutchi, pangasius)
•Vietnam: 12 of 19 tested positive
•Cambodia: 2 of 2 tested positive
•Indonesia: 1 of 3 tested positive
•Thailand: 1 of 7 tested positive
•China: 1 of 1 tested positive
Channel Catfish
•China: 1 of 8 tested positive
A Stop Sale order on imported catfish and basa product from Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, China and Vietnam has been re-imposed by the State of Alabama.
Commissioner Ron Sparks of the Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries announced the state-imposed ban at a press conference in Montgomery late Wednesday afternoon.
The announcement was certain to delight domestic catfish farmers who have punched buttons at both the state and federal levels to limit foreign fish imports to the United States.
Sparks said the Asian fish products tested positive for fluoroquinolones.
Quinolones and fluoroquinolones are chemotherapeutic bactericidal drugs, used for eradicating bacteria by interfering with DNA replication.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not allow the use of fluoroquinolones in fish or seafood.
Alabama tested 40 samples of basa type products and catfish from the five countries; 18 samples came back positive for fluoroquinolones.
Commissioner Sparks has issued nine suspensions from sale or movement orders for 486 cases of product (8,840 lbs).
This product has been either voluntarily destroyed or returned to the importer of record after the Department has notified the FDA.
The Alabama Department of Agriculture & Industries detection reporting limit for fluoroquinolones is 1 part per billion (ppb) or greater.
Seventeen samples were in the 1-5ppb range and one sample tested greater than 50ppb. Product samples continue to be collected and tested and enforcement action will be implemented as necessary.
With the action, Alabama continues "Automatic Stop Sale Order" criteria established in April 2007.
"This series of tests that we have just completed indicates the importance of the continuation of the Stop Sale Order," Sparks said.
Test Results:
Basa Type Products (swai, sutchi, pangasius)
•Vietnam: 12 of 19 tested positive
•Cambodia: 2 of 2 tested positive
•Indonesia: 1 of 3 tested positive
•Thailand: 1 of 7 tested positive
•China: 1 of 1 tested positive
Channel Catfish
•China: 1 of 8 tested positive
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Checking Imports
Catfish Farmers Want Imports Inspected
Calls on Congress to tighten regulations.
Compiled by staff
Published: Oct 19, 2009
The Catfish Farmers of America this week launched a major advertising and public safety awareness campaign called "All Catfish Should be Treated Equally". The campaign urges the USDA to enact a congressionally approved law requiring all imported catfish to meet the same stringent health and safety standards as imported beef, poultry and pork.
"We've launched this campaign because of the urgency of this health and safety issue," said Joey Lowery, president of the Catfish Farmers of America. "We need Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to enact this law now. Nothing is more important than the health and safety of our families. U.S. catfish farmers fully support the toughest and widest-ranging regulations and inspections that will protect American consumers when it comes to catfish - both imported and domestic."
The Catfish Farmers of America advertising campaign is targeting D.C.-based decision-makers and opinion leaders.
While the USDA currently inspects and ensures the safety of all meat and poultry products sold in the United States, it does not inspect seafood. The inspection of seafood is conducted by the Food and Drug Administration.
Last year 5.2 billion pounds of seafood were imported into the United States from foreign countries. However, the FDA inspected only two percent of all imported seafood, including catfish, according to the Government Accountability Office.
"There is absolutely no way to determine whether all these imports are safe from contamination or harmful chemicals that aren't allowed here in the U.S.," said Lowery. "We want USDA approval that every catfish product imported into America meets the same rigorous standards for quality and safety as our farm-raised catfish."
The Catfish Farmers of America started its "All Catfish Should Be Treated Equally" campaign this week because the administration has reached a critical point in the decision-making process for enacting the law.
The U.S. Congress, responding to evidence of serious problems with the quality of imported catfish, voted to move catfish inspections and regulation from the FDA to USDA as part of the 2008 Farm Bill. USDA Secretary Vilsack, who has made food safety one of his top priorities, is now considering whether to require that all imported catfish meet USDA standards, or to include only Chinese "channel" catfish which are grown from young U.S. catfish stock.
Catfish products are also imported to the United States from Vietnam and Thailand where fish from the catfish family are called "tra" or "basa." Among the two percent of seafood imports from Vietnam inspected by the FDA during a recent four-year period, nearly one in every five seafood shipments, including catfish, was contaminated with potentially deadly chemicals or drugs that are banned by the United States in farm-raised catfish, according to the FDA.
In a bipartisan appeal, Sen. Blanche L. Lincoln, D-Ark., chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, and Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, urged Vilsack to "support a broad definition of catfish that will ensure that catfish products meet the standards for safety that Americans have come to expect from the U.S. Department of Agriculture."
Calls on Congress to tighten regulations.
Compiled by staff
Published: Oct 19, 2009
The Catfish Farmers of America this week launched a major advertising and public safety awareness campaign called "All Catfish Should be Treated Equally". The campaign urges the USDA to enact a congressionally approved law requiring all imported catfish to meet the same stringent health and safety standards as imported beef, poultry and pork.
"We've launched this campaign because of the urgency of this health and safety issue," said Joey Lowery, president of the Catfish Farmers of America. "We need Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to enact this law now. Nothing is more important than the health and safety of our families. U.S. catfish farmers fully support the toughest and widest-ranging regulations and inspections that will protect American consumers when it comes to catfish - both imported and domestic."
The Catfish Farmers of America advertising campaign is targeting D.C.-based decision-makers and opinion leaders.
While the USDA currently inspects and ensures the safety of all meat and poultry products sold in the United States, it does not inspect seafood. The inspection of seafood is conducted by the Food and Drug Administration.
Last year 5.2 billion pounds of seafood were imported into the United States from foreign countries. However, the FDA inspected only two percent of all imported seafood, including catfish, according to the Government Accountability Office.
"There is absolutely no way to determine whether all these imports are safe from contamination or harmful chemicals that aren't allowed here in the U.S.," said Lowery. "We want USDA approval that every catfish product imported into America meets the same rigorous standards for quality and safety as our farm-raised catfish."
The Catfish Farmers of America started its "All Catfish Should Be Treated Equally" campaign this week because the administration has reached a critical point in the decision-making process for enacting the law.
The U.S. Congress, responding to evidence of serious problems with the quality of imported catfish, voted to move catfish inspections and regulation from the FDA to USDA as part of the 2008 Farm Bill. USDA Secretary Vilsack, who has made food safety one of his top priorities, is now considering whether to require that all imported catfish meet USDA standards, or to include only Chinese "channel" catfish which are grown from young U.S. catfish stock.
Catfish products are also imported to the United States from Vietnam and Thailand where fish from the catfish family are called "tra" or "basa." Among the two percent of seafood imports from Vietnam inspected by the FDA during a recent four-year period, nearly one in every five seafood shipments, including catfish, was contaminated with potentially deadly chemicals or drugs that are banned by the United States in farm-raised catfish, according to the FDA.
In a bipartisan appeal, Sen. Blanche L. Lincoln, D-Ark., chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, and Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, urged Vilsack to "support a broad definition of catfish that will ensure that catfish products meet the standards for safety that Americans have come to expect from the U.S. Department of Agriculture."
Algae Workshop
Open Ponds Could Be Key to Algae-Biodiesel Production
1 Comment Posted by John Davis – October 20th, 2009
Rising feed prices for catfish farms and the rising Chinese market are bad news for those in the South, as more than 320,000 catfish pond acres could be up for grabs. But where one door closes, another opens, as a possible glut of open-air ponds could provide a boon for those looking to raise algae for biodiesel.
To explore the possibilities, the National Algae Association Mid-South Chapter is presenting a workshop on November 18-19, 2009 in Memphis, Tennessee at the Holiday Inn Select Hotel, downtown. This association press release says the key speakers will include Barry Cohen, Director of the National Algae Association; Terri Chiang of Biomass Partners, LLC; and Ron Putt of Auburn University:
The workshop’s focus will be highlighted by a motor coach trip to Saul Fish Farm, a leading aquaculture facility in Des Arc, Arkansas where attendees will go on a walking tour to get a first-hand glimpse of the scope and potential for algal open pond production. Rodney Saul, owner of Saul Fish Farm will describe his procedures for growing algae for aquaculture applications. While at the farm, attendees will hear from additional speakers and interact in open forums on algal growing techniques, harvesting, and extraction methods.
Deadline submission for white papers for open pond algal growth systems, technologies, and support equipment is November 1st for review by the executive committee for potential inclusion in the workshop.
“This event is very timely in light of the strong interest in alternatives to expensive, closed-loop algae production systems, says Tamra Fakhoorian, president of the NAA Mid-South Chapter. She continues, “Given the current availability of hundreds of thousands of existing pond acres in the South and new applicable technologies coming on-line, aquaculture farmers and entrepreneurs alike are taking a good look at the economic feasibility of becoming open pond algae farmers. This workshop will address the opportunities, the challenges and late-breaking solutions for open pond production.”
You can get more information on registration here. Early registration goes on through November 4th.
1 Comment Posted by John Davis – October 20th, 2009
Rising feed prices for catfish farms and the rising Chinese market are bad news for those in the South, as more than 320,000 catfish pond acres could be up for grabs. But where one door closes, another opens, as a possible glut of open-air ponds could provide a boon for those looking to raise algae for biodiesel.
To explore the possibilities, the National Algae Association Mid-South Chapter is presenting a workshop on November 18-19, 2009 in Memphis, Tennessee at the Holiday Inn Select Hotel, downtown. This association press release says the key speakers will include Barry Cohen, Director of the National Algae Association; Terri Chiang of Biomass Partners, LLC; and Ron Putt of Auburn University:
The workshop’s focus will be highlighted by a motor coach trip to Saul Fish Farm, a leading aquaculture facility in Des Arc, Arkansas where attendees will go on a walking tour to get a first-hand glimpse of the scope and potential for algal open pond production. Rodney Saul, owner of Saul Fish Farm will describe his procedures for growing algae for aquaculture applications. While at the farm, attendees will hear from additional speakers and interact in open forums on algal growing techniques, harvesting, and extraction methods.
Deadline submission for white papers for open pond algal growth systems, technologies, and support equipment is November 1st for review by the executive committee for potential inclusion in the workshop.
“This event is very timely in light of the strong interest in alternatives to expensive, closed-loop algae production systems, says Tamra Fakhoorian, president of the NAA Mid-South Chapter. She continues, “Given the current availability of hundreds of thousands of existing pond acres in the South and new applicable technologies coming on-line, aquaculture farmers and entrepreneurs alike are taking a good look at the economic feasibility of becoming open pond algae farmers. This workshop will address the opportunities, the challenges and late-breaking solutions for open pond production.”
You can get more information on registration here. Early registration goes on through November 4th.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Regulation Isn't Fishy
Posted on Sun, Oct. 18, 2009 11:08 PM
In Seafood Industry, Regulation Isn't Fishy
By STEVE EVERLY
The Kansas City Star
Breaking News
Suspicious containers found in Lawrence Person of interest identified in fatal Lawrence hit-and-run Recalled baby food may be tainted with botulism Chiefs trade Tank Tyler to Carolina Billy Joel, Elton John coming to KC in December Missouri to lay off 100 state parks workers Jury convicts Raytown man in videotaped killing at south KC bar Woman charged with dropping toddler from balcony Navy recruiter sentenced to 15 years in KC sex sting Truck plunges into south KC creek DNR closes Lake of the Ozarks beach for high E. coli NBC Action Weather | A nice evening; clouds move in Tuesday Burke to enter KC mayor race No one injured after small plane lands in grass Missouri prison population at all-time high Southwest Missouri man killed in hunting accident More charges expected in 2006 group home fire that killed 11 Two-week hospital stay possible for injured KC fire captain KCK man shot to death is identified Former Kansas congressman Glickman to step down as head of MPAA Don’t lump the U.S. seafood industry in with businesses that are sick and tired of big government. This is one sector that wants more regulation, and the sooner the better.
The problem is seafood sold at less than the weight listed on the package, which an industry gathering earlier this year described as “premeditated, organized and intentional” fraud.
Industry groups want regulators to be more aggressive in helping curb the abuse, which has some seafood selling at 10 to 35 percent less than its labeled weight. Though it’s difficult to say just how widespread shortweighting is, the industry fears the losses are substantial for honest vendors and for consumers, given that nearly $23 billion in seafood was sold in the U.S. last year.
“We want to shine a light on this so we can get rid of it,” said Gavin Gibbons, a spokesman for the National Fisheries Institute, the country’s largest seafood trade group, whose members include chain restaurants, wholesalers and fishermen.
The U.S. consumes 5 billion pounds of seafood a year, 80 percent of it imported and most of it frozen. That makes the industry and consumers particularly vulnerable because a package that says, for example, 10 pounds of shrimp is supposed to contain 10 pounds of shrimp — plus any ice. But without a careful thawing, draining and weighing, it’s nearly impossible to tell whether excess ice could be cheating the buyer.
On top of that, the Food and Drug Administration inspects only 2 percent of seafood and focuses on food safety more than possible underweighting.
There are signs the industry’s message is being heard, as the FDA says it is considering a tougher approach and recently issued a warning about ice being wrongly included in listed weights.
“We do take economic fraud seriously,” said Stephanie Kwisnek, a FDA spokeswoman.
State regulators also are looking at the issue, though only a few states routinely check the weight of seafood, in part because it takes special equipment and can be expensive.
Neither Kansas nor Missouri currently performs the tests, but Ron Hayes, Missouri’s division director for weights and measures, said the seafood issue was only recently brought to his agency’s attention.
“Very likely we’ll be doing some testing,” he said.
The nature of the seafood business has long made it vulnerable to some forms of deception, such as substituting a cheaper species of fish for one that can snare a higher price, or making up names that suggest a better — and more expensive — product. Earlier this year, for instance, federal regulators said that calling Vietnamese catfish “white roughy” was misleading.
As for shortweighting, it’s difficult to say how common the problem is because of the lack of comprehensive data, the Government Accountability Office said in a recent report.
But the Better Seafood Board, another industry group seeking to stamp out the fraud, says the practice has become so brazen that one Chinese supplier offered wholesalers three different prices for channel catfish. The more deceptive the weight of a package, the cheaper the price was for a “pound” of fish.
Similar solicitations are appearing in California, which has inspected seafood for decades, said Kurt Floren, who is in charge of weights and measures for Los Angeles County. He said that he first saw evidence of shortweighting more than a decade ago and that awareness of the problem is increasing.
Some Kansas City area wholesalers said they also knew that shortweighted product was available from some suppliers, but they refused to buy it.
Wisconsin is another state that checks for underweighted seafood, and regulators there say they have found “quite a bit of it,” with packages of frozen seafood getting as much as 25 percent of their weight from ice.
“I think it’s a significant problem,” said Judy Cardin, chief of weights and measures for the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.
An ice glaze is typically applied to help protect seafood from dehydration and freezer burn. But more glaze than needed can be applied, and in any case none of the ice is supposed to be counted as part of the seafood’s weight.
The American Frozen Food Institute, which represents companies that sell frozen seafood, said it was monitoring the issue but had not decided whether there’s a problem that needs increased regulation.
But the industry gathering earlier this year, which a representative of the Frozen Food Institute attended, came to a different conclusion. More than two dozen people representing industry groups, wholesale seafood companies, and state and federal regulators attended the “seafood forum” in May at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency in Gaithersburg, Md.
According to the memorandum summarizing the meeting, there was consensus that shortweighting of seafood was occurring not only in the U.S. but in other countries as well. The summary said further that a concerted effort is needed, including more regulation and consumer education about the fraud.
Industry groups at the forum argued that checking for economic fraud could also improve food safety, because a company that cheated on weight might be more likely to also breach food safety rules.
FDA officials at the forum promised to consider whether such a link existed between food safety and shortweighting.
Perhaps most important for the industry groups, it said it would consider making economic fraud a larger part of its seafood enforcement strategy.
So far, the FDA hasn’t put more resources into inspections for shortweighting, but the industry groups want it to follow through.
“They have a role to play,” said Gibbons of the National Fisheries Institute. “That’s what we pay taxes for.”
In Seafood Industry, Regulation Isn't Fishy
By STEVE EVERLY
The Kansas City Star
Breaking News
Suspicious containers found in Lawrence Person of interest identified in fatal Lawrence hit-and-run Recalled baby food may be tainted with botulism Chiefs trade Tank Tyler to Carolina Billy Joel, Elton John coming to KC in December Missouri to lay off 100 state parks workers Jury convicts Raytown man in videotaped killing at south KC bar Woman charged with dropping toddler from balcony Navy recruiter sentenced to 15 years in KC sex sting Truck plunges into south KC creek DNR closes Lake of the Ozarks beach for high E. coli NBC Action Weather | A nice evening; clouds move in Tuesday Burke to enter KC mayor race No one injured after small plane lands in grass Missouri prison population at all-time high Southwest Missouri man killed in hunting accident More charges expected in 2006 group home fire that killed 11 Two-week hospital stay possible for injured KC fire captain KCK man shot to death is identified Former Kansas congressman Glickman to step down as head of MPAA Don’t lump the U.S. seafood industry in with businesses that are sick and tired of big government. This is one sector that wants more regulation, and the sooner the better.
The problem is seafood sold at less than the weight listed on the package, which an industry gathering earlier this year described as “premeditated, organized and intentional” fraud.
Industry groups want regulators to be more aggressive in helping curb the abuse, which has some seafood selling at 10 to 35 percent less than its labeled weight. Though it’s difficult to say just how widespread shortweighting is, the industry fears the losses are substantial for honest vendors and for consumers, given that nearly $23 billion in seafood was sold in the U.S. last year.
“We want to shine a light on this so we can get rid of it,” said Gavin Gibbons, a spokesman for the National Fisheries Institute, the country’s largest seafood trade group, whose members include chain restaurants, wholesalers and fishermen.
The U.S. consumes 5 billion pounds of seafood a year, 80 percent of it imported and most of it frozen. That makes the industry and consumers particularly vulnerable because a package that says, for example, 10 pounds of shrimp is supposed to contain 10 pounds of shrimp — plus any ice. But without a careful thawing, draining and weighing, it’s nearly impossible to tell whether excess ice could be cheating the buyer.
On top of that, the Food and Drug Administration inspects only 2 percent of seafood and focuses on food safety more than possible underweighting.
There are signs the industry’s message is being heard, as the FDA says it is considering a tougher approach and recently issued a warning about ice being wrongly included in listed weights.
“We do take economic fraud seriously,” said Stephanie Kwisnek, a FDA spokeswoman.
State regulators also are looking at the issue, though only a few states routinely check the weight of seafood, in part because it takes special equipment and can be expensive.
Neither Kansas nor Missouri currently performs the tests, but Ron Hayes, Missouri’s division director for weights and measures, said the seafood issue was only recently brought to his agency’s attention.
“Very likely we’ll be doing some testing,” he said.
The nature of the seafood business has long made it vulnerable to some forms of deception, such as substituting a cheaper species of fish for one that can snare a higher price, or making up names that suggest a better — and more expensive — product. Earlier this year, for instance, federal regulators said that calling Vietnamese catfish “white roughy” was misleading.
As for shortweighting, it’s difficult to say how common the problem is because of the lack of comprehensive data, the Government Accountability Office said in a recent report.
But the Better Seafood Board, another industry group seeking to stamp out the fraud, says the practice has become so brazen that one Chinese supplier offered wholesalers three different prices for channel catfish. The more deceptive the weight of a package, the cheaper the price was for a “pound” of fish.
Similar solicitations are appearing in California, which has inspected seafood for decades, said Kurt Floren, who is in charge of weights and measures for Los Angeles County. He said that he first saw evidence of shortweighting more than a decade ago and that awareness of the problem is increasing.
Some Kansas City area wholesalers said they also knew that shortweighted product was available from some suppliers, but they refused to buy it.
Wisconsin is another state that checks for underweighted seafood, and regulators there say they have found “quite a bit of it,” with packages of frozen seafood getting as much as 25 percent of their weight from ice.
“I think it’s a significant problem,” said Judy Cardin, chief of weights and measures for the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.
An ice glaze is typically applied to help protect seafood from dehydration and freezer burn. But more glaze than needed can be applied, and in any case none of the ice is supposed to be counted as part of the seafood’s weight.
The American Frozen Food Institute, which represents companies that sell frozen seafood, said it was monitoring the issue but had not decided whether there’s a problem that needs increased regulation.
But the industry gathering earlier this year, which a representative of the Frozen Food Institute attended, came to a different conclusion. More than two dozen people representing industry groups, wholesale seafood companies, and state and federal regulators attended the “seafood forum” in May at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency in Gaithersburg, Md.
According to the memorandum summarizing the meeting, there was consensus that shortweighting of seafood was occurring not only in the U.S. but in other countries as well. The summary said further that a concerted effort is needed, including more regulation and consumer education about the fraud.
Industry groups at the forum argued that checking for economic fraud could also improve food safety, because a company that cheated on weight might be more likely to also breach food safety rules.
FDA officials at the forum promised to consider whether such a link existed between food safety and shortweighting.
Perhaps most important for the industry groups, it said it would consider making economic fraud a larger part of its seafood enforcement strategy.
So far, the FDA hasn’t put more resources into inspections for shortweighting, but the industry groups want it to follow through.
“They have a role to play,” said Gibbons of the National Fisheries Institute. “That’s what we pay taxes for.”
Monday, October 19, 2009
Where Does Your Catfish Come From?
10.16.2009 3:00 pm
Poll: What’s the origin of your catfish?
By Harry Jackson Jr.
Email thisShare this Print this Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark Stumble It! The American catfish industry is demanding that the USDA ensure that imported catfish is safe.
This fresh out of Jackson, Miss.: Catfish farmers – a major industry in the Southeast, and growing in Missouri — are demanding that the U.S. Department of Agriculture impose the same rules of safety, freshness and cleanliness on imported catfish.
You mean they don’t already? Apparently not. I didn’t know there was a fight about this. Now, I find out that that earlier this year the Alabama Agriculture found antibiotics that are banned in America, in catfish imported from China. As a result the Alabama Ag Commissioner banned the sale of catfish from China.
Catfish Farmers of America want federal legislation that scrutinizes imported fish as closely as American fish.
Also news, the American Agriculture Department doesn’t inspect imported seafood. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration does that, and according to Alabama, not very well. Last year 5.2 billion pounds of seafood were imported into the United States last year, says the catfish farmers organization. Two percent was inspected by the FDA, says the organization. (Of course it’s infinitely more complicated than that.)
Still,
Does it matter to you where the catfish you buy comes from?
Yes. I always buy American fish.
No. price matters more than origin.
Not my problem. I only eat catfish in Grafton, Ill., where I watch them catch it out of their back doors.
Poll: What’s the origin of your catfish?
By Harry Jackson Jr.
Email thisShare this Print this Digg Yahoo! Del.icio.us Facebook Reddit Drudge Google Fark Stumble It! The American catfish industry is demanding that the USDA ensure that imported catfish is safe.
This fresh out of Jackson, Miss.: Catfish farmers – a major industry in the Southeast, and growing in Missouri — are demanding that the U.S. Department of Agriculture impose the same rules of safety, freshness and cleanliness on imported catfish.
You mean they don’t already? Apparently not. I didn’t know there was a fight about this. Now, I find out that that earlier this year the Alabama Agriculture found antibiotics that are banned in America, in catfish imported from China. As a result the Alabama Ag Commissioner banned the sale of catfish from China.
Catfish Farmers of America want federal legislation that scrutinizes imported fish as closely as American fish.
Also news, the American Agriculture Department doesn’t inspect imported seafood. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration does that, and according to Alabama, not very well. Last year 5.2 billion pounds of seafood were imported into the United States last year, says the catfish farmers organization. Two percent was inspected by the FDA, says the organization. (Of course it’s infinitely more complicated than that.)
Still,
Does it matter to you where the catfish you buy comes from?
Yes. I always buy American fish.
No. price matters more than origin.
Not my problem. I only eat catfish in Grafton, Ill., where I watch them catch it out of their back doors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)