Sandhusker
Well-known member
Buying a pork chop labeled "organic" is relatively straightforward: You can assume that the pig that produced it ate only organic food, roamed outdoors from time to time and was left free of antibiotics.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is trying to help consumers by defining what makes a fish organic. Fishermen and fish farmers are each making a case for the coveted classification.
But what makes a fish organic?
That is a question vexing the Agriculture Department, which decides such things. The answer could determine whether Americans will be able to add fish to the growing list of organic foods they are buying, and whether fish farmers will be able to tap into that trend and the profits that go with it.
Organic foods, which many people believe to be more healthful (though others scoff), are grown on farms that shun chemicals and synthetic fertilizers and that meet certain government standards for safeguarding the environment and animals.
An organic tomato must flourish without conventional pesticides; an organic chicken cannot be fed antibiotics. Food marketers can use terms like "natural" and "free range" with some wiggle room, but only the Agriculture Department can sanction the "organic" label.
To the dismay of some fishermen - including many in the Alaskan salmon industry - this means that wild fish, whose living conditions are not controlled, are not likely to make the grade. And that has led to a lot of bafflement, since wild fish tend to swim in pristine waters, show lower levels of contaminants and be favored by fish lovers.
"If you can't call a wild Alaska salmon true and organic," asked Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, "what can you call organic?"
Instead, it appears that only farm-raised salmon may pass muster, as may a good number of other farm-raised fish - much to the delight of fish farmers.
"With our control from hatch to harvest, that's going to be what people are looking for," said Neil Anthony Sims, president and co-founder of Kona Blue Water Farms in Hawaii, which sells a species of yellowtail that is sometimes used for sushi.
But a proposed guideline at the Agriculture Department for calling certain farmed fish "organic" is controversial on all sides.
Environmentalists argue that many farm-raised fish live in cramped nets in conditions that can pollute the water, and that calling them organic is a perversion of the label. Those who catch and sell wild fish say that their products should be called organic and worry that if they aren't, fish farmers will gain a huge leg up.
Even among people who favor the designation of farmed fish as organic, there are huge disputes over which types of fish should be included.
Trying to define what makes a fish organic "is a strange concept," said George H. Leonard, science manager for the Seafood Watch Program at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, which offers a consumer guide to picking seafood. "I think the more you look at it, particularly for particular kinds of fish, it gets even stranger."
The issue comes down largely to what a fish eats and whether the fish can be fed an organic diet. There is broad agreement that the organic label is no problem for fish that are primarily vegetarians, like catfish and tilapia, because organic feed is available (though expensive).
Fish that are carnivores - salmon, for instance - are a different matter because they eat other fish, which cannot now be labeled organic. That creates a chicken-and-egg problem, so to speak. Wild tuna, swordfish and halibut are probably not going to qualify because they are rarely, if ever, farm raised.
The Agriculture Department panel that recommended adding farmed fish to the organic roster was willing to work around the issue and offered various ways that fish-eating fish could qualify.
But those work-arounds have infuriated some environmentalists, who take issue with the idea that a fish could be called organic if it ate meal made from wild, nonorganic fish. This constituency complains, among other things, that demand for fish meal is depleting wild fisheries.
"When it comes to carnivorous fish, it seems to be a complete deception of what organic means," said Andrea Kavanagh, director of the Pure Salmon Campaign, an advocacy group working to improve conditions for farm-raised fish. "Organic is supposed to be on 100 percent organic feed."
As the purists balk, the market for organic foods grows. Consumer sales reached $13.8 billion in 2005 compared with $3.6 billion in 1997, according to the Organic Trade Association. What started as a farming technique for crops has expanded into everything from processed foods to flowers and cosmetics. There was even a federal task force to evaluate organic pet food.
Fish farmers and retailers are painfully aware of what they are missing, and some of them are taking matters into their own hands. As things stand, a limited amount of seafood is being sold as organic at stores in the United States, usually because it was certified by other countries or by third-party accreditation agencies.
If the Agriculture Department ultimately approves organic fish, it would certainly complicate the debate about what types of seafood are best in terms of taste, nutrition, price and environmental impact. Farm-raised? Wild-caught? Or farm-raised organic?
There is plenty of history to the debate. In 2000, when the Agriculture Department sought to weed out some of the food industry's murkier organic claims, it named a task force to evaluate requests from fish farmers for organic eligibility.
The farmers argued, then as now, that with demand for seafood growing and many wild fisheries being depleted, farm-raised seafood should have a competitive edge. On farms, they said, the number of fish remains stable, and the quality of water and feed are controlled.
One thing the task force did was to rule out the possibility that wild fish could be labeled organic.
"It takes some thinking about," said Rebecca J. Goldburg, a senior scientist at the advocacy group Environmental Defense, who was on the advisory panel. "What it comes down to is, 'organic' is about agriculture, and catching wild animals isn't agriculture."
The task force recommended that farm-raised fish could be labeled organic as long as their diets were almost entirely organic plant feed.
The Agriculture Department shelved those recommendations and let the issue lie fallow. In 2005, a second task force was convened - this time, with most of the members affiliated with the aquaculture industry.
Earlier this year, the group recommended far less stringent rules, including three options for what organic fish could eat: an entirely organic diet; nonorganic fish for seven years while fish farms make the transition to organic fish meal; or nonorganic fish meal from "sustainable" fisheries. Sustainable fisheries are those that ensure that their fish stocks do not become depleted.
Even if the recommendations are adopted, it will still take several years before USDA-certified organic fish appear in stores or restaurants. But domestic fish farmers say that new rules cannot come soon enough. While the aquaculture industry has experienced rapid growth, the vast majority of it has been overseas - mainly in China - and much of the growth in seafood sales in the United States, which had a wholesale value of $29.2 billion in 2004, has come from imports.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is trying to help consumers by defining what makes a fish organic. Fishermen and fish farmers are each making a case for the coveted classification.
But what makes a fish organic?
That is a question vexing the Agriculture Department, which decides such things. The answer could determine whether Americans will be able to add fish to the growing list of organic foods they are buying, and whether fish farmers will be able to tap into that trend and the profits that go with it.
Organic foods, which many people believe to be more healthful (though others scoff), are grown on farms that shun chemicals and synthetic fertilizers and that meet certain government standards for safeguarding the environment and animals.
An organic tomato must flourish without conventional pesticides; an organic chicken cannot be fed antibiotics. Food marketers can use terms like "natural" and "free range" with some wiggle room, but only the Agriculture Department can sanction the "organic" label.
To the dismay of some fishermen - including many in the Alaskan salmon industry - this means that wild fish, whose living conditions are not controlled, are not likely to make the grade. And that has led to a lot of bafflement, since wild fish tend to swim in pristine waters, show lower levels of contaminants and be favored by fish lovers.
"If you can't call a wild Alaska salmon true and organic," asked Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, "what can you call organic?"
Instead, it appears that only farm-raised salmon may pass muster, as may a good number of other farm-raised fish - much to the delight of fish farmers.
"With our control from hatch to harvest, that's going to be what people are looking for," said Neil Anthony Sims, president and co-founder of Kona Blue Water Farms in Hawaii, which sells a species of yellowtail that is sometimes used for sushi.
But a proposed guideline at the Agriculture Department for calling certain farmed fish "organic" is controversial on all sides.
Environmentalists argue that many farm-raised fish live in cramped nets in conditions that can pollute the water, and that calling them organic is a perversion of the label. Those who catch and sell wild fish say that their products should be called organic and worry that if they aren't, fish farmers will gain a huge leg up.
Even among people who favor the designation of farmed fish as organic, there are huge disputes over which types of fish should be included.
Trying to define what makes a fish organic "is a strange concept," said George H. Leonard, science manager for the Seafood Watch Program at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, which offers a consumer guide to picking seafood. "I think the more you look at it, particularly for particular kinds of fish, it gets even stranger."
The issue comes down largely to what a fish eats and whether the fish can be fed an organic diet. There is broad agreement that the organic label is no problem for fish that are primarily vegetarians, like catfish and tilapia, because organic feed is available (though expensive).
Fish that are carnivores - salmon, for instance - are a different matter because they eat other fish, which cannot now be labeled organic. That creates a chicken-and-egg problem, so to speak. Wild tuna, swordfish and halibut are probably not going to qualify because they are rarely, if ever, farm raised.
The Agriculture Department panel that recommended adding farmed fish to the organic roster was willing to work around the issue and offered various ways that fish-eating fish could qualify.
But those work-arounds have infuriated some environmentalists, who take issue with the idea that a fish could be called organic if it ate meal made from wild, nonorganic fish. This constituency complains, among other things, that demand for fish meal is depleting wild fisheries.
"When it comes to carnivorous fish, it seems to be a complete deception of what organic means," said Andrea Kavanagh, director of the Pure Salmon Campaign, an advocacy group working to improve conditions for farm-raised fish. "Organic is supposed to be on 100 percent organic feed."
As the purists balk, the market for organic foods grows. Consumer sales reached $13.8 billion in 2005 compared with $3.6 billion in 1997, according to the Organic Trade Association. What started as a farming technique for crops has expanded into everything from processed foods to flowers and cosmetics. There was even a federal task force to evaluate organic pet food.
Fish farmers and retailers are painfully aware of what they are missing, and some of them are taking matters into their own hands. As things stand, a limited amount of seafood is being sold as organic at stores in the United States, usually because it was certified by other countries or by third-party accreditation agencies.
If the Agriculture Department ultimately approves organic fish, it would certainly complicate the debate about what types of seafood are best in terms of taste, nutrition, price and environmental impact. Farm-raised? Wild-caught? Or farm-raised organic?
There is plenty of history to the debate. In 2000, when the Agriculture Department sought to weed out some of the food industry's murkier organic claims, it named a task force to evaluate requests from fish farmers for organic eligibility.
The farmers argued, then as now, that with demand for seafood growing and many wild fisheries being depleted, farm-raised seafood should have a competitive edge. On farms, they said, the number of fish remains stable, and the quality of water and feed are controlled.
One thing the task force did was to rule out the possibility that wild fish could be labeled organic.
"It takes some thinking about," said Rebecca J. Goldburg, a senior scientist at the advocacy group Environmental Defense, who was on the advisory panel. "What it comes down to is, 'organic' is about agriculture, and catching wild animals isn't agriculture."
The task force recommended that farm-raised fish could be labeled organic as long as their diets were almost entirely organic plant feed.
The Agriculture Department shelved those recommendations and let the issue lie fallow. In 2005, a second task force was convened - this time, with most of the members affiliated with the aquaculture industry.
Earlier this year, the group recommended far less stringent rules, including three options for what organic fish could eat: an entirely organic diet; nonorganic fish for seven years while fish farms make the transition to organic fish meal; or nonorganic fish meal from "sustainable" fisheries. Sustainable fisheries are those that ensure that their fish stocks do not become depleted.
Even if the recommendations are adopted, it will still take several years before USDA-certified organic fish appear in stores or restaurants. But domestic fish farmers say that new rules cannot come soon enough. While the aquaculture industry has experienced rapid growth, the vast majority of it has been overseas - mainly in China - and much of the growth in seafood sales in the United States, which had a wholesale value of $29.2 billion in 2004, has come from imports.
