« May 2007 Table of Contents 
One Man's Opinion: Is organic fish a raw deal?
By Peter Redmayne
May 01, 2007
That's more organic than a fish that swims in the ocean
hundreds of miles from shore, fattening itself on an
all-natural diet of squid, shrimp or sardines? How about a fish
that's grown in a hot, muddy pond on a diet composed largely of
soybeans?
The latter is the way the U.S. Department of Agriculture
sees it, at least. The agency has chewed over what seafoods can
qualify for its organic label for more than six years. So far
the answer is nothing. That may change later this year, when
the agency's National Organic Standards Board is expected to
come up with guidelines for farmed fish ( SFB April '07, p.
26).
Wild fish, it appears, no matter how natural, will still be
off the organic labeling table for the foreseeable future. If
it's not farmed, the agency doesn't see how it can come up with
guidelines for fish that live in a non-controlled environment.
That's a sore point with the U.S. seafood industry, especially
the folks in Alaska, who have hitched their wagon to the wild,
sustainable seafood marketing mantra. "If organic is
replicating nature, then nature itself is the standard," Anne
Mosness, a former Alaska salmon fishermen who lobbies against
farmed salmon, was quoted in the April issue of SFB .
Farmed salmon producers aren't too thrilled with the USDA
either. After intensive lobbying by environmental groups, in
February the NOSB's Livestock Committee voted 6 to 1 to prevent
the organic label for fish that are raised in net pens on a
diet composed of fishmeal. In March, at its semi-annual
meeting, the NOSB decided to defer a final recommendation on
the controversial issue of pen-raised fish until its fall
meeting. In the meantime, the NOSB decided to go ahead and come
up with guidelines that will allow producers of fish that are
raised in closed-water systems on vegetarian diets to get their
fish certified organic by USDA.
(The environmentalists' primary beef with net-raised fish is
that the stocks of industrial fish like anchovies and sardines
are being overfished because of the growing demand from fish
farmers. In reality, however, these fish stocks would be fished
anyway and the fishmeal would be fed to livestock instead of
fish. The irony in the greens' argument is that feeding fish to
fish is significantly more sustainable, since fish convert
protein more efficiently. And that's not to mention the reduced
methane emissions, not a trivial matter when you consider the
methane from livestock contributes more to global warming than
emissions from transportation.)
In spite of USDA's glacial effort to set standards for
organic seafood, organic farmed fish (mostly trout and salmon)
and shellfish (mostly shrimp) are showing up in U.S. seafood
counters and on menus. Most of this product is certified by
independent certifiers such as Germany's Naturland or
Florida-based Quality Certification Services.
By most accounts, plenty of consumers are willing to pay a
sizeable premium for organic seafood, hence the rush by
producers to cash in on the growing demand. So no doubt
retailers and chefs with the right clientele will be happy to
promote organic seafood, no matter who certifies it. And since
it will have to be farmed, wild seafood producers will end up
getting a raw deal.
Contributing Editor Peter Redmayne lives in Seattle