BajaNomad - Farms for tuna

Farms for tuna

aldosalato - 4-26-2005 at 08:10 PM

Lloys's report

Farms for tuna
Dohsui, a subsidiary of Japanese conglomerate Mitsubishi, is investing 150 million dollars in building "fish farms" for tuna in La Paz, Baja California Sur. Mitsubishi, one of world's most diversified transnationals, is the world's largest tuna trader.

The operation will produce bluefin tuna (which commands higher prices than yellowfin or big-eye) for export to the U.S. and Japan. About 30 million dollars worth of the nation's total tuna exports in 2004 (88.7 million dollars) went to Japan.

The national's tuna fleet, comprised of 60 vessels operating in the eastern Pacific, caught 128,914 tons of tuna in 2004.

Mexitron - 4-26-2005 at 08:23 PM

Sounds like a great idea.....gettin' ungry fer sushi already.

comitan - 4-26-2005 at 08:25 PM

Hope they lose some as I go trolling by.

mike odell - 4-26-2005 at 09:03 PM

aldo,
2 weeks ago I saw some new stuff from Pichilugi to Tecolote
in the water, as well as up by Isla San Jose, are these fish farms???

Don't turn your back when Mitsubishi's around

latitude26n - 4-26-2005 at 11:04 PM

There was a Frontline (PBS) special a while back that was devoted entirely to Mitsubishi's track record of environmental degredation throughout the world from fishing and whaling, the shipping ports they control in the south Pacific, and clearcut foresting in Borneo and Indonesia.

The show focused on Mitubishi's M.O. of paying millons of dollars annually in "fines" to governments around the world for their misdeeds awhile they continue their practices and rake in Billions.r

Who was behind the salt works plan at Laguna San Ignacio?

If Mitsubishi is able to get their foot in the door, La Paz should keep a close eye on them.

[Edited on 4-27-2005 by latitude26n]

interesting subject...

Sharksbaja - 4-27-2005 at 01:37 AM

Tuna Farming - How is it Done?

Tuna farming, in its current form, is the capture, transfer, transport, storage, and feeding of live tuna. Tuna farming operations are presently focused on northern bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) and southern bluefin tuna (Thunnus maccoyi). Efforts to breed bluefin tuna in an artificial environment have been realized but attempts to raise bluefin hatchlings to full maturity have yet to become commercially viable. New projects are currently underway to farm yellowfin and bigeye tuna.

Fishing vessels using poling methods and purse-seine nets capture live tuna and transfer the fish into towable sea cages. In the case of purse-seine net vessels, divers are used to direct live tuna from the fishing net to the towable sea pens. Since the objective is to transfer live tuna, purse-seine nets are drawn only to match the towing cage circumference, 132 meters (see Purse-Seine Fishing Illustration and Explanation). This procedure permits the successful release of live by-catch and excess tuna.

After the transfer of live tuna into the sea pens, the pens are slowly towed back to port where the fish are fed large amounts of natural bait and vitamins. Conditions are monitored continuously to provide valuable scientific data and to ensure premium quality production. Tuna are discharged from the pens when environmental conditions, fish quality, pen stocking density and market conditions are most suitable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems more like rustling than farming.

I am always interested in new aquaculture techniques/endeavours but I have a few questions about this one. Particularily, the type of feed and the question of genetic crossover. So they don't harest eggs or otherwise encourage reproduction? Take out but don't put back?

"Farming" usually involves rearing the fish from juvenile to adult in a closed/controlled cycle. This means that these fish depend on humans to survive. Ranching on the other hand usually employs releasing the juveniles to mature more naturally then retuning home to spawn.

Tuna feed primarily on anchovies, greatly deminished in the Sea of Cortez. Who and where are the going to get the anchovies to feed the captured animals.

Since tuna are an epipelagic fish with enormous range they obviously incur a different diet than, for example; farmed salmon. This leads me to believe that these fish will be unlike their wild cousins.
I use fresh salmon as farmed salmon is far inferior in many respects. There is quite a large controversy over its (farmed)purported health benefits.

I also realize that tuna follow a temperature line or contour which sometimes brings them close to shore here in the NW but more notably, a general increase in off-shore(100-200mi) tuna populations in the late summer the last few yaers.

Are the pens able to be moved to a warmer water area if necessary? Warmer water stimulates hunger and tuna can eat!

If Mitsubishi wants to corner a market today, their spies were here yesterday.

[Edited on 4-27-2005 by Sharksbaja]

aldosalato - 4-27-2005 at 05:28 AM

The tuna large pens should be located in front of San Juan de La Costa.

I do not know much about tuna farming............. myself I am worried about the use of antibiotics. Still the idea and investment looks very positive for the area.

P.S. Cancellation of salt plant in San Ignacio has been a big mistake.

Sharksbaja - 4-27-2005 at 01:20 PM

Aldosalato said:"P.S. Cancellation of salt plant in San Ignacio has been a big mistake."

I think the plant would have a huge negative impact on ecotourism in the area not to mention what physical changes would occur. Have you seen the Guerrero salt works in those space based pictures? It is enormous. Just a risky project from different standpoints.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=27.802277,-114.073792&spn...

zoom in for detail

aldosalato - 4-27-2005 at 05:28 PM

Salt works areas are the BEST for migratory birds.
This is fact.

I agree that human developments create changes and mostly I am against most of them myself. Still on this subject I think Mexico shooted itself in the foot just to get along with international environmental organization.

Now Australia has the lead in salt exports.

Paulina - 4-27-2005 at 06:08 PM

One set of Tuna pens in Punta Banda.

aldosalato - 4-27-2005 at 07:22 PM

Right now wholesale prices of prime quality fish in Baja is still very low at around 3-4 dollar a kg.
Offer is limited and prices are slightly on the way up.
In a few of years due to overfishing prices will probably increase dramatically and be around 10-15 USD per kg at current prices (discounting future inflation).

The only way to feed the hungry world population and contain price of prime quality fish is through fish farming.

[Edited on 4-28-2005 by aldosalato]

Fish Farms around Ensenada?

El Almirante - 4-27-2005 at 07:52 PM

On our recent trip ,just north of Ensenada as we were coming down the grade, we saw 15-20 white rings in the water, in goups of 3-5. They looked to be about 50' in diameter, and were about 1/4 mile offshore. Does anyone know if they are farming fish, and if so, what?

Those particular nets

jrbaja - 4-27-2005 at 07:59 PM

are off Salsipuedes and are specifically for bluefin tuna. They are putting in more and they are spreading everywhere.

Dave - 4-27-2005 at 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aldosalato
Right now wholesale prices of prime quality fish in Baja is still very low at around 3-4 dollar a kg.

Care to take a guess as to what the Japanese will pay per lb for one of those big blues? Tuna farming is better than having a diamond mine.

aldosalato - 4-28-2005 at 06:41 AM

3-4 kg prime quality fish is for snapper, cabrilla, groupers dorado etc........

Tuna wholesale prices are higher also in Mexico............probably already around 15 USD per kg.
In Japan they are around 30 USD per kg.
Yes it is a huge profit.
But we have to admit that Japanese are the best in the world to do fish farming. So if Mexicans want to lear they have to allow foreign investments and profits till their own enterprenours can take the lead in the field in future years.

The important thing is to limit the catch in the wild so that this important resource can be preserved for future generations.

Today there has been a report on Televisa criticizing the future tuna farming in La Paz.

Myself I make my living on real estate and tourism in La Paz area. Still I think that we need more technology and grow new technician in profitable new jobs.
Fish farming is one.

Dave - 4-28-2005 at 09:46 PM

Sushi has become so expensive in Japan that the Japanese vacation in the States just to eat at Sushi bars.

Worldtraveller - 4-28-2005 at 10:55 PM

I don't know about Tuna farming. However, I do know that Salmon farming has a terrible reputation in the Pacific Northwest for flavor, texture, health, pollution & environmental concerns. Whether this reputation is deserved or not, I and most of my friends always choose wild fish over farmed fish.

Fish farms......

Pompano - 4-29-2005 at 06:57 AM

It's the same thing with the walleye as with the farm-raised salmon. The walleye is argueably the best eating fish in the world...but when farm-raised is a poor substitute to the flavor and texture of the wild fillets!!

Although I love tuna sushi and sushimi.......Nothing but nothing beats a shore lunch of 'Far Northern Lake' walleye fillets....yummmmmm. Pass me another fillet, por favor?

wilderone - 4-29-2005 at 09:56 AM

Aldosalato said:"Salt works areas are the BEST for migratory birds.
This is fact." Are you saying there wouldn't be migratory birds if it were not for the saltworks being there? The GN saltworks operations was responsible for a turtle die-off due to a toxic brine discharge. Also, there was a large amount of batteries disposed of there, causing more toxins to leach into the sensitive wetlands causing long-term environmental damage. Mollusks and plant life were tested and found to contain high amounts of toxic chemicals. It's an interwoven ecological life science that requires the health of each component in order to thrive. Mitsubishi has been raping the Earth of its natural resources for quite some time, with Baja, CA in its sights because your government can be compromised so easily. You expect them to change their tactics?

aldosalato - 4-29-2005 at 11:32 AM

Yes the best ornitologist of La Paz BCS University, Lic. Carmona, certified after extensive studies in the area that the salt works "salitrales" are a very positive addendum for the migratory birds in Baja.

If Mitsubishi is leaving chemical leaks it is right to fine them and even close their operation. But that does not change the principle that there is not a "greener" industry than making salt with salt water, wind and sun.

Did someone say sashimi

jrbaja - 4-29-2005 at 11:37 AM

birds and progress

Sharksbaja - 4-29-2005 at 12:01 PM

that may be true but the birds were here first and are obviously fairing better than the fisheries.. The fish farming industry is not without inherent problems. Since this topic is focused on tuna farms we will not stray into the serious consequences of say, shrimp farming.
I like the idea of farming fish reared in pens. The real problem may lie in the availability of the tunas staple food, the anchovy. Assuming that this method of farming doesn't deplete the long-ranging tuna fish. The fact remains that tuna need a constant supply of live anchovies or some facsimile.
I have read past info relating to the loss of baitfish, particularily sardines. These types of fish are a crucial link in the food chain. When declines in anchovies occur so does the predator fish. I guess my question is: Is the harvest of anchovies for farming compatible with the number of fish available. Tuna following the currents find the food on their ocean transit. Anchovies tend to follow the cooler currents than sardines. This may lead tuna farms to shudder during warm/El Nino current episodes.

The info below underscores the importance of evaluating the effect numerous "farms" would have on the biosphere.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.american.edu/TED/sardine.htm

With a decline in the population of the California sardine
came an increase in the population of its primary competitor the
anchovy. This only added fuel to the controversy regarding the
cause of the decline in the sardine population. Those who claimed
that the reduction in the amount of sardines was caused by a
natural phenomenon, ie. the change in water temperature saw this
as evidence supporting their view. Because the North Pacific
anchovy prefers water cooler than its cousin the sardine, the
growth of anchovy population reenforces the theory that the decline
in sardine population is due to climatic change. Those who claim
that over fishing was responsible for the reduction in the
population of sardine claim that the anchovy was simply filling the
void left by the over fished sardine. (18) The landings of
California anchovy expanded as those of the California sardine
dwindled. The industry grew from an annual take of 17,000 tons in
1965-66 to 120,000 tons in 1973-74. The increase in the population
of the anchovy due to both the reduction in the numbers of its
primary competitor the sardine and the decrease in average water
temperature off the pacific North American coast. The other factor
resulting in the increased take of California anchovies was the
reallocation of resources used in the sardine industry. While some
of the capital equipment was sold to the booming Peruvian anchovy
industry, most of the labor and equipment was redirected to the
California anchovy industry.
The California Fish and Game Commission took lessons from the
death of the sardine industry and enforced quotas based on
scientific research on the maximum sustainable yield for California
anchovies. The Commission adopted policies to pursue the objectives
of maintaining ample populations of sea life to insure the
continued existence, and to maintain these populations through
limits on both sport and commercial takes. The Commission went
further to declare a strong need to reach agreements on quotas with
the Mexican government. (19) The California sardine case is an
example of why the government must regulate the use of natural
resources, which belong to us all, when they are exploited for
profit. When these types of endeavors are left to their own, the
bottom line and profitability are all that matter, even when it
threatens the continued existence of the industry itself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The sardine demise is still a contested issue. It is inconclusive but points to the indiscriminate harvest over an extended period of time.

Article against the tuna farm

aldosalato - 4-29-2005 at 03:38 PM

Granjas de at?n podr?an provocar mareas rojas en la bah?a

Estos organismos demandan elevados vol?menes de sardina y la acumulaci?n de materia org?nica producir?an toxinas.
Tambi?n en riesgo las inversiones tur?sticas al acabarse especies marinas.
Tras advertir que el establecimiento de las granjas de at?n de la Bah?a de La Paz sin tomar en cuenta la capacidad de carga del sistema, pueden resultar una fuerte amenaza para la vida marina de la propia bah?a, el jefe del Laboratorio de Elasmobranquios del Departamento de Biolog?a Marina de la Universidad Aut?noma de Baja California Sur, Carlos Villavicencio Garayzar, expuso que estos organismos demandan elevados vol?menes de sardina para su mantenimiento y engorda, por cada kilo de incremento en peso se requiere darles entre 10 y 25 kg. de alimento, es decir entre 9 y 24 se va a las aguas.

La cifra anterior debe de multiplicarse por el n?mero de toneladas para tener una idea de la magnitud del impacto, refiri?.

Por otra parte, indic?, en la bah?a existen inversiones en granjas de camar?n que tambi?n van a aportar nutrientes a la bah?a. Y si no se tiene un cuidado en establecer la capacidad de carga, la acumulaci?n de materia org?nica puede ocasionar la formaci?n de mareas rojas, que producen toxinas y acabar con una buena parte de la vida marina.

Estas mareas rojas, hizo hincapi?, acabar?an tambi?n con las granjas de at?n y de camar?n, siendo una amenaza para los mismos inversionistas que ver?an p?rdidas en sus respectivas inversiones.

Villavicencio Garayzar resalt? tambi?n que se debe de cuidar ?demasiado bien?que los beneficiarios de los permisos de las granjas sean nacionales y no japoneses, como ha sucedido en Ensenada quienes han sido los ?nicos beneficiarios.

Otro de los graves problemas es que de presentarse una marea roja afectar?a al turismo y con ello a inversiones de Costa Baja, Para?so del Mar, Balandra, etc.

Adem?s la fuerte demanda de sardina puede generar conflictos en la cadena tr?fica, afectando otras especies como aves, picudos, dorado, entre otras, por lo que recomienda que se revise ampliamente la capacidad de carga del sistema de la Bah?a de La Paz y la extracci?n de sardina, finaliz? Carlos Villavicencio Garayzar.

El Peninsular

Sharksbaja - 4-29-2005 at 06:43 PM

and in English:

Farms of tuna would be able to cause red tides in the bay

These agencies demand high volumes of sardine and the accumulation of organic matter would produce toxins. Also in risk the tourist investments al to be finished marine species. After notifying that the establishment of the farms of tuna of the Bay of The Peace without taking into account the capacity of load of the system, they can result a strong threat for the marine life of the own bay, the leader of the Laboratory of Elasmobranquios of the Department of Marine Biology of the Autonomous University of Baja California South, Carlos Villavicencio Garayzar, exposed that these agencies demand high volumes Its maintenance and grows fat, by each kilogram of increment in weight is required to give them between 10 and 25 kg. of food, that is to say between 9 and 24 goes to the water.

The previous figure should be multiplied for the number of tons to have an idea of the magnitude of the impact, referred.

On the other hand, indicated, in the bay investments in farms of shrimp exist that also are going to contribute nutrientes to the bay. And if itself does not it have a care in establishing the capacity of load, the accumulation of organic matter can cause the formation of red tides, that produce toxins and to put an end to a good part of the marine life.

These red tides, did emphasis, they would finish also with the farms of tuna and of shrimp, being a threat for the same investors that would see losses in their respective investments.

Villavicencio Garayzar stood out also that should take care of themselves ?too much well?that the beneficiaries of the permission of the farms be national and not Japanese, as has happened in Inlet who have been the only beneficiaries.

Another of the serious problems is that to be presented a red tide would affect al tourism and with it to investments of Low Coast, Paradise of the Sea, Yacht, etc.

Besides the strong demand of sardine can generate conflicts in the chain tr?fica, affecting other species as birds, picudos, golden, among others, for which recommends that the capacity of load of the system of the Bay of The Peace be revised extensively and the extraction of sardine, finalized Carlos Villavicencio Garayzar.

The Peninsular one

aldosalato - 4-29-2005 at 08:12 PM

I agree on the debate on putting tuna farms in La Paz.
Still I am in favour of it for many reason.

1) Baja needs to develop also its own jobs alternative to tourism, real estate and fishing.

2)Mexico needs to develop a more modern fishing industry so that it does not deplete its main resources in the sea. Japan have modern technology in tuna farming. I do not see anything wrong with having plants here. In 10 years time many Mexican in the area will know how to operate a tuna farm and competition will be open.

3) Sardines currently cought in the wild are mostly transformed in fishing meal with very low value for export.
Using them to feed tuna would bring added value to their usage.

Bruce R Leech - 4-29-2005 at 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by aldosalato
I agree on the debate on putting tuna farms in La Paz.
Still I am in favour of it for many reason.

1) Baja needs to develop also its own jobs alternative to tourism, real estate and fishing.

2)Mexico needs to develop a more modern fishing industry so that it does not deplete its main resources in the sea. Japan have modern technology in tuna farming. I do not see anything wrong with having plants here. In 10 years time many Mexican in the area will know how to operate a tuna farm and competition will be open.

3) Sardines currently cought in the wild are mostly transformed in fishing meal with very low value for export.
Using them to feed tuna would bring added value to their usage.

I agree. if Mexico was doing this I would be for it But the Japanese are going to git most all of the benefit and Mexico will git stuck with the mess. just like the calamari industry did up here.

Don Alley - 4-29-2005 at 09:49 PM

Quote:

Seems to me it would make sense to establish a few things first:

1) How much forage fish will this new industry command? How much is available before Mexico " deplete(s) its main resources in the sea?"

2) These large fish will be reared in an enclosed, stationary location in place of a moving location in deeper, open seas. Waste products will be concentrated in this one location. Any adverse effects?

3) Sardines and added value...so can we just assume that the fishing meal industry will just disappear? That the new uses for forage fish will replace, and not just add to, current harvests?

...and probably more questions that aren't at the top of my head.

But here we have people who support this scheme, right now, no questions asked.

Great record so far in managing (actually, failing to manage) the Sea of Cortez. Astounding how much has been lost since I first fished it over 40 years ago.

more info on t.thynnus farming

Sharksbaja - 4-29-2005 at 11:49 PM

Caught in a trap: Tuna face a new threat
Report by Stephen Khan and Kathy Marks

The Independent

9th June 2004

Farming was meant to be the salvation of these prized fish. Instead, the farmers have grown rich and the tuna is more threatened.

In the exclusive sushi restaurants of Tokyo, Kobe and Osaka, hungry diners eagerly watch and wait. Maki and futo rolls are passed by as customers sit patiently with chopsticks poised. Then, on the appearance of one dish, they pounce. The tuna has arrived.
In nigri form - served on a small ball of rice - tuna rules the sushi world. Forget shrimp, salmon eggs and eel. It is raw slices of gleaming red flesh the Japanese crave.

Of the total worldwide catch of 1.2 million tons of tuna, the Japanese consume 600,000 tons. But there is one variety that stands out above all others; it is thunnus thynnus - the mighty bluefin. For the Japanese this is the king of fish. Its large size, colour, texture and high fat content make it so prized.

Such quality ensures it is the most expensive tuna. A 440lb specimen can fetch more than a thousand dollars. But there is another factor in its spiralling price - rarity.

The bluefin - one of seven tuna species fished commercially - can reach weights of more than 1,000lb, but that does not stop the sleek beast accelerating faster than a Porsche 911. It is found in waters from the southern Indian Ocean to the North Atlantic.

But the Japanese love bluefin so much that they have almost eaten it off the face of the Earth. By the late 1990s, stocks were down to an all time low - less than nine per cent of what they were in 1960.

Yet it appeared salvation was at hand. Like salmon and trout before it, tuna was supposed to be saved by the fish farmers. Not only would raising the fish in captivity allow wild stocks to recover, but also it would ensure that a steady supply continued to flow into Japanese markets.

Tuna farming, though, was to differ in one significant way from the industry that altered the coastlines of Scotland and Norway. While farmed salmon are born and raised in captivity, the tuna are captured at sea by trawlers pulling purse-seine nets capable of swallowing an airliner. They are then carefully brought to shore for fattening up.

It meant they could guarantee Japanese markets that the fish would arrive in the prime, fattened-up state that customers so love. It seemed like an ideal, sustainable solution that could be efficiently managed.

That, at least, was the theory. Now though, the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) for nature is warning that raising the fish in captivity could be exacerbating, rather than solving the problem of declining stocks.

And, as with salmon, the environmental realities of farming tuna are dawning after fragile communities pegged their economic future to it.

Captive tuna have flourished, becoming latter-day Klondykes for fishermen, especially along the southern Spanish coast of the Mediterranean, Australia and Mexico. The pens have proved a godsend for depressed coastal fishing towns and villages that were in dire need of an economic shot in the arm.

In the late 1990s, Port Lincoln on the remote Eyre Peninsula in southern Australia was a struggling fishing community on its last legs. Now it is reputed to have the highest number of millionaires per capita in the southern hemisphere.

This remarkable reversal in fortunes is attributable to one factor: tuna farming. Tuna now drives the economy in Port Lincoln. The fish-rich waters off the town of 13,000 are dotted with farms, and the ?100m a year bluefish tuna industry is the largest employer on the peninsula.

The industry has brought untold wealth to a group of Croatian fishermen whose families were penniless when they emigrated to Australia and who now own extravagantly ornate mansions on the hills overlooking Boston Bay.

The farms were set up as a response to the introduction of tuna quotas in the late 1980s, which fishermen saw as a threat to their livelihoods. No longer able to go out and catch as much fish as they wanted, they sought a means of maximising their return. They had a brainwave, or so it appeared at the time. Rather than slaughtering the fish, they would ranch them instead.

Every summer, Port Lincoln's tuna farmers sail out 100 miles to the edge of the continental shelf to ambush schools of southern bluefish tuna migrating across the Great Australian Bight. They catch them in giant circular nets and tow them back to Boston Bay, where they are transferred to pens five miles offshore and fed until they are fat enough to be turned into sushi.

When the price is right on the Japanese markets, the tuna are harvested and whisked by aircraft to Tokyo, to be sold in the vast Tsukiji market and other outlets around Japan. Each fish is worth up to ?800, which accounts for the wealth of the families who set up some of the world's first tuna farms.

Port Lincoln, once a depressed and run-down town, has acquired hotels, restaurants, cinemas and a spanking new marina that includes a waterfront residential development accessed by a private drawbridge.

While being fattened up, the tuna consume vast amounts of fish. Three times a day, feed boats moor up beside the farms and flick in a few tiddlers to see if the tuna are hungry. Then they lower pallets of frozen fish into a feeder cage in the middle of the pen. The tuna cruise up and lie beneath the cage, waiting for the fish to thaw and drop into their mouths.

For the tuna, it is the closest thing to being hand-fed. In the wild, they eat only once a week, and have to work hard for it. One feed boat alone leaves port every morning loaded with 20 tons of pilchards, sardines, herrings and anchovies, chosen for their high oil content and imported from California.

Six boats carrying armed security guards patrol the farms every night. With 1,800 tuna in each pen, the farmers cannot afford the theft of their valuable captives. Poachers are on the prowl, and thefts do take place.

The farms are also monitored by biologists employed by the main Japanese tuna importers, who are based in Port Lincoln during the season. They go out on the feed boats to examine the farms and then advise their companies which fish to buy when harvesting begins in late July.

The bluefish tuna of the Southern Ocean are highly prized by Japanese, who love their succulent, sweet flesh. The vast majority of the 4,000 tons of tuna kept in cages off Port Lincoln is bound for Japan.

When the fish reach the optimum weight, and when the market price of bluefin is favourable, harvesting begins. Divers plunge into the pens, grab the tuna and heave them on to the decks of waiting boats. When their numbers are thinned out, the rest are caught in conventional fashion, with a hook, line and pilchard. They reach Japan within 24 hours.

The Croatians who dominate the Port Lincoln tuna industry have been examining ways of applying their farming techniques to other large fin fish species, such as yellowtail kingfish, King George whiting, mulloway and snapper. The "tuna barons" have also exported their expertise to Croatia, where their relatives have established operations to farm the northern bluefin.

It is a move that has been welcomed by communities desperate for work and by Japanese traders who know they can easily shift thousands of tons of the creature.

There is just one problem. Wild bluefin remain locked in a battle for survival. The waters off the coasts of Spain, Sicily and Croatia have proved ideal for rearing captive tuna. They may also prove to be the species' graveyard.

The WWF says Japanese imports have risen by 21 per cent over the past three years.

The spike in tuna farming threatens to destroy the already overfished wild tuna in the Mediterranean, the WWF warned, noting that the practice is not subject to stringent controls. Yet with Libyan, Turkish and Maltese farmers all keen for a larger slice of the lucrative market, the prospects for stock recovery look bleak.

On a recent trip to tuna farms near Alicante in southern Spain, Don Staniford, an expert in aquaculture, was able to see tuna being fattened up for the sushi restaurants.

Mr Staniford, author of Cancer of the Coast: the environmental and public health disaster of sea-cage fish farming, has spent years highlighting the many problems associated with salmon, trout and cod farming. He is deeply concerned about the future of the bluefin.

"The idea that raising tuna in captivity could help wild stocks recover is frankly ludicrous," said Mr Staniford. He explained that the animals face all the problems experienced by salmon and cod, but the pressure on wild numbers was all the greater because the penned fish were actually plucked from the oceans.

Furthermore, with the tuna being a carnivorous fish, its voracious appetite meant that other fish stocks had to be heavily fished to feed it. While it takes three tons of wild fish to produce one ton of salmon and five tons of wild fish to produce one ton of cod, it takes a massive 20 tons of wild fish to fatten up just one ton of tuna for market. The effects on wild fisheries are devastating, he warned. Yet the European Union continues to fund the expansion of tuna farms in the Mediterranean.

Such subsidies could lead to commercial extinction of the endangered bluefin tuna within just a few years, the WWF warned this week. The conservation group said tuna farming jumped by 50 per cent last year in the Mediterranean to reach 21,000 tons. A catch at this level "is not compatible with the conservation of a healthy bluefin tuna population," it warned.

The rapid expansion of the industry since the late 1990s has been aided by EU subsidies of up to ?15m, according to the report. "These subsidies should be immediately eliminated as they are directly resulting in overfishing of the bluefin tuna and could lead to the collapse of the stock in the region within the next few years," said Simon Cripps, director of the WWF's global marine programme.

The WWF argument was rejected yesterday by the European Commission which argued that tuna farming is conducted under strict conditions and its output is limited by national fishing quotas.

Gregor Kreuzhuber, a spokesman for the European Commissioner for agriculture and fisheries, Franz Fischler, said that the method deployed was irrelevant to the amount of fishing that takes place. He said: "It is not a free for all. Tuna that has been caught and is subsequently fattened is deducted from the overall quota of fish that can be taken from the sea."

But environmentalists argue that better policies must be employed. They argue that some fish are not even logged for quotas because they are not actually landed. "Some fish are caught, put in pens and then shipped to Japan without being registered," said Mr Staniford.

And there was a further word of caution from Mr Staniford. Chillingly, it may not just be the health of wild fish stocks that are at risk, he warned. Last week, American newspapers reported that notices in some New England shops and restaurants will be forced to advise pregnant women and children under the age of 12 that they should not eat tuna. High levels of mercury have been found in the fish, even though most of those on the market are caught in the wild.

"We are already at a stage where mercury is being found in tuna," said Mr Staniford. "The experience of fish farming in other species is that rearing fish in high-density cages increases the concentration of pollutants in the flesh. There are now serious questions about the impact of pen-reared tuna on human health."

woody with a view - 4-30-2005 at 09:06 AM

nice story sharks!

now i'm gonna go pull the covers over my head and be depressed for an hour or two....

wilderone - 5-2-2005 at 09:25 AM

Kinda like drugs. Get rid of the users, and you'll get rid of the problem. Japan needs to manage their own population within their own country and stop pillaging the earth. Aldosalto, you want a new industry for Baja? Stop giving away your tuna to the Japanese and open some sushi bars.

Because of the Japanese love

jrbaja - 5-2-2005 at 11:52 AM

for fresh dead mariscos, the majority of pangueros in this area are cleaning out the urchins. Before that it was abalone but those are all gone.
Just like developers, you just can't say no to money!

And the end result? Yikes!!!

sad

Sharksbaja - 5-2-2005 at 12:23 PM

Dave - 5-2-2005 at 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wilderone
Japan needs to manage their own population within their own country and stop pillaging the earth.

Pillaging?? Last I heard, Japan was paying (top dollar) for what they used.

Dave - 5-2-2005 at 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jrbaja
Just like developers, you just can't say no to money!

Gee JR, I thought money wasn't a priority for your Mexican friends.

It isn't my Mexican friends

jrbaja - 5-2-2005 at 01:17 PM

that are selling out the resources. and they get paid so little for this stuff that it's barely worth it comparatively speaking.
But Dave, as far as them needing money, they are aware of the changing times down here. And, they need to put their children through school and it's expensive. Mexicans are not stupid by any means!
That's why I get so much help with the bamboo projects. They may be able to quit selling out their land to rich gringos if they learn to use it themselves.
And speaking of which, hows the Guadalupe project going ? :lol:

Dave - 5-2-2005 at 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jrbaja
And speaking of which, hows the Guadalupe project going ? :lol:

Judging by the look

jrbaja - 5-2-2005 at 03:23 PM

I'd guess I either have the wrong person or it was just gossip. Nevermind! :biggrin:

wilderone - 5-2-2005 at 04:10 PM

You're right, Dave. I should have said "devastate." Just because they pay for it, doesn't condone their relentless consumption:

In 1996 Japan imported over $360 million worth of sea urchin roe from a world fishery in marked decline. These fisheries, principally in the US and Chile developed largely unregulated after the collapse of the Japanese urchin fishery and are now themselves in decline with little prospect for recovery (Keesing and Hall in press).
____________
The livelihoods of many Maine fishermen are closely tied to the economy and tastes of the Japanese. They dive for sea urchins, which are then sold to exporters who sell them to Japan for sea-urchin roe, a delicacy in Japan. In the mid-1990s, when the Japanese economy was soaring and the Japanese sea urchin harvest was declining due to over-fishing, the bountiful supply of Maine sea urchins was tapped. Prices, which had once been 14 to 28 cents a pound, rose to $3.50 a pound at peak times. This enabled some fishermen to earn over $1,000 a day.
Nowadays, the Japanese economy is less buoyant and the sea urchin population is declining; there may only be a five-year supply left. As a result, the fishermen are looking for other delicacies to sell. Eels have been popular with the Japanese, prices soaring to $300 a pound as their demand outgrew the supply in Japan. However, Maine eel catches are down also, and prices have crashed to $25 a pound. Fishermen are now trying to interest the Japanese in sea cucumbers, periwinkles, and whelks, but without much success. They are loathe to go back to fishing for lobsters and scallops. 8/2001 Economics Resource Center
_________________

Japan's imports of "uni" have increased during the same period. In 1994, 11 countries exported live or fresh sea urchins to Japan. The top six countries, which account for 99 percent of all Japanese sea urchin imports:
USA
Republic of Korea
Canada
Chile
China
Iceland
Seaurchin.org/marketnews

__________________

In defiance of a resolution passed by the IWC in London in July, the Japanese begin their controversial hunt of Dall's Porpoises November 1. Meat labeled as "whale" in Japanese supermarkets is often Dall's porpoise, bottlenose dolphin, or other dolphin or small whale species.As the population plummets hunters are targeting lactating females with calves. The dependent calves are left to die. ENN

_____________

It is reported that Japan will expand its already controversial whaling programme in Antarctica this year; nearly doubling its minke whale hunt, and adding humpback and fin whales to those targeted. Japan currently kills about 440 minke whales each year in its Antarctic Scientific Whaling Programme, and another 160 minkes in the North Pacific along with 50 Bryde?s, 100 sei and 10 sperm whales. Although the IWC banned commercial whaling in 1986, the killing of whales for scientific research is permitted, and Japan?s whaling operations exploit this loophole for commercial gain.
WDCS June 2005

_________________
Cuba is proposing that their population of hawksbill turtles be downlisted from CITES I to CITES II. CITES is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. Under CITES, species listed in Appendix I are threatened with extinction and all trade in these species is banned! Appendix II lists species that will be threatened unless trade in them is regulated, therefore a permit is required.
On June 9, 1997, the member countries that have signed CITES will be asked to move the Cuban population of hawksbill turtles (E. imbricata) from Appendix I to Appendix II. If successful, this would allow Cuba to trade in hawksbill shells, or bekko. Since the only significant market for bekko is Japan, there is speculation that Japan is behind this request and is providing funds in support. Success would also set a precedent that would encourage other countries to seek resumption of the bekko trade. Turtles.org
________________________
www.traffic.org March 2005, Tokyo, Japan... Some wild tortoise and freshwater turtle populations in Asia could be threatened by trade supplying for a vast demand for pets in Japan, says TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network. Japan is the largest importer of live tortoises as pets in the world. According to a new report released today, Japan's impact needs urgent assessment to ensure that this trade does not threaten the survival of a number of these species. This is critical, especially since over half of the Asian tortoises and freshwater turtles are already considered threatened as a result of consumption for food and use in traditional medicines according to IUCN-The World Conservation Union.
__________________
Around 20,000 dolphins are killed off the coast of Japan every year and it is widely regarded in the small fishing towns as a great honour to be able to hunt dolphins and whales. Despite enormous criticism from environmentalists and governments the slaughter continues and the meat from whales and dolphins fetch a high price on the local markets, and is much more profitable and prized than either tuna or regular fish. www.weeklygripe.co.uk
________________________
WHO POSES THE BIGGEST THREAT TO FISH STOCKS?
Of all the countries, Japan poses the greatest threat to the depletion of fish in the seas. Japan is the world's biggest consumer of fish and is under pressure to play a more active international conservation role and discourage its suppliers from overfishing the high seas. Tsukiji market, in Tokyo, is an extraordinary mortuary for global sea life, of whom are provided for a national appetite for fish that exceeds all others. The Australian bluefin tuna is expected to fetch about $15, 000 each. These enormous prices influence Japanese fisherpeople to sail past the government-set boundaries of Australia's waters and illegally fish there, hoping to catch as much as possible so to make a fortune.
Not only do the Japanese pose a problem for other countries' fish stocks, but also threaten the world's fish stocks as a whole. Each day, tens of thousands of tonnes of marine life, prised from rocks and scooped from oceans by factory ships working 24 hours a day, are auctioned in the early hours. There is a vast range, including trays of tiny translucent squid, crates of oysters, clams and molluscs. Also apparent are tanks full of salmon, snapper and octupus. Varieties of bonito, tuna and marlin are high in demand and most will end up on serving plates as fastidiously prepared sushi or sashami. Japan's taste for seafood is astonishing and only appears limited by price and availability. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates Japan devours 30 per cent of the world's fresh fish, close on 80 kilograms a year for each man, woman and child. Australians manage just 18 kilos. http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/4620/overfishing.htm

Perhaps if we started making real

jrbaja - 5-2-2005 at 04:15 PM

Japanese Sashimi out of real Japanese :lol:

Heavy on the wasabi por favor! :lol:

The economist on overfishing

aldosalato - 5-3-2005 at 06:32 AM

Talks are taking place in Canada this week aimed at rescuing the world's fragile fish stocks. The simplest solution is tougher rules limiting fishing?but politicians have a way of caving in to fishing lobbies

LET your hook be always cast. In the pool where you least expect it, there will be fish,? wrote Ovid. These days, alas, one can?t be so sure of a nibble. Thanks to rampant overfishing, the world?s stocks of cod, tuna and countless other sea-dwellers have been dwindling for decades. But what to do about it? This weekend, Canada began hosting five days of international talks aimed at finding an answer.

Signs of growing scarcity are everywhere: fish are getting smaller, as are catches. Some fishing grounds, such as Canada?s Grand Banks and Europe?s North Sea, are so seriously depleted that they may never fully recover; North Sea stocks of cod have shrunk to about 10% of 1970 levels. Even the last of the world?s waters to be exploited?in the South Atlantic and Indian Ocean, and round Antarctica?have succumbed to the rapaciousness of vast fishing fleets. All over the world, governments are wrestling with the problem, trying to balance what?s best for the sea against what?s best for their fishing industries. Only last week, Ireland introduced a scheme to reduce the number of fishing boats because of a shortage in marine stocks. The week before, Hong Kong?s quasi-parliament had debated similar measures.
The plight of the oceans is described in a recent report by the UN?s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Its tone is reserved, but the numbers contained within it seem to suggest that modern fishing is really analogous to mining: fish are pulled from the sea faster than they can be replenished. The proportion of global stocks classed by the FAO as over-exploited, depleted or recovering grew from 10% of the total in the mid-1970s to an alarming 25% by the early 1990s, and has levelled off since then. But only a tiny sliver of that is recovering. And fishing grounds that are ?fully exploited? (ie, producing catches that are already at or very close to their maximum sustainable production limit) have risen to around 50% of the total, from the mid-40s ten years ago; much of this is teetering on the edge of over-exploitation. Scientists estimate that the number of large fish in the oceans has fallen by perhaps 90% since the 1950s.

The problem may only get worse as demand grows. Fish is a wonderful source of protein, not only for the growing populations of poor countries but also for the rich world?s health-conscious consumers. So total world production (both marine and inland) increased steadily from 19.3m tonnes in 1950 to 100m tonnes in 1989 and 134m tonnes in 2002. On current projections, it will rise to 179m tonnes by 2015. Ultimately, this could be bad for business: theory suggests that the maximum sustainable yield that can be cropped from a fishery comes when the biomass (amount of living matter) of a target species is about 50% of its original level. Most fisheries are already well below that.

Umpteen agencies busy themselves with monitoring, suggesting and complaining about this, and various international agreements have been drawn up: in 1982, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea set standards for responsible fishing; 13 years later, the FAO drafted a (non-binding) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries; and the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development set goals for restoring depleted fish stocks. However, these efforts have failed to turn the tide. Most governments studiously ignore them.

One reason for this is the age-old ?tragedy of the commons?, whereby anyone with access to a shared valuable resource has an interest in over-exploiting it, and it is in nobody's interest alone to maintain it. Another reason is the tendency of politicians to cave in spinelessly to the demands of the fishing industry, just as they do when faced with angry farmers. The European Union?s common fisheries policy, for instance, is no less absurd than its agricultural namesake. Attempts to alter it?by, for instance, creating no-fishing zones off some member countries' coasts?have been horribly watered down against the advice of independent experts, most recently last December. Even in Hong Kong, supposedly one of the world?s freest markets, fishermen are subsidised.

Some think the best way to tackle the fishing crisis is to encourage the growth of fish farming?a blue revolution in this century to match the green revolution of the last. To some extent, this is already happening: marine and inland farming now account for more than 30% of total fish production, up from around 26% in 1998 and single figures 30 years ago.

Fish farming?s supporters argue that it could meet the growing shortfall as wild fisheries become more and more exhausted. But fish farming has its downsides too. Most farmed fish must be fed with other fish that have been caught in the sea; sometimes several tonnes of dead fish are needed for one tonne to live. Critics also argue that farmed fish is fatty, polluting and stuffed with antibiotics. If the past history of agriculture is any guide, ?aquaculture? should eventually play a leading role in meeting world demand for fish. Whether this can be done in a way that does not pollute the marine environment unacceptably remains to be seen.

Others argue that the focus for the near term should be on beating the fishing fleets at their own game. Today?s vessels can find their prey using sonar and satellites, meaning that a higher proportion of what is in the sea can be caught quickly and easily (though much of this is unwanted ?by-catch? which is usually thrown back). Some policy wonks think that satellites should now also be used to track those boats and ensure they are not breaking quota agreements. However, a better first step might be a system of long-term quotas that are transferable between countries, similar to the recently established global carbon-trading scheme.

Such a system may well be discussed at the talks in Canada, but the political will to act has so far been decidedly lacking. Some politicians now even argue, conveniently, that the chief culprit in years to come will not be fishing fleets, but climate change: glaciers are melting, which is reducing the ocean?s salinity, which in turn is starting to cause a drop in plankton, depriving fish of a key food. Perhaps. But for the time being, the problem remains too many trawlers chasing too few fish.