On Tuesday, we posted a link to a National Marine Fisheries Service feature titled 10 Myths about Marine Aquaculture.
Some folks with the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute, as well as the Alaska office of NMFS, didn't care for the feature. They requested, and got, changes to item No. 1 on the list of "myths."
Here is the original version:
1 Farmed fish and shellfish doesn't taste as good.
Taste is a matter of personal preference. In 2011, people in the U.S. ate over one billion pounds of shrimp and the majority of that is farmed — people must like it! In a recent survey, farmed salmon was preferred over wild salmon by Washington, DC area chefs. Most wild and farmed salmon are different species so you would expect them to taste different just as turkey does not taste like chicken. Some people prefer the fishier taste of wild salmon and many prefer the milder taste of farmed. Luckily, both are very good for you!
And here is the edited version now on the NMFS site:
1 Farmed fish and shellfish doesn't taste as good.
Taste is a matter of personal preference. In 2011, people in the U.S. ate over one billion pounds of shrimp and the majority of that is farmed — people must like it! Most wild and farmed fish are different species so you would expect them to taste different just as turkey does not taste like chicken. Some people prefer the taste of wild fish and many prefer the taste of farmed. Luckily, both are very good for you!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Absolutely horrifying the way NOAA is denouncing wild salmon in favor of farmed. Wild is fishy farmed is mild?? If they let the fish farm industry weigh in or write the "10 myths" NOAA should have a fact sheet (written with the same, ahem.. process) next to the "10 myths" about the benefits of wild salmon so that the public can decide for themselves. Lets start with the quantity and type of additives and "aquatic animal drugs including antibiotics" given to farmed fish in the US and for what reason. Less than 10% of shrimp exports are inspected and shrimp is widly known to be one the the worst of the farm raised seafood imports because of its filth and drugs. Eating US wild caught seaffod is the best choice by far.
meant less than 10% of shrimp imports.
And a wild turkey is more tasty than a hatchery raised butterball. Of course, these definitions always depend on how many shots of Wild Turkey your hatchery operator drank.
This is pure propaganda and it's a direct contradiction to the best available science, as well as information on their own website. Shame on NMFS for publishing such thinly veiled misleading information.
How can they claim that 'fish waste'is organic and therefore in balance with the ecosystem? Are the pesticides used kill sea lice that are killing lobsters and shellfish not considered waste from the fish farms?
Untreated sewage from any city is also organic, but that doesn't make it a healthy contribution to the environment.
And how about the claim that aquaculture uses less wild fish than it produces. This is completely untrue of salmon, which their own website suggests commonly takes the fish oil from 5 lbs of wild fish to raise. They are relying on broad generalizations about global aquaculture with the intent that the reader concludes that those statements are true for their seafood purchases. Those statements are absolutely false as they relate to farmed salmon, and shame on NMFS for publishing such misleading garbage with our tax dollars.
This propaganda should have been the very first dollar sequestered!
This is what happens when you have money and are organized. Multi-national food corporations have been lobbying hard to allow off-shore fish farming for years. They will use all kinds of arguments to get there. It will not create jobs, or at least very many. All products will be processed overseas. What jobs they do produce will be low paying maintenance and pen tending gigs. Farmed shrimp has caused the markets for domestic wild to tank. There are plenty of shrimp, we just can't harvest and process as cheap as other countries with a lower standard of living. So we have lost a pile of what were decent paying jobs right there. When we buy something from overseas, our money leaves and never comes back. The feds with their liberal trade policies, feed this fire. The intent of course is to line the pockets of multi-national food corporations, but the consequence is the same, and causes the trade imbalance they propose to alleviate. This is coming, and there is little we can do to stop it.
It would seem the farm fish lobby has forked over some dollars for this bit of propaganda
So how much propaganda does the local aquaculture lobby actually create 8:28, were not 150 million man made pinks in 2013, not part of the same culture?
So if one pays an aquaculture tax, is their aquaculture better or worse for you? Tell us about your myths, and one little lie, the biggest lie of all?
#10
"Finally, domestic aquaculture creates jobs at home and supports vibrant coastal communities and working waterfronts."
Some people need their bi-focals adjusted, but then again aquaculture, as written into the Alaska Constitution Limited Entry Act, Article 8 Section 15, isn't aquaculture either?
But the obvious true issue relates to, who can be confused, when a wild salmon, spawned in a bucket at your local aquaculture facility, is thought to be Natural Selection (C. Darwin?)
You know natural selection, where the weak perish, and the strong survive?
When the definition of any aquaculture fish is branded wild, you know scientific fact "IS" the ultimate Propangda Machine.
150 million aquaculture humpies cannot lie!
Dude: spelling and definition is farmed fish. The problem was several state hatchery enhancement programs gave farm boys eggs to start their farms to today's generations of fifth cousins on life support.
Seems your kettle of fish had plenty of die-offs with sea-lice head implants by Natural selection over survival of the fittest.
Your sporty anti-commercial diatribe over successful pink enhancement programs is laughable.
You should start another propoganda initiative - to shut down the new AK state hatchery to stop king salmon, coho, and trout stockings - because ADFG labels them hatchery-produce or "naturals" if their a king salmon.
It is a difficult argument against farmed salmon for Alaska as we have one of the most aggressive enhancement programs in the world. Both forms of salmon production have their negative impacts as we all know. Pretty much a conflict to not support farmed salmon on one hand and on the other hand support hatchery fish. They both have different but negative impacts.
I disagree. Anytime you raise animals in a tight little box, be it human or fish, it creates a very unhealthy environment that usually involves trying to fix it with feeding them drugs while they crap all over themselves.
Farmed fish are designated "invasive species" in Alaska and for good reason.
Some European countries no longer accept a list of chemicals induced that replicate fish colors or other toxic components. For example, chemicals that can cause blindness in humans.
The history of chemicals used in feeds and or injected to counter sea lice infestations or used directly in pens and then released into open waters revolutionized the "industry" as cost cutting measures. Meanwhile fish culturists manipulated genetic traits with other fish species. Industrial supermarket fish by cloning.
Farmed "salmon" Food safety akin to meeting minimal standards and different standards by country and "rules" mainly export standards around cheap labor or less enviromental oversight.
Pen raised salmon food safety is a swimming white mice experiment driven by economics.
PS. Ten years ago a European friend in the farm fish industry sat down and ate a fresh Alaska wild king just harvested and baked on the grill - he remarked "this is the best salmon I have ever tasted or ate in my life." Bon appetite NOAA.
Post a Comment