USDA labels farmed fish ‘organic’, candy corn a ‘vegetable’, and Bush an ‘environmentalist’
November 20th, 2008Okay, I made up the last two, but the Washington Post reports today:
For the first time, a federal advisory board has approved criteria that clear the way for farmed fish to be labeled “organic,” a move that pleased aquaculture producers even as it angered environmentalists and consumer advocates.
You can put lipstick on a pig…. No, wrong aphorism. You can call a dog a horse, but it is still a dog … though some conservatives will no doubt try to ride it.
OK, maybe there isn’t a good aphorism, but this last minute frenzy of destruction is getting absurd (see “Bush makes final push to worsen warming, make our children dumber, and sicken all Americans“). The story offers several reasons why this latest assault on our language and environment is a bad idea:
Environmentalists and consumer advocates blasted the recommendations, which would serve as the basis for regulations to be issued by the Agriculture Department. Activists questioned why up to 25 percent of fish feed could be made up of non-organic material, while all other animals certified as organic must eat 100 percent organic feed. They also noted that open-net pens can harm the environment by allowing fish waste and disease to pollute the ocean.
“What we think is at stake is not just the integrity of a standard for fish but the whole organic standard and consumer confidence in it,” said Patty Lovera, assistant director of the advocacy group Food & Water Watch. “A huge part of the growth in organic is driven by people looking for food that comes with assurance. When you start bending the rules, that’s a big risk.”
… Surveys show that most consumers have little sense of what it would mean to produce organic fish and expect that these animals would come under much stricter environmental controls than those the National Organic Standards Board approved.
Consumers Union released a poll last week in which 93 percent of respondents said fish labeled organic should be produced with 100 percent organic feed; 90 percent said organic fish farms should be required to recover waste and not pollute the environment.
Just keep saying to yourself, “January 20, January 20, January 20.”
November 20th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Not soon enough …
November 20th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Where are the USDA panel’s recommendations so that others can read them?
Don’t farmed fish need to be regularly given anti-parasitical and anti-bacterial drugs?
I know that organic farmed animals can be given drugs for therapeutic purposes only, rather than to enhance growth or to compensate for disease inducing farming practices (like poor feed and crowding). But for farmed fish, bacterial and fungal disease are often directly related to the conditions in which they are raised, which are often unnatural and disease causing.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
crf — AFAIK, yes.
This is disgusting.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Some years ago people realize there would not be enough moose for everyone so they invented the domesticated cow. This caused a huge uproar by people who had no idea what they were talking about. Eventually it all settled down and beef became acceptable.
Seriously, fish farming has to happen if we want to have enough protein to feed the world. Lets not go off on the rice and beans stuff. At least for myself fish is a strong preference.
Fish farming depends on how and where it is done. Adequate water flow is essential for healthy conditions. It is my understanding that anti-biotics were once used somewhere, but the main operations no longer do that.
This is not to say that there have not been problems. There are parasites in many wild ocean fish that can be more of a problem in a more localized operation. This is serious, but I think it is very important to the world that we encourage projects to work out the problems.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
This just in, FDA labels ketchup as a vegetable.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Yes, farmed fish are still given antiobiotics. It depends on the actual fish species farmed, but farmed salmon in BC are often still given antibiotics. I wonder if they’re going to include the chemicals that they can give the salmon to make their flesh more pink and thus more desirable to buy.
Don’t even get me started on the parasite issues…farmed salmon pens are suspected to help distribute parasites to wild salmon passing near the farms.
Bottom line is salmon farms include a host of problems that some believe is far worse than the lack of farmed fish in the market.
November 20th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I have no objection, in principle, to fish farms and farmed fish. But the fish farm practices obviously need serious regulatory oversight.
Anyway, unless the fish food is 100% organic, the fish product should not even be labeled ‘organically farmed fish’ or some such.
November 20th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Somehow feeding antibiotics shouldn’t be considered ‘organic’, either.
November 22nd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
If you think this is bad it is only the thin edge of the wedge as the Bush Administration continues to allow large multi-national Agricultural companies to jeopardize the health of Americans.
“In the waning months of the Bush administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has joined the ranks of federal agencies rushing through new regulations that weaken protections for human health and the environment. USDA has released a proposed rule that would significantly weaken oversight of all genetically engineered crops, and which continue to allow companies to grow food crops engineered to produce drugs and industrial chemicals”.
http://ga3.org/campaign/GMOregs
These companies no longer argue that the rDNA genes will not be transferred to other plant species, but now are saying “It is important to recognize that the kind of gene flow alleged in the Nature paper is both inevitable and welcome”.
(Prakash, C (2002) Joint Statement of Scientific Discourse in Mexican GM Maize Scandal, 24 February).
Anyone beside me notice the parallel between what the AGW deniers and pro-GM seed promoters are saying about the long term effects of their junk science?
The contamination of corn and other food crops by genes producing extremely potent pharmaceuticals or toxic industrial chemicals is more worthy of concern than what is being allowed to be termed “organic fish”.