Search

This infographic accompanies "The Effects of Regulation on Ornamental Aquaculture Farms in Florida" (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FA248), an Ask IFAS factsheet that discusses the results of a study conducted to measure the impact of regulations on ornamental aquaculture farms in Florida using on-farm data from 2018. Florida’s diverse ornamental aquaculture industry has many unique challenges that set it apart from other aquaculture commodity groups. The numerous production techniques, diversity of species, and various market outlets make the ornamental aquaculture industry an intriguing study in how regulations impact the industry. By understanding regulatory impacts, we can streamline efforts to address them.

Emerging research on aquaculture governance has pointed to the conundrum of negative global environmental effects from economic incentives for aquaculture production to shift from more highly regulated to less regulated countries. This study has focused on examining whether regulatory costs on U.S. tilapia farms may have contributed to their contraction in contrast to the growth of global tilapia production that contributes to the volume of seafood imports into the U.S. A national survey (coverage rate = 75% of tilapia sold; response rate = 18%) found that on-farm regulatory costs accounted for 15% of total production costs on U.S. tilapia farms, the fifth-highest cost of production. The total direct regulatory costs nationally were $4.4 million, averaging $137,611/farm. Most problematic were regulations of effluent discharge, predatory bird control, international export, and water and energy policies. Manpower costs for monitoring and reporting were the greatest cost of regulatory compliance. The lost sales revenue resulting from regulations was $32 million a year, or 82% of total annual sales, indicating that the regulatory framework has constrained the growth of U.S. tilapia farming. The smallest tilapia farms had the greatest regulatory cost per kg. This study provides evidence that regulatory costs, along with other challenges related to live fish markets, have contributed to the decline in U.S. tilapia production. Increased competitiveness of the U.S. tilapia industry will require a combination of: (1) improved regulatory efficiency that reduces on-farm cost burdens without reducing societal benefits; (2) research and on-farm extension assistance to evaluate new tilapia fillet equipment; and (3) research on changing consumer preferences to provide guidance on effective strategies to penetrate the large U.S. fillet market.

Florida’s diverse ornamental aquaculture industry has many unique challenges that set it apart from other aquaculture commodity groups. The numerous production techniques, diversity of species, and various market outlets make the ornamental aquaculture industry an intriguing study in how regulations impact the industry. By understanding those regulatory impacts, we can streamline efforts to address them. A study was conducted to measure the regulatory impact on ornamental aquaculture farms in Florida using on-farm data from 2018. All farms were censused in the state and results covered 82% of the industry with a response rate of 41% of farms. This factsheet discusses the results of that study and the regulatory burden that the ornamental aquaculture industry in Florida endures.

Understanding the economic effects of regulations on US aquaculture farms provides insights into which compliance costs create the greatest compliance burden on farms. This can further guide strategies to improve the efficiency of regulatory frameworks and potentially reduce on-farm compliance costs while maintaining adequate oversight. This study estimated the regulatory compliance burden on US catfish farms as part of a national effort to quantify the cost of regulations on US aquaculture farms. Completed survey interviews of catfish farms in the major catfish-producing states covered 63% of the total US catfish production area. Total regulatory costs of the US catfish industry were estimated at $45 million annually. Lost farm revenues (measured as the value of lost production, the value of markets lost from regulations, and the value of business opportunities lost because of regulations) were estimated to be $35 million per annum. Catfish-producing states outside the Alabama/Arkansas/Mississippi region had the highest ($2856/ha) and Alabama the lowest ($1127/ha) regulatory costs per hectare among the surveyed states. The greatest regulatory cost burden on catfish farms ($18 million) was caused by environmental regulations related mostly to the management of federally protected piscivorous migratory birds, followed by labor regulations ($12 million), and taxes/insurance ($7 million). Regulatory costs ($/kg) were 2.6 times higher on smaller (<80 ha) farms relative to larger (>300 ha) farms. Attention is needed to identify alternative regulatory frameworks that provide the same degree of regulatory oversight but are more cost-efficient.

The ornamental aquaculture trade is a diverse sector of aquaculture and faces unique challenges that other commodity groups do not have to contend with. The various production techniques, species, and destination markets make ornamental aquaculture an interesting study in how regulations impact the industry. In Florida, aquaculture is primarily regulated under the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, unique from other states. Regulatory costs and the value of lost production on ornamental farms in Florida were estimated to be $5.2 and $23.2 million, respectively. Results from an industry-wide census have shown that there is a high regulatory burden on ornamental farmers for some regulatory categories. These include issues of legal control of fish-eating predators, the restriction of drugs and chemicals, which would be beneficial to production, and the prohibition for farmers to raise species that have been restricted for culture at the national and state level. Larger farms were also able to limit the impact from regulations better than smaller farms by spreading their regulatory costs and value of lost production across greater sales. Although the values of lost production were high for ornamental producers, direct regulatory costs were low compared with other aquaculture commodities demonstrating that the industry in Florida may prove a regulatory model for other sectors.

Global production of marine finfish has grown in total volume of production and the number of species farmed commercially, but there has been little production in the United States of marine finfish other than salmon and red drum. For most species considered to be ready for commercialization, there are few or no farms from which to evaluate the size of the market or to estimate revenues and costs necessary to assess economic feasibility. This present study takes a first step to fill this gap with an analysis of the existing supply of 20 marine finfish species identified as candidates for commercialization in the United States, as a proxy for effective demand (the volume of a product sold at the market equilibrium price). Secondary data from 1950 (where available) through 2019 were compiled on each species, including (1) global aquaculture production, (2) US aquaculture production, (3) US commercial landings, (4) US recreational landings, and (5) imports. Current effective market demand (measured as the sum of commercial landings, farmed production, and imports) was low, totaling 36.6 million kg across the 20 species, which is equivalent to less than 23% of the annual volume sold of US farmed catfish. Commercial landings for 17 of the 20 species exhibited declines, potentially offering opportunities for farmed product to capture market share by filling the increasing gaps in supply. The variability in commercial landings provides opportunities for farms to capitalize on their advantage in supplying product with a high degree of consistency of volume, size, delivery frequency, and quality. Several unknown factors suggest the need for follow-up studies on consumer preferences, degree of substitutability among finfish species, and effects of recreational landings on demand. An important limitation to prospective producers is the lack of species-specific import data for the generic categories of “flounder,” “bass,” and “snapper.” This supply analysis provides a foundatio

The US catfish industry has undergone significant technological advancements in an attempt to achieve cost efficiencies. This study monitored the progress of the adoption of alternative and complementary technologies in the US catfish industry. A 2019-2020 multi-state in-person survey in Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi (n = 68), revealed increased adoption of intensively aerated ponds (6,315 ha) and split ponds (1,176 ha). The adoption of alternative, more intensive, production practices has been accompanied by increased adoption of complementary technologies of fixed-paddlewheel aeration, automated oxygen monitors, and hybrid catfish. As a result, the average aeration rate in the tristate region has increased to 7.8 kW/ha with 97% of catfish farms adopting automated oxygen monitors. About 53% of the water surface area in the tristate region was used for hybrid catfish production. Fingerling producers have also adopted a feed-based, oral vaccine against Enteric Septicemia of Catfish, with 83% of the fingerling farms and 73% of the fingerling production area vaccinated against ESC in 2020. Increased adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies in the US catfish industry explains the 59% increase in foodfish productivity from 2010 to 2019. Monitoring the progress of adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies will guide researchers and Extension personnel involved in the refinement and dissemination of these technologies.

One of the key underlying principles of sustainable food and agriculture systems is to enhance the resilience of people, communities, and ecosystems. This paper discusses broadly the intersection of community resiliency and sustainability of our food system through the lens of positive and negative contributions of aquaculture within the context of the underlying environmental, economic, social, and governance dimensions. Aquaculture has been part of the food supply system for humans for millennia, and its contributions to the resiliency of communities and to sustainability is critical to meet the nutritional, economic, and ecological challenges of the world. Aquaculture, as any human endeavor, can result in negative impacts on the environment, economy, social structure, and resilience of communities. Recent work has reported continued progress in the sustainability of aquaculture and dispelled myths that have proliferated in public media. As a result, aquaculture is increasingly viewed as a potential solution to global challenges of supplying a sustainably raised protein source, complementing fishing and other activities in communities, improving water quality, and responding to climate change, among others. Communities face ever more complex pressures that affect their resiliency when confronted with an array of environmental, social, and economic challenges. Whether aquaculture enhances or decreases the resilience of communities depends largely on the regulatory framework and associated public governance policies at local, state/provincial and national levels. In locales where aquaculture is under-regulated, communities can be affected negatively from resulting environmental, economic, and social problems. Over-regulation of aquaculture can stifle aquaculture activities that enhance ecosystem services and provide social and economic benefits. Greater attention is needed to aquaculture governance and regulatory processes to ensure that rulemaking, implementation

Lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) and greater scaup (A. marila), hereafter scaup, consume a variety of aquatic invertebrates, plants, and occasionally small fish. Scaup have foraged on commercial aquaculture farms in the southern United States for decades. However, the types, abundance, and rate of fish exploitation by scaup on baitfish and sportfish farms are not well documented. Thus, information is needed to understand how fish and other foods influence scaup use of aquatic resources, and any potential economic effects of depredation of fish. From November-March in winters 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, we conducted 1,458 pond surveys to estimate the abundance and distribution of scaup on Arkansas baitfish and sportfish farms that commercially produce species such as golden shiners (Notemigonus crysoleucas), fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas), goldfish (Carassius auratus), and sunfish (Lepomis spp.). We also collected and processed 531 foraging scaup and quantified the proportion of scaup consuming fish and the proportion of their diet obtained from fish. Fish consumption was highly variable between years. In our survey area, we estimated total fish consumption at 1,400 kg and 60,500 kg for winters 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, respectively. Sunfish ponds experienced the maximum loss (18,000 fish/ha) during winter 2017-2018, while goldfish ponds experienced a loss of just 2,600 fish/ha during the same winter. The estimates of baitfish and sportfish loss to scaup revealed potential management strategies for minimizing fish loss and can inform economic analysis of the financial impact of scaup on producers. (c) 2021 The Wildlife Society.

Regulatory costs on aquaculture farms have been shown to be of a magnitude that warrants additional analysis. The drivers of farm-level costs of fish health inspections were identified in this study from national survey data on U.S. salmonid farms. The greatest costs identified were related primarily to state fish health requirements for inspection and testing to certify that fish are free of specific pathogens prior to approval of necessary permits to sell and/or transport animals. Fish health inspection costs included laboratory testing, farm personnel time, veterinary fees, and shipping samples to laboratories, with laboratory testing and the value of farm personnel time being the most expensive components. Principal cost drivers were the number of tests and whether required sampling was farmwide or for each lot as identified by the collector. Farmers who primarily sold into recreational markets had greater fish health costs than farmers who primarily sold food fish because of the greater numbers of species and size-/age-classes of salmonids on their farms. Regulatory requirements to test all species and size-/age-classes on farms increased inspection costs by increasing the total number of tests, the total value of fish sacrificed, and shipping costs. Consequently, for farms with more than one species or more than one size-/age-class, annual farm-level testing was less costly than annual lot-based testing. Increased numbers of tests in a given year, although reported by only a few respondents, can increase costs dramatically and turn profitable farms unprofitable, even food fish farms. Smaller salmonid farms experienced disproportionately greater inspection cost burdens than did larger farms. The fish health inspection scenario of only one annual inspection of only the most susceptible species and size-/age-class showed a cost burden that did not generate economic distress, even on smaller salmonid farms. Other scenarios modeled (based on survey data) that inclu

This survey was designed to capture and quantify the effects of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on the aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied industries. The survey closed April 10th, 2020 at 11:59 pm. The survey will be distributed at the conclusion of every quarter for 2020, to attempt to capture the evolving impacts of COVID-19 over time. U.S. trout foodfish farmers have been impacted severely by the COVID-19 pandemic. All trout foodfish respondents had had sales orders from private companies canceled and 21% had had government (state/federal) orders canceled, with losses reported as high as $4 million per month. While lost sales were the immediate impact, other challenges were mentioned related to increasing production costs, financing, and other essential services that are critical to survival of the farm or business. Of grave concern is that only 36% of trout foodfish respondents indicated that their farm or business would survive the next 3 months without external assistance.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how aquaculture/aquaponics farms and allied businesses have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. The survey will be distributed once per quarter throughout 2020, to capture the evolving effects of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on your farm or business. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

These demonstration and research results are a collaborative effort of Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) Agents and Specialists, Virginia producers, and agribusiness. The purpose of this publication is to provide research-based information to aid in the decision-making process for soybean producers in Virginia. It provides an unbiased evaluation of varieties, management practices, and new technologies through on-farm replicated research using producer equipment and time. These experiments enable producers to make better management decisions based on research and provide greater opportunities to improve yields and profits, which improves quality of life for them and their families. Archived Virginia On-Farm Soybean Test Plots information can be accessed from: http://www.sites.ext.vt.edu/newsletter-archive/soybean-test-plots/index.html