FEED SUSTAINABILITY - CURRENT STATUS, FUTURE PROSPECTS AND CONSUMER ATTITUDES

Paul Morris

Skretting, Wincham, Northwich, Cheshire, CW9 6DF, UK.

Milestones

• Fishmeal and oil replacement

• Responsible sourcing

• Schemes and controls

• Fundamentally efficient

• Uptake of the industry’s offering

• Barriers to progress

Fishmeal and fish oil replacement• Fish require nutrients, not feed materials

• Feed raw materials have been under continuous investigation since fish farming entered the “modern” age

• Early feeds for salmonids had high proportions of slaughterhouse waste, later replaced by fishmeal and fish oil

• Fishmeal and fish oil provide an excellent balance of nutrients and have been very economic in fish feeds though competition for this resource will become more fierce

• Major EU-funded projects (RAFOA, AquaMax) highlight potential for fishmeal and oil substitution in species commonly farmed in Europe; delineate current substitution boundaries

• Published studies indicate complete replacement of fishmeal and oil is feasible in some commonly farmed species

• Skretting data shows portion-sized trout, for example, can grow effectively on feeds without fishmeal and oil though growth and FCR are less good than with fishmeal

Cumulative growth rate (SGR) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) of portion-sized rainbow trout fed diets made with / without fishmeal and with / without fish oil in freshwater at 11°C (legend indicates meal / oil combination)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

FF FV VF VV FF FV VF VV

Sgr

(%/d

ay) o

r FC

R

SGRMeal: P = 0.0025Oil: P = 0.7475Interac’: P = 0.8465

b b

b b

a a

a a

FCRMeal: P = 0.0005Oil: P = 0.4714Interac’: P = 0.2897

Morris, UnpublishedSGR FCR

Amounts of fatty acid in feeds had a significant impact on amounts of fatty acids in flesh of rainbow trout given feeds with / without fishmeal and with / without fish oil

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

12 16 20 24 28

18:2 n-6 (linoleic acid)

A18:2 n-6 in feed (% of fatty acids)

A18:2 n-6 in flesh (% of fatty acids)

1

2

3

4

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

20:5 n-3 (EPA)

A20:5 n-3 in feed (% of fatty acids)

A20:5 n-3 in flesh (% of fatty acids)

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

22:6 n-3 (DHA)

A22:6 n-3 in feed (% of fatty acids)

A22:6 n-3 in flesh (% of fatty acids)

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

12 16 20 24

Total saturates

Sum saturates in feed (% of fatty acids)

Sum saturates in flesh (% of fatty acids)

Y = 0.2230x + 4.7042r2 = 0.7155P = 0.0005

Y = 0.3196x + 17.4466r2 = 0.7800P = 0.0001

Y = 0.1917x + 2.3348r2 = 0.4725P = 0.0135

Y = 0.5362x + 8.0362r2 = 0.4958P = 0.0106

Morris, Unpublished

Responsible sourcing• We are in it for the long-term - the feed industry and its suppliers are obliged to secure

sustainable resources to stay in business

• Fishmeal and oil remain highly desirable feed materials because of the relative cost-effectiveness of their high protein/digestible amino acid content and LC n-3 PUFAS

• Fishmeal and oil will be “strategic” feed materials, used optimally to be of greatest benefit

• Increasingly, our customers are asked to provide differentiated offerings to their customers. Sustainability credentials (explicit and implicit) are becoming fields for competition between retailers and ultimately, between feed producers and our suppliers

• Fishmeal and oil supply has remained approximately static for many years with most fisheries supplying this market being fully exploited

• Net increase in FM/FO requirement from aquaculture (annual increase in feed requirement partly offset by decreasing proportion in feed) means the proportion of the commodities entering aquaculture has increased at the expense of agricultural feeds

• Estimates vary but according to Tacon & Metian (2008) in 2006 global aquaculture used:68.2% of the annual fishmeal production88.5% of the annual fish oil production

Jackson, 2009

Annual output of the main fishmeal and oil producingcountries compared to 12-year average values 1995 - 2006

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Annu

al p

rodu

ctiu

on (t

onne

s x

1 m

illion

Fish mealFish oil At best - outlook is static

Source: IFFO

Trends in spot prices of commodity oils 2004–2009Biofuel rising price of food oils linked with mineral oil

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Jan-

04M

ar-0

4M

ay-0

4Ju

l-04

Aug

-04

Oct

-04

Dec

-04

Feb-

05A

pr-0

5Ju

n-05

Aug

-05

Oct

-05

Dec

-05

Feb-

06A

pr-0

6Ju

n-06

Aug

-06

Oct

-06

Dec

-06

Feb-

07A

pr-0

7Ju

n-07

Aug

-07

Oct

-07

Dec

-07

Feb-

08A

pr-0

8Ju

n-08

Aug

-08

Oct

-08

Dec

-08

Feb-

09

US

D /

tonn

eRapeseedFish oil, Scand.Fish oil, PeruvianPalm oil

USD / tonne, CIF

Schemes and controls

• The fishmeal and oil used in Europe comes mainly from the N.E. Atlantic and S.E. Pacific, mostly produced by the “IFFO 5/6”

• Fishing is heavily regulated in these areas by government enforcement underpinned by scientific advice and codes of practice

• Anchovetta, Atlantic herring, blue whiting and Chilean jack mackerel are 4 of the top 10 marine fish species caught in 2006 and are commonly used for the production of fishmeal and oil. They are described as “fully exploited” with some components of the individual fisheries classified as “over exploited” as of 2006 (FAO 2008)

• In addition to governmental controls, individual companies along the chain have established their own sourcing criteria to assure that their aspirations and beliefs are translated into sustainable feed

Organisations issuing guidance and setting standards– A far from complete list

• Fishery “health” and productivityICES - N.E. AtlanticIMARPE - PeruIFOP - ChileIMR - Icelandic watersNOAA - W. Atlantic

• Guidance and control on how / when and how much to fishFAO - UN Code of Conduct for Responsible FishingQuota setting - NEAFC & coastal states e.g. EU, Norway, IcelandMSC - Certification of responsibly fished fisheriesFriends of the Sea - Certification of responsibly fished fisheries

• How to use the resourceIFFO - Code of Responsible PracticeFeed standards - Aquaculture standards e.g. Soil Association (organic)Farming standards - Global Aquaculture Alliance, Aquaculture Stewardship

Council, Scottish Code of Practice

• Farmer and retailer schemesIndividual farming companies and most retailers have codes of practice and/or standards which mostly add specific criteria to those prescribed by the organisations above

Sustainability doesn’t just mean securing marine resources

• Replacement of fishmeal / oil must be achieved without contributing to unsustainable practices elsewhere

• Plant proteins and oils should ensure that fish production remains resource efficient in terms of feed conversion ratio or at least no net increase in environmental impact

• Schemes are emerging that will provide guarantees of the sustainability of the plant products used e.g.Soya: ProTerra

Round Table for Sustainable SoyaFEMAS Sustainable Soya Scheme

Palm: Round Table for Sustainable Palm

• Although not necessarily acceptable in all markets, land animal by-products represent a means of using materials that are not usually consumed by humans to “spare” fishmeal and oil

Opportunities for differentiation• Sustainability is implicit in the feed

compounders’ activities though, with some farming companies seeing sustainability as away to differentiate their product from the mainstream, there are a number of interpretations of what is sustainable

• Partnerships between retailers, processors, farmers and their suppliers have emerged

• Raw materials, processes and husbandry are all subjected to rigorous assessment and re-evaluation to provide documented evidence that the principles are being adhered to and strengthened

Example of a decision tree used to determine the acceptability of fishery products for inclusion in a bespoke feed

Fundamentally efficient – Feed conversion ratios

• Finfish aquaculture is fundamentally efficient w.r.t. feed use due to the low feed conversion ratios (FCRs) achievable, the high edible yield of the fish produced and the high nutritional value of the processing by-products

• Each incremental improvement in FCR saves the feed material resource and the energy involved in feed manufacture, handling and transportation

• Feed manufacturers and farmers work closely on projects to optimise FCR to shrink the gap between the biological FCRs seen in feed trials and the economic FCRs achieved in the field

• Optimising FCRs is how farmers can make the biggest contribution to the sustainability of fish feed

Influence of ration size (% bw/d) on the specific growth rate (SGR) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) of rainbow trout grown from 100g in freshwater at 11ºC

y = 0.2348x2 - 0.3948x + 0.8973R2 = 0.9356

y = 0.9225Ln(x) + 1.1637R2 = 0.9927

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8Nominal Ration (% bw/d)

FCR

or S

GR

(%/d

ay)

FCR CUSGR cu

Standard table

Fastracktable

Fundamentally efficient – Fish in vs fish out• Numerous publications have proposed the fish in / fish out (FIFO) ratios achieved by

aquaculture and salmon farming in particular:

Tacon & Metian, 2008Aquaculture in general = 0.7Salmon = 4.9Trout = 3.4Marine fish = 2.2Other finfish = 0.2 – 0.5

Jackson, 2009Takes a broader view and incorporates production of animals other than salmon, the improved conversion of fish into fishmeal and the use of fishery by-products (responsible for 22% of total fishmeal production)Aquaculture in general = 0.5Salmon = 1.7Livestock in general = 0.07 (1 tonne fishmeal 14 tonnes livestock)

• The debate will run and run

• By applying simple assumptions, it is possible to evaluate the impact of partial fishmeal / oil substitution on the fishery resource required for salmonid production opportunities for salmonid farming to become a net fish protein producer (NFPP) or even a net fish producer

• There will be questions regarding the acceptability of fish grown according to such criteria in different markets but there will be opportunities for differentiation

Effects of increasing the proportion of fish oil substituted on the requirement for wild fish and efficiency of fish oil production

FeedCP = 44%CF = 28%FM = 25%Alt. oil = variableFish FM = 22%Fish FO = 5%

Fish usage now constrained by fishmeal needReduce FM inclusion or improve fish FM ratio to become a net fish producer

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

(L) Wild fish required (kg/tonne farmed fish)(R1) Oil productivity (%)

% of fish oil substituted

Wild fish required (kg/tonne farmed fish)

Oil productivity (%)

Fundamentally efficient – Impact on the climate• Skretting has commissioned a life

cycle analysis (LCA) for farmed salmon from SIK (Swedish Institute for Food and Biotechnology)

• The net result shows that per kg edible fish, salmon is a “climate efficient animal product” with a global warming potential that is very similar to that of chicken and substantially less than that of pork and beef

• Approx 80% of the life cycle environmental impact (GWP, energy use & acidification) of salmon farming is a consequence of feed, still plenty for the feed industry to do

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16S

alm

on

Chi

cken

Por

k

Bee

f (D

+M)

Kg

Co2

-e/k

g ed

ible

pro

duct

Beef D+M = combined beef + dairy production

Uptake of the industry’s offering

• Fishmeal reductionUnless producing fish for a specific niche market or according to prescriptive quality scheme rules e.g. Label Rouge, when economic, most salmon and trout farming companies accept feeds made with the minimum fishmeal content each feed manufacturer recommends

No issues with fishmeal replacement using appropriate vegetable proteins

UK, Ireland and Norway strongly resisting use of animal by-products

Limited concern regarding use of land animal proteins in the rest of the world including mainland Europe

• Fish oil reductionGlobal uptake of the opportunity to partially replace fish oil has been mixed

Scotland & Ireland very conservative – limited but growing use now

Norway very active for a long time

Chile, Canada and Australia open to partial replacement with vegetable oilsand potentially to animal fats e.g. poultry oil as well

Barriers to progress• Both in academic realm and in production, there is plenty of evidence to show

salmon and trout productivity and quality, including healthy eating, need not be compromised through partial fish oil replacement with vegetable oil

• In the absence of recent, unbiased intelligence regarding the consumer’s view, SARF, the feed compounders and SSPO commissioned a review of attitudes towards replacing fish oil in the production and retail chain and consumers (Thistle Environmental, 2008)

• The barrier to implementation within the UK has been one of perception within the industry itself and the desire to serve a differentiated market

• Food scares in recent decades instilled a conservatism in sections of the production and retail chain where “naturalness” of fish feed is seen as protection from media assault

• While Thistle’s report showed that conservative sectors of the supply chain could supply a relatively large niche (approx 20% of consumers), the majority of consumers were likely to accept of a degree of responsible fish oil substitution

Responses in consumer attitude survey carried out by IPSOS MORI for SARF Project

Don't mind / care10%

Mainly plant based13%

No preference35%

Mainly fish based21%

Mixed21%

• What is your preference, if any, for the type of diet that farmed salmon should be given?

Thistle Env. / SARF, 2008

Responses in consumer attitude survey carried out by IPSOS MORI for SARF Project

Would eat more9%

Don't mind / care13%

Would make no difference

71%

Would eat less7%

• If farmed salmon feed was changed to about half and half with some fish-based feed replaced by plant-based feed, how if at all, would this affect your salmon eating?

Thistle Env. / SARF, 2008

Summary• Fishmeal and oil are resources that we will continue to use in the

future though we will be use them in a much smarter way

• Fishmeal and oil are sustainable commodities with practically the whole industry devoted to assuring we only use responsibly sourced materials

• Fish farming is still fundamentally an efficient, relatively low impact form of animal protein production

• Sustainability of feed resources is fundamental to what we do, yet sectors of the production chain will still find a niche in which to market their own perspective on sustainability and naturalness

FIN