Catfish - U.S. |
|
.jpg)
Sometimes known as Channel Catfish
This Species is Farm Raised
Fish farmers raise Catfish mostly in the Southern U.S. in large earthen ponds, resulting in some water pollution problems. Compared to other farmed fish, Catfish need less fishmeal/oil from wild sources in their feed, and they are native to where they're farmed.
| CRITERION | Points |
|---|---|
| Inherent Operational Risks | 2.00 |
| Feed | 2.50 |
| Pollution | 2.00 |
| Risk to Other Species | 2.25 |
| Ecological Effects | 3.00 |
| Final Score | 2.35 |
| Color | ![]() |
| Final Score | Color |
|---|---|
| 2.60 - 4.00 | ![]() |
| 2.20 - 2.59 | ![]() |
| 1.80 - 2.19 | ![]() |
| 1.40 - 1.79 | ![]() |
| 0.00 - 1.39 | ![]() |
General System Design: An aquaculture system's design is a good overall proxy measure for the likely effect of the operation on the environment. For example, open systems (e.g., net pens and net cages) are more likely to have pollution, disease, and escape issues than closed systems (e.g., recirculating tanks). With shellfish, which don't require supplemental food input, the more important question is whether they are harvested on or off of the bottom.
| 1.00 | This species is raised in a high risk system (e.g., net pens; net cages). |
| 2.00 | This species is raised in a moderate risk system (e.g., most ponds; raceways; bottom culture of mollusks). All Catfish sold in the United States is produced domestically. Fish similar to Catfish that are raised in Vietnam -- Tra (Pangasius hypopthalmus), Basa (Pangasius bocourti), and Swai (Pangasius micronemus) -- cannot be sold under the market name 'Catfish' in the U.S. Also, in 2003 the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that imports of these species from Vietnam were injuring the domestic Catfish industry so they created an Antidumping rule, under which imports of these species are subject to tariffs (CFA 2003). |
| 3.00 | This species is raised in a low risk system (e.g., re-circulating closed system; suspended culture of mollusks; zero-discharge ponds). |
| -0.25 | Species is raised at a high stocking density; OR there is a high density of sites in the geographic region, with evidence of environmental impact. There are approximately 174,000 acres of land used for production for Catfish (USDA 2005). Production of Channel Catfish in the U.S. is centered in the southeast, mostly in the Mississippi River flood plain. Almost all Channel Catfish aquaculture facilities (95%) are located in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, with Mississippi accounting for more than 70% of the total production (Robinson and Avery 2000). Production in Mississippi is concentrated in the Yazoo-Mississippi River floodplain (Tucker, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| -0.25 | Operations do not incorporate best-available, cost-effective technology to reduce environmental impact. In Alabama, Best Management Practices encourage farmers construct seinable ponds that do not have to be emptied for harvest and that drain near the surface. They also recommend the use settling basins, wetlands, or other ponds to treat the final 20 to 25% of discharged effluent or that farmers retain the final effluent in the pond and release it slowly after suspended solids have had the chance settle to the bottom of the pond after 2 to 3 days. Doing so greatly reduces the concentration of total suspended solids, nitrogen, and phosphorus released (AU and USDA 2004), but this practice does not seem to be widespread. The catfish industry has experimented with constructed wetlands, but does not view them as feasible, because they require considerable land (Seok et al. 1995). | |
| -0.25 | There are no effective zoning or permitting practices for siting of facilities. | |
| -0.25 | Government programs encourage expansion of high-impact systems. | |
| +0.25 | Species is raised at a low stocking density OR there is a low density of sites in the geographic region, which results in minimal impact to the natural ecosystem. | |
| +0.25 | Operations incorporate innovative culture methods that limit environmental impacts (e.g., polyculture). | |
| +0.25 | There are effective zoning or permitting practices for siting and operation of facilities (e.g., mandatory consideration of hydrographic characteristics; requirements for site rotation). Zoning laws vary on state, regional, and often local basis. In Mississippi, where the majority of operations are located, regulations dealing with the location of Catfish farms deal primarily with well-water permitting and the wetland provisions of the Clean Water Act (Warren, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| +0.25 | Government programs preferentially encourage the expansion of low-impact systems over high impact systems. | |
| 2.00 | Points for Inherent Operational Risks | |
Ecological Footprint of Feed: "Trash" fish, frequently used in developing countries, is an industry term used to refer to whole fish or fish parts fed to farmed fish without being processed into fish meal and fish oil. Twenty percent was selected as a cut-off because carnivorous species (e.g., salmon; eel; tuna; cobia; etc.) generally consume greater than twenty percent fish products (fishmeal, fish oil, or trash fish), while omnivorous or herbivorous species (e.g., catfish; tilapia; carps; etc.) consume less than twenty percent fish products.
| 1.00 | Typical aquaculture feed includes high levels of fishmeal, fish oil, or "trash" fish (i.e., >20% of the feed; e.g., salmonid feeds). |
| 2.00 | Typical aquaculture feed includes moderate levels of fishmeal, fish oil, or "trash" fish (i.e., <20% of the feed; e.g., tilapia and catfish feeds). The natural diet of Channel Catfish includes both plant and animal material. Adults feed on insects, snails, crawfish, green algae, aquatic plants, seeds, and small fish (Wellborn 1998). Studies from the National Warmwater Aquaculture Center at the University of Mississippi show that Catfish can be raised on soybean meal-based diets with low levels of fishmeal, or with no fishmeal (Li et al. 2003). Although some all-vegetable protein diets are used, Catfish feed typically contains 2 to 6% fishmeal or other animal protein (Robinson, pers. comm., 2004), as well as plant meals, grains, vitamins, and minerals (UA and USDA 2004). |
| 3.00 | No feed is used (e.g., mollusks and seaweeds) or typical aquaculture feed includes no fishmeal, fish oil, or "trash" fish (e.g., paddlefish; filter-feeding carps). |
| -0.25 | When fish products are used, the major sources score low on the Wild-Caught Fisheries Ranking System. | |
| -0.25 | Feed contains greater than 10% of fish products and public or private sectors are not working to reduce fish content in feed. | |
| -0.25 | Feed conversion ratio (FCR) is high (i.e., >2.0; e.g., eel). Catfish are capable of converting feed at a ratio of 1.5 or better, but throughout the industry the feed conversion ratio is about 2.4 to 2.5 (Li, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| -0.25 | Government policy promotes research, development and commercialization of carnivorous or other highly fishmeal-dependent species. | |
| +0.25 | When fish products are used, the major sources score high on the Wild-Caught Fisheries Ranking System; OR the source is innovative and ecologically sound (e.g., fisheries byproducts); OR no feed is used. | |
| +0.25 | Feed contains less than 10% of fish products OR public and private sectors are working to reduce the fish content in feed; OR no feed is used. Feed for Catfish typically contains 2 to 6% fishmeal or other animal protein. This level of fishmeal represents an improvement from previous years when Catfish feeds contained closer to 8% fishmeal (Li, pers. comm., 2004). Efforts are underway to eliminate all animal protein from Catfish feeds (Robinson, pers. comm., 2004). If feeds are made without animal-derived proteins, they must be supplemented with the amino acid lysine, which plant proteins lack. Widespread use of lysine in Catfish feed is not economically feasible at this time, but research is ongoing (Tucker, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| +0.25 | Feed conversion ratio (FCR) is low (i.e., <1.3; e.g., salmon); OR no feed is used. | |
| +0.25 | Government policy promotes research, development and commercialization of herbivorous species or other species not highly dependent on fishmeal. Research on developing more sustainable Catfish feeds is ongoing at Mississippi State University's Thad Conchran National Warmwater Aquaculture Center and Auburn University, as well as at other universities, the United States Department of Agriculture, and in the private sector. | |
| 2.50 | Points for Feed | |
Typical effluent treatment procedures:
| 1.00 | Effluent is not treated before discharge (e.g., salmon net pens). |
| 2.00 | Effluent is partially treated before discharge (e.g., infrequently discharged effluent from catfish ponds).
Catfish farmers do not treat discharged effluent but instead rely on natural processes (e.g. algal and bacterial metabolism) to reduce excess nutrients and organic matter in pond waters. Algae and bacteria in ponds use most (90%; Tucker, pers. comm., 2004) of the excess nitrogen, phosphorus, and organic matter. The majority of these nutrients end up in pond sediments or the atmosphere, and the nutrient load in effluent discharged from Catfish farms is relatively small compared with the nutrient load in other aquaculture operations' effluents (Goldburg and Triplett 1997). |
| 3.00 | Effluent is substantially treated before discharge (e.g., recirculating shrimp systems; settling ponds; reconstructed wetlands); OR treatment is not necessary because supplemental feed is not used (e.g., molluscs or seaweeds). |
| -0.25 | Operations have demonstrated negative impacts on water quality or sediment/benthic characteristics (e.g., elevated nutrient levels; algal blooms; altered benthic communities). | |
| -0.25 | Pollutants (e.g., pesticides; parasiticides; antibiotics; plastic; nets; dead fish) are frequently discharged into the environment or otherwise not appropriately discarded. | |
| -0.25 | Effluent regulations do not exist, are lax, or are poorly enforced, which allows for degradation of the aquatic environment. In June 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a Final Rule that established wastewater controls and performance standards for 245 aquaculture facilities in the United States. The regulations aim to reduce discharge of pollutants such as Total Suspended Solids, as well as non-conventional pollutants including nutrients, drugs, chemicals, and toxic pollutants such as metals and PCBs. These new controls stem from a 1989 lawsuit in which the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups sued the EPA for failing to comply with the Clean Water Act. The rule related to aquaculture was the last of a series of rules issued under this lawsuit (EPA 2004). | |
| -0.25 | Available technologies and practices to reduce or recycle waste (e.g., feed sensors; low-pollution feeds) are not used. | |
| +0.25 | Operations generally improve water quality or sediment/benthic characteristics (e.g., oyster farms). | |
| +0.25 | Chemicals (e.g., pesticides; parasiticides; antibiotics) are rarely or never used. Less than 1/2 of 1% of Catfish feed is medicated. Bayluscide, a molluscide, controls the digenetic trematode, Bolbophorus sp., which can be passed onto Catfish by American White Pelicans (Terhune et al. 2003). However, the Catfish Farmers of America states that Bayluscide is almost never used due to its high cost and a regulation that requires that ponds must be empty of fish to use the chemical (Warren, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| +0.25 | Robust water quality regulations exist (e.g., permits required; discharge caps; strong enforcement), and regular monitoring occurs. | |
| +0.25 | Innovative methods and practices to reduce or recycle wastes are used (e.g., integrated systems; effluent and solid wastes used as terrestrial fertilizer); OR innovative methods and practices are not needed because raising this species does not create waste. Typically the potential for the highest instantaneous delivery of pollutants to the environment occurs when ponds are drained to collect fish. Otherwise, effluent quality varies seasonally and tends to be poorest in the summer when the rate of fish feeding is highest. During this time, organic matter, nitrogen and phosphorous accumulate in pond waters. Processes that reduce particulate material, such as sedimentation, reduce the concentrations of suspended solids and total phosphorus in pond water. By raising fish of different ages together, and collecting only the largest ones using seine nets, producers can wait up to 10 years before draining ponds (Warren, pers. comm., 2004). | |
| 2.00 | Points for Pollution | |
Frequency and Impact of Escapes:
| 1.00 | Farmed species regularly or intermittently escape into the wild AND escapes are non-native to the area or otherwise pose a risk to native populations or ecosystems (e.g., most non-native fish raised in outdoor facilities). |
| 2.00 | Escape frequency is not known OR farmed species is native to the area where it is raised and poses minimal risk to native populations or ecosystems (e.g., channel catfish in the US; most native mollusks). Originally Channel Catfish were distributed only in the Gulf States and in the Mississippi valley north to the prairie provinces of Canada and Mexico. Their range did not extend west of the Rocky Mountains or to the Atlantic coastal plain. However, the species has since been introduced throughout the United States and globally (Wellborn 1988). Nonetheless, the vast majority of Channel Catfish aquaculture operations in the U.S. occur within their native range, and farm-raised Catfish rarely escape from ponds. Pond drainage systems typically use screens to prevent Catfish from escaping and unwanted fish (e.g., Sunfish) from entering ponds (Warren, pers. comm., 2004). |
| 3.00 | Farmed species never (or virtually never) escape to the wild (e.g., species is raised in bio-secure facilities). |
| -0.25 | This farmed species has been known to survive in the surrounding ecosystem if it escapes; OR would likely survive given its physiological requirements. Since this species is indigenous to the area where the majority of production occurs, escaped fish are likely to survive in the surrounding ecosystem. | |
| -0.25 | This farmed species is known or is likely to compete with wild species for food or habitat if it escapes; OR this species is known or is likely to compromise the genetic integrity of the wild species (e.g., through spawning disruption, genetic introgression or establishment of feral stocks) if it escapes. | |
| -0.25 | This farmed species is known or is likely to amplify and transmit disease or parasites to wild populations (e.g., infectious salmon anemia or sea lice infestations) if it escapes. | |
| -0.25 | Regulatory authorities are not adequately addressing the risks of escape or spread of disease associated with farming this species. | |
| +0.25 | Rescore This farmed species has not been known to survive in the surrounding ecosystem if it escapes; OR would not likely survive given its physiological requirements; OR farmed species is a native mollusc. | |
| +0.25 | Operations employ management protocols and techniques to limit the ecological impacts of escaped farmed fish (e.g., triploidy; sterilization); OR it's unlikely that escaped individuals will either compete with wild species for resources, or compromise the genetic integrity of wild species. Researchers have found evidence that escaped domestic Catfish do not compromise the genetic integrity of wild Catfish. A study of 8 locations near Catfish farms in Alabama concluded that there is no greater similarity of wild Catfish to domestic Catfish captured near Catfish farms than to wild Catfish captured far from the farms. This study, although still under review and limited in its coverage, finds evidence that no major escapes have happened in Alabama (Liu, pers. comm., 2005). It would be unlikely for any interbreeding of farmed and wild Catfish to significantly alter the wild population's genetics (Goldburg, pers. comm., 2005). | |
| +0.25 | Operations employ effective disease and parasite management protocols (e.g., fallowing of pens; retaining water when disease outbreak occurs); OR incidence of disease or risk of retransmitting disease is low. There is no documentation of disease being spread through escaped Catfish. The digenetic trematode, Bolbophorus sp., can occur in commercially raised Catfish. Bolbophorus sp., which lives in the gastrointestinal tract of the American White Pelican, is passed on to Catfish when the pelican defecates into Catfish ponds. The eggs of the Bolbophorus infest an intermediate host, the Ram's Horn Snail, are later released into the pond water, and then infest Catfish. To complete the life cycle of this trematode, pelicans feeding on Catfish at Catfish farms eat infected fish and become infected or re-infected with the parasite (Terhune et al. 2003). | |
| +0.25 | Regulatory authorities are addressing the risks of escape and spread of disease associated with farming this species. | |
| 2.25 | Points for Risk to Other Species | |
Ecological sensitivity of site used for operations:
| 1.00 | Operations are generally located in areas of high ecological sensitivity (e.g., coastal wetlands; mangroves). |
| 2.00 | Operations are generally located in areas of moderate ecological sensitivity (e.g., coastal and nearshore waters; rocky intertidal or subtidal zones; river or stream shorelines). |
| 3.00 | Operations are generally located in areas of low ecological sensitivity (e.g., land that is less susceptible to degradation such as land formerly used for agriculture or land previously developed). Catfish operations all occur on land, most often on converted agricultural land. |
| -0.25 | Farming this species causes substantial damage to surrounding habitat, ecosystem or other resources (e.g., groundwater depletion; stream diversion; saltwater intrusion; soil salinization; loss of habitat for juvenile fish; loss of flood control; dredging hard bottoms; etc.). | |
| -0.25 | Harmful or lethal predator deterrents are used (e.g., bird/seal shootings; acoustic deterrent devices); OR operation otherwise harms wildlife (e.g., dolphin/seal entanglement; disrupting migration routes; bird/animal shooting). Since DDT was banned in the U.S., populations of Double-crested Cormorants (DCCOs) have rebounded to high levels of abundance, and their breeding range has expanded. The boom in Catfish farming has aided DCCOs' proliferation, as the cormorants now have large quantities of prey available to them in large, shallow Catfish ponds near their over-wintering grounds. Over-wintering survival of DCCOs in the Southeastern U.S. has increased for adults and sub-adults, due to the abundance of food at aquaculture ponds. Though there is still disagreement about the extent of the economic damage to aquaculture and though the damage is often local and intense in nature, DCCOs have become an economic liability to Catfish farmers, who shoot them and other piscivorous birds feeding at their Catfish ponds (Glahn et al. 2002). | |
| -0.25 | If seed is collected from wild sources, the intensity of collection is high enough to result in depletion of brood stock, wild juveniles, or associated non-target organisms (e.g., collection of postlarvae shrimp). | |
| -0.25 | Government policy encourages aquaculture operations to locate or expand in areas of high ecological sensitivity. | |
| +0.25 | Operations enhance habitat structure or function (e.g., constructed wetlands). Catfish ponds host large numbers of ducks and geese during their annual migrations and dozens of non-nuisance shore birds year-round. However, piscivorous birds also find the farms attractive, and the shooting of birds at Catfish farms prevents us from awarding points here. | |
| +0.25 | Predator deterrents are not used OR predator deterrents are used but are not harmful or lethal (e.g., predator exclusion nets), AND operation does not otherwise harm wildlife. | |
| +0.25 | Seed comes predominantly from hatcheries or on-farm sites (e.g., seed for trout); OR if seed is collected from the wild, it does not deplete brood stock, wild juveniles, or associated non-target organisms (e.g., collection of oyster or mussel spat). Catfish spawn in farm ponds. Fertilized eggs are collected and taken to the hatchery, where they are hatched. Then the larvae are moved to nursery ponds and, later, to grow-out ponds (Robinson and Avery 2000). | |
| +0.25 | Government policy encourages the growth of aquaculture operations in areas of low ecological sensitivity; OR protects sensitive habitats from aquaculture operations (e.g., prohibitions on cutting mangroves). | |
| 3.00 | Points for Ecological Effects | |
Auburn University and USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service (AU and USDA). 2004. Alabama Aquaculture, Best Management Practices. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Alabama. Available at: http://www.ag.auburn.edu/aaes/communications/publications/fisheries.html.
Boyd, C.E. 2005. Personal Communication. Auburn University.
Boyd, C. E., J. Queiroz, J. Lee, M. Rowan, G.N. Whitis, and A. Gross. 2000. Environmental assessment of channel catfish farming in Alabama. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 31:511-544.
Boyd, C.E. and C.S. Tucker. 1995. Sustainability of channel catfish farming. World Aquaculture 26(3):45-53.
Catfish Farmers of America (CFA). 2003. Catfish Farmers of America Applaud Final Antidumping Ruling. Press Release.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2004. Industrial Water Pollution Controls. Effluent Guidelines for Aquatic Animal Production Industry. Final Rule-Fact Sheet. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/guide/aquaculture/fs-final.htm.
Glahn, J.F., S.J. Werner, T. Hanson, and C.R. Engle. 2002. Cormorant depredation losses and their prevention at catfish farms: economic considerations. In: Clark, L., J. Hone, J.A. Shivik, R.A. Watkins, K.C. VerCauteren, and J.K. Yoder, eds. Human conflicts with wildlife: economic considerations. Proceedings of the Third NMRC Special Symposium. National Wildlife Research Center.
Goldburg, R. 2005. Personal Communication. Environmental Defense.
Goldburg, R. and T. Triplett. 1997. Murky Waters: Environmental Effects of Aquaculture in the U.S. Available at: www.environmentaldefense.org/ pdf.cfm?ContentID=490&FileName=AQUA.PDF.
Li, M. 2004. Personal Communication. Mississippi State University, Thad Cochran National Warmwater Aquaculture Center.
Li, M., E.H. Robinson, and B.B. Manning. 2003. Use of All-Vegetable Proteins in Channel Catfish Diets. Poster display for the Institute for Social, Economic and Ecological Sustainability, 2003 International Organic Aquaculture Workshop.
Liu, J. 2005. Personal Communication. Auburn University.
Paul, E. 2005. Personal Communication. The Ornithological Council.
Robinson, E. 2004. Personal Communication. Mississippi State University, Thad Cochran National Warmwater Aquaculture Center.
Robinson, E. and J.L. Avery. 2000. Thad Cochran National Warmwater Aquaculture Center (NWAC) Fact Sheet. Available at: http://msstate.edu/dept/tcnwac/fs005.pdf.
Seok, K., S. Leonard, C.E. Boyd and M.F. Schwartz. 1995. Water quality in annually drained and undrained channel catfish ponds over a three-year period. Progressive Fish-Culturist 57:52- 58.
Silapajarn, O., C.E. Boyd, K. Silapajarn, and P.L. Chaney. 2004. Effects of Channel Catfish Farming on Water Quality in Big Prairie Creek, West-Central Alabama. Special Report No. 2 for Alabama Channel Catfish Producers. Available at: www.ag.auburn.edu/aaes/communications/ specialreports/sr_no2.pdf.
Terhune, J.S., D. Wise, J.L. Avery, L.H. Khoo, and A.E. Goodwin. 2003. Infestations of the Trematode Bolbophorus sp. in Channel Catfish. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (SRAC). SRAC Publication No. 1801. Available at: http://srac.tamu.edu/.
Tucker, C. 2004. Personal Communication. Mississippi State University, Thad Cochran National Warmwater Aquaculture Center.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2005. National Agricultural Statistics Service: Catfish Production 2005. Available at: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/other/pcf-bbc/2005/.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Double-crested cormorant management in the United States.
Warren, H. 2004. Personal Communication. Catfish Farmers of America, Vice President.
Wellborn, T.L. 1988. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (SRAC). Channel Catfish. Life History and Biology. L-2402. SRAC Publication No. 180. Available at: http://srac.tamu.edu/.
![]() | Species is relatively abundant, and fishing/farming methods cause little damage to habitat and other wildlife. |
![]() | Species has medium to high levels of abundance, or fishing/farming methods cause some damage to the environment. |
![]() | Some problems exist with this species' status or catch/farming methods, or information is insufficient for evaluating. |
![]() | Species abundance is generally low, or fishing/farming methods typically have large environmental impact. |
![]() | Species has a combination of problems such as overfishing, high bycatch, and poor management; or farming methods have serious environmental impacts. |
| A fishery targeting this species has been certified as sustainable and well managed to the Marine Stewardship Council's environmental standard. Learn more at www.msc.org. | These fish contain levels of mercury or PCBs that may pose a health risk to adults and children. Please refer to http://www.edf.org/seafood for more details. |