Aquaponics Digest - Wed 05/05/99
Message 1: Rooting cuttings
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 2: Re: Germination of lettuce in hot weather
from Jon Hays
Message 3: Re: Rooting cuttings
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 4: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from LC543119
Message 5: Hi....
from joyeuse@netcom.ca (Joy Pye-Macswain)
Message 6: Re: Hi....
from Glen Seibert
Message 7: Re: Hi....
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 8: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 9: Re: Hi....
from wesleycoggins@webtv.net (wesley coggins)
Message 10: Re: Hi....
from "Mark Brotman"
Message 11: RE: Hi....
from Dorothy Cady
Message 12: cabbage worms
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 13: diatomeceous earth
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 14: Re: Hi....
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 15: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Message 16: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from Jaarvis
Message 17: Re: Hi....
from KLOTTTRUE
Message 18: Re: Hi....
from wesleycoggins@webtv.net (wesley coggins)
Message 19: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from "TGTX"
Message 20: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from "Andrew.D:Aquaculture Advantage"
Message 21: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
from "Andrew.D:Aquaculture Advantage"
Message 22: Re: Rooting cuttings
from Craig & Robin Prince
Message 23: Aquaculture standards - US
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 24: Organic Aqua-culture standards in debate by NOSB Lvst Cmte
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 25: Public Comments Requested on Proposed National Aquaculture
Program by USDA-APHIS
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 26: Re: Germination of lettuce in hot weather
from "William Brown"
Message 27: Re: cabbage worms
from "Wendy Nagurny"
Message 28: Re: Hi....
from "William Brown"
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 1 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Rooting cuttings
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 05:16:49 -0400
Hi Craig,
I've rooted tarragon and oregano successfully from cuttings in my
perlite beds. Usually within a week you start to see roots. If there
is a need to transplant I would wait until the roots are about an inch
long, a totally unscientific, intuitive decision. I've tried to root a
couple of other cuttings without success, these were a passion vine and
blackberry cuttings.
Adriana
> Lets get the ball rolling here. Has anyone been sucsessful in starting
> soft wooded
> cuttings in gravel growing beds.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 2 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Germination of lettuce in hot weather
From: Jon Hays
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 07:19:24 -0600
Hello Adriana: For germination of lettuce in hot weather try using an old
refrigerator and set the temp. at 55* and try that. You might have to use a
chiller on your irrigation after you transplant to keep your lettuce from
bolting.
John Hays
PS Enjoy all of your post, so keep posting.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 3 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Rooting cuttings
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 09:12:11 -0500
At 05:16 AM 5/5/99 -0400, Adriana wrote:
>Hi Craig,
> I've rooted tarragon and oregano successfully from cuttings in my
>perlite beds. Usually within a week you start to see roots. If there
>is a need to transplant I would wait until the roots are about an inch
>long, a totally unscientific, intuitive decision. I've tried to root a
>couple of other cuttings without success, these were a passion vine and
>blackberry cuttings.
>
>Adriana
>
>
>> Lets get the ball rolling here. Has anyone been sucsessful in starting
>> soft wooded
>> cuttings in gravel growing beds.
We've had good success with many "soft wooded" cuttings - Rosemary, Jasmine,
some trees, and others. What specific plants did you have in mind, Craig?
Paula
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 4 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: LC543119
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 10:21:32 EDT
ADRIANA HOW DO YOU LIKE THE ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS FROM AUSTRALIA
GORDON
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 5 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Hi....
From: joyeuse@netcom.ca (Joy Pye-Macswain)
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 10:38:56 -0400 (EDT)
Morning All....
I have just joined the list so thought that I might introduce myself...hope
that is alright...:) :) :) I guess that I should start off by saying that
my name is Joy Pye-MacSwain. I hold a Masters of Science from the Atlantic
Veterinary College, in Fish Health and Pharamcology and have several years
experience with cold water fish species. Translation...:) :) :) I am a very
fishy person...like to work with them and _love_ to eat them! As for
growing things..not in tanks, that is ... I have managed to kill several
flowering
things over the years. Plants and I have not had a great relationship thus
far...sigh.... but now that I have been hired as the Research Assistant for a
brand new aquaponics facility to be build next weekend here in Nova Scotia, I
am going to have to learn a lot about hydroponics, tomatoes, lettuce and how to
put them all together with tilapia in re-circulating systems. I will probably
have a number of questions over the next while and I hope that all of you
will be
willing to share your experiences and give lots of advice to a rank
beginner...:) :)
Thank in advance.....
Now where did I put that manuel on growing tomatoes in soilless media
again???? :)
Joy Pye-MacSwain,
Future Aqua Farms
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 6 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: Glen Seibert
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 09:28:52 -0700
Welcome Joy Pye! I envy you the beginning of a new adventure!
This place is "stocked" full of wonderful people who absolutely love to
share info...what a resource!
Good Luck!
Glen Seibert
Fullerton College Hydroponics
http://www.hydroponicsonline.com/clubs
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 7 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 12:51:36 -0400
Welcome Joyce,
I can tell you'll fit right in with this crowd given your sense of
humor. And your fishiness will be greatly appreciated by most of us.
Those of us who work in the plant side of things will be happy to share
whatever knowlege we can.
Adriana (who in a former life did a 2-month consulting stint in Moncton
in January...)
> I have just joined the list so thought that I might introduce myself...hope
> that is alright...:) :) :) I guess that I should start off by saying that
> my name is Joy Pye-MacSwain.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 8 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 12:52:43 -0400
WHAT ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS??????
By the way I had a super week last week, added 3 good accounts.
Adriana
LC543119 wrote:
>
> ADRIANA HOW DO YOU LIKE THE ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS FROM AUSTRALIA
> GORDON
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 9 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: wesleycoggins@webtv.net (wesley coggins)
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 15:27:35 -0400 (EDT)
Hi there,
I to have just joined the group, having fun raising Talapia and growing
many different kinds of veg's some of which are Cabbages and am having
problems with a green worm eating away at my cabbages, anybody got any
answers as how to get rid of them?
Wes & Carole
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 10 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: "Mark Brotman"
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:42:20 -0400
Try Dipel, which is Bacillus thuringensis bacteria. Safe for fish, safe
for plants, very unsafe for caterpillars. Nice, natural solution.
Good luck!
Mark
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 11 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: RE: Hi....
From: Dorothy Cady
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 13:44:41 -0600
>>>wesleycoggins@webtv.net wrote: "...am having problems with a green worm
eating away at my cabbages, anybody got any answers as how to get rid of
them?"
I get cabbage worms on my plants too, but they are in standard soil grow
boxes. The worms don't usually show up until the end of the growing season
when my plants are growing old and tired. I simply pick most of them off by
hand and squish them between two solid objects (like a couple of rocks).
Depending on how your plants are rooted, you may be able to sprinkle the
plants with diatomaceous earth. It cuts the worms and they die of
dehydration in a (couple?) of days, and you can just rinse the diatomaceous
earth off the cabbage before you eat it. (My apologies if this email is too
graphic.)
Good luck.
Dorothy
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 12 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: cabbage worms
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:47:01 -0400
Wes,
I second the recommendation on BT. I've also seen a suggestion to plant
all cabbage family plants together to facilitate pest control.
Adriana
am having
> > problems with a green worm eating away at my cabbages, anybody got any
> > answers as how to get rid of them?
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 13 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: diatomeceous earth
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:50:53 -0400
A friend passed on an Amish pest control method which involved mixing
diatomeceous earth with water and spraying it on the plants. In
researching this further I found out that there is a food-grade DE which
is used in grains and flours to keep it from clumping, it is essentially
silica. If you use this there is no ned to rinse it off of the plants.
I haven't tried it yet but found numerous sources for the food-grade DE
on-line, mostly in Y2K sites:>)...
Adriana
> Depending on how your plants are rooted, you may be able to sprinkle the
> plants with diatomaceous earth. It cuts the worms and they die of
> dehydration in a (couple?) of days, and you can just rinse the diatomaceous
> earth off the cabbage before you eat it.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 14 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 14:51:32 -0500
At 03:27 PM 5/5/99 -0400, Wes wrote:
>Hi there,
>
>I to have just joined the group, having fun raising Talapia and growing
>many different kinds of veg's some of which are Cabbages and am having
>problems with a green worm eating away at my cabbages, anybody got any
>answers as how to get rid of them?
Glad you're finally with us, Wes.
You'll need to buy some Bt (bacteria thuring.....sorry, I can't remember the
full spelling) - it's a specific treatment for caterpillars . Try to spray
when it's not full sun. You spray it onto the crop (does not harm the crop
or anyone who eats it). The caterpillars take one bite and STOP. Although
they don't just fall away as they would with some chemical cures, they also
don't do any more damage, and the treatment is safe for all of us (including
the fish in your system).
You should be able to find it at any location that carries garden
products...maybe even Wally World, but for certain garden supply centers and
farm supply.
The caterpillars will eventually drop off and become part of your compost,
but the damage will stop. Most of the time your plants will be able to
recover. It's the only way I know to safely stop them short of stripping
out the entire bed and spraying the gravel.
Let us know how you do.
Paula
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 15 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: Adriana Gutierrez & Dennis LaGatta
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:57:08 -0400
My apologies to the group, I thought I was sending a private reply.
Gordon, I wondered if someone had sent me a sample that I hadn't
received. The drippers I'm using are made by Antico, which I thought
were Dutch, are those the ones you were referring to?
Anyway, I love the drippers, they can be adjusted down to a single
drop, much better than what you can get in the irrigation department of
Home Depot.
If anyone wants a source send me an e-mail and I'll put you in touch.
The place I got them from originally no longer does small accounts.
Adriana
LC543119 wrote:
>
> ADRIANA HOW DO YOU LIKE THE ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS FROM AUSTRALIA
> GORDON
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 16 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: Jaarvis
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 16:01:14 EDT
i'd be interested in the source,
thanks
jaarvis
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 17 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: KLOTTTRUE
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 17:05:00 EDT
In a message dated 5/5/99 3:28:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
wesleycoggins@webtv.net writes:
<< Hi there,
I to have just joined the group, having fun raising Talapia and growing
many different kinds of veg's some of which are Cabbages and am having
problems with a green worm eating away at my cabbages, anybody got any
answers as how to get rid of them?
Wes & Carole B B Gun
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 18 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: wesleycoggins@webtv.net (wesley coggins)
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 17:43:37 -0400 (EDT)
THANKS TO ALL .
Wes & Carole
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 19 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: "TGTX"
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 18:24:59 -0500
I thought the Adjustable Drippers were that Zydeco Band from Louisiana...or
was that a steel drum band from Trinidad?
Muse-e-cologically,
Ted
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 20 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: "Andrew.D:Aquaculture Advantage"
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 09:48:54 +0930
Hi all .
My good friend and associate is the maker of the Copeland adjustable
drippers and irrigation systems here in Australia. After speaking with him
about what a good bunch you all were, he said he would consider a rep by one
of you for your state to redistribute, if anyone was interested.
Reply to asdd@twpo.com.au
Andrew
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 21 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: ADJUSTABLE DRIPPERS
From: "Andrew.D:Aquaculture Advantage"
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 09:53:29 +0930
I will send you some more details Jarvis. Please send me a profile on your
self and the quantities you would require.
Andrew
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 22 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Rooting cuttings
From: Craig & Robin Prince
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 19:15:03 -0700
Thanks, Adriana , Paula - and everyone else who is listening :)
yall are great.
I am thinking about berry vines, also flowering shrubs (tea tree)-(Berberis)
types.
Possibly perenials.
Thanks for the input
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 23 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Aquaculture standards - US
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 21:14:55 -0500
The following two posts are forwarded messages concerning the proposed
aquaculture standards in the US (as detailed in the Federal Aquaculture
Briefs), as well as a posting concerning the NOSB debates on the standards.
If these are not of interest to you, please delete.
This is not to eliminate discussion on this list, but the postings are
lengthy and I wanted to let you know.
Paula
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 24 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Organic Aqua-culture standards in debate by NOSB Lvst Cmte
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 21:18:29 -0500
Hello Paula,
I thought this might be of interest to the list but it's a litle
long. If you feel it's appropriate, feel free to post any or all.
Gordon
-----------------------------------------------
From: Erorganic
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 10:03:54 EDT
Subject: Organic Aqua-culture standards in debate by NOSB Lvst Cmte
To: Organic4um
A communication from the ORGANIC FORUM:
Facilitated by Eric Kindberg, certified organic farmer
Email: erorganic
Website: http://members.aol.com/organic4um
Written contributions and comments are sought.
If you desire your email address to be removed from our circulation list,
please inform us. To be added to this email circulation request to
organic4um
ORGANIC FORUM--Organic Aqua-culture statements
May 1, 1999
Organic Forum comments:
Here is the text of an up-coming aquaculture article. The only blatant error
in the proposed NOSB recommendations is not allowing wild aquatic products to
be fed, as I see it. This error arises because the Livestock Committee
appears to not agree with the wild crop section of OFPA as being interpreted
for wild aquatic animals--perhaps, it only applies to aquatic plants, kelp
being and "organically produced" aquatic wild crop. Some Committee members'
thought processes conflict with the "livestock" definition in OFPA which
allows the production site of wild animals to be certified. The definition
of a "certified organic farm" includes certification of "sites."
Your comments should be made to: Livestock Committee NOSB_Livestock@usda.gov
Other NOSB Committee email addresses are:
Accreditation Committee NOSB_Accredit@usda.gov
Crops Committee NOSB_Crops@usda.gov
Executive Committee NOSB_Executive@usda.gov
Livestock Committee NOSB_Livestock@usda.gov
Interdisciplinary Committee on Processing Principles
NOSB_Interdisc@usda.gov
International Committee NOSB_International@usda.gov
Materials Committee NOSB_Materials@usda.gov
Processing Committee NOSB_Processing@usda.gov
Best, Eric
ORGANIC AQUACULTURE?
A big opportunity for the right small fish farmer.
A rapidly emerging retail market in North America and Europe is organic
foods. In the US, total expenditures in this sector trebled from 1992 through
1997 to $4.2 billion, which is 1% of US grocery store sales. While still
small, the organic food market is growing at an annual rate of 25 percent.
The leading US natural foods retailer, Whole Foods Market, Inc., has grown
from sales of $90 million in 1991 through 10 stores, to $1.4 billion in 1998
with 87 stores, -- a remarkable rate of 40% per year. The second largest
re-tailer, Wild Oats, is growing as fast. Some large retail chains now offer
organic fruits, vegetables, poultry and meats.
Natural foods retailing has clear lines of differentia-tion by
seeking to provide their discerning customers with the best possible products
that are nutritious and healthy, fresh, safe, pure, and grown in the most
environmentally sustainable manner. This generally means fruits, vegetables,
meats and poultry free of pesticides and herbicides, hor-mones and growth
promoters, synthetic colorants and other additives, and antibiotics, plus
other factors.
Hundreds of farms and food processors supply this emerging market,
many operating under organic standards monitored by third-party certifiers.
Where certification standards are not yet developed, such as in seafood,
natural foods retailers carefully source these products to their particular
standards. Organic certifications are awarded by a number of private
organizations and state bodies. In 1990, Congress passed the Federal Organic
Foods Production Act that mandates that the United States Department of
Agricul-ture establish national standards for the certification of organic
foods. At present, the USDA is grinding through this process including
organic standards for aquaculture.
In my article in the January/February issue of Aquacul-ture Magazine
entitled Who is Capturing Aquaculture's Val-ues? I point out how exceptional
value creation awaits fish farmers who move out of hyper-competitive pricing
of their commodities into markets where they have greater control over the
value chain. Organic aquaculture is precisely such an opportunity.
At the Monterey Bay Food Group, we estimate that the present market
potential for aquaculture grown seafood through natural food retailers on an
annual basis to be ap-proximately 2 million pounds of salmon, 3.5 million
pounds of shrimp, 1.2 million pounds of catfish, 200,000 pounds of tilapia
fillets, and 1 million oysters, with perhaps some-what fewer clams. These are
very rough estimates. Price checks in natural food stores indicate a premium
of $1.00 per pound is often charged for the superior qualities of-fered. The
opportunity-providing small size of this market is of significant importance,
which will be developed later in this article.
The proposed USDA standards for organic aqua-culture will be
impossible to meet. If adopted in their present form, there will be no
certifiable aquaculture products. Discerning customers seeking the qualities
assured by or-ganic certification will be deprived of such as-surances for
farm grown seafoods. The purpose of organic certifications will be pre-empted.
ABSENCE OF FISH FARMERS IN ESTABLISHING THESE STANDARDS
The proposed standards, drafted by the Livestock Com-mittee of the National
Organic Standards Board, appear to be prepared by people with little
knowledge about fish farming absent of any involvement of the industrial
aquaculture com-munity.
These draft standards, following criteria for other forms of
livestock, address several issues, including the fish growing environment;
feed components; nutrient levels in discharge waters; predator control;
breeding and egg ma-nipulation; health care and medications; harvesting and
killing; and processing. While certainly there are some com-mon criteria in
all areas of organic livestock certifica-tion, such as prohibitions of
pesticides, the approach of one-size-fits-all does not recognize the wide
diversity of species, environments, feeding requirements, etc., found in
aquaculture. Clams grown in the open ocean and catfish in freshwater ponds
are treated the same, as are cold water salmon and warm water shrimp.
European organic aquaculture standards take a species specific approach.
PREEMPTION
There are several clearly pre-emptive conditions in the proposed
standards that follow in italics. Netcages and net-pens are not allowed. This
one requirement eliminates the entire salmon industry, the second most
consumed aquaculture product in the United States.
Organisms that have been genetically manipulated (e.g. triploiding,
gynogenesis, etc.) or that have been subjected to hormone treatment are
prohibited. This requirement elimi-nates tilapia, the aquaculture product
with the most rapid market growth, and other mono-sex crops.
Feed additives, with the exception of minerals, vita-mins, phaffia
yeast, and enzymes of natural origin, are pro-hibited. This proposed standard
raises a contradiction. Vi-tamins are essential for good fish health, and
superior ani-mal health is mandated. Vitamin E, a major component in feeds
for salmonids and other fish, is extracted from soy-beans. While some organic
soybeans are certified for feeds, there is no source of vitamin E extracted
from organic soy-beans. Therefore, fish cannot be fed this vitamin that is
essential for the good animal health requirement under the standard. It would
preclude most, if not all, species of fish grown on formulated diets.
FISHMEAL AND FISH OIL
The most vexing proposal is Fishmeal and fishoil ob-tained from wild
caught fish will not be allowed. This would destroy the very essence of
organic certification, i.e., healthy and nutritious seafood. Medical
literature is re-plete with the connection between seafood and good human
health, and with the identification of omega-3 fatty acids, which are high in
many seafoods, as the reason. Coronary disease, cancer, and other diseases
and ailments are be-lieved to result from an absence of sufficient omega-3
fatty acids in our modern diets of processed foods. In many cases, less
desirable and counteracting omega-6 fatty acids are substituted.
A recent survey by Applied Biometrics of Stuart, Flor-ida determined
that 82 percent of Americans are aware of fish oil as a health providing
nutrient, with 53 percent specifically aware of omega-3's.
Farm grown salmon diets are high in fish oils that pro-vide high
levels of omega-3 fatty acids to the people who consume this fish. There are
no other sources of fish oil than from wild fish, and this requirement to
proscribe the use of fish oils obtained from wild caught fish would force
salmon feed formulators to use other lipids. Other lipids used in poultry
agriculture, include oils from soybeans, safflower, corn, tallow, and yellow
grease. These are low in omega-3 fatty acids and high in saturated fats and
omega-6 fatty acids. With a substitution of these lipids, basic rea-sons for
consumers selecting salmon and other seafoods (i.e., nutrition and health)
would be frustrated. Unwitting consumers expecting superior sources of health
factors such as omega-3 fatty acids, would, in fact, be eating fish low in
the very factors they assume they are buying. This highly unfortunate
condition would be the result of meeting organic certification requirements.
Healthy organic salmon would be an oxymoron.
A second reason consumers purchase fish is taste. Dr. Ron Hardy, in
his regular column in the January/February 1998, issue of this magazine
titled Nutritional Benefits of Farmed Fish, reported that with salmon fed
substitute lipids such as safflower oil, taste panelists could easily
distin-guish fish fed safflower oil from those fed herring oil. It is
contrary to organic certification to cause the production of unnaturally
flavored products, and to force the elimina-tion of natural nutritional
components essential to good hu-man health.
FISH MEAL AND OTHER SOURCES OF PROTEIN
As with fish oil, there are substitute sources of pro-tein for
fishmeal. Much current research in the US by Dr. Hardy and others is directed
towards using grain meals in fish rations. However, grain meals are high in
phytic acid, an organic form of phosphorous not digested by fish. This
results in high levels of phosphorous in discharges from farms employing
grains in fish diets, which is a major envi-ronmental concern. High
phosphorous discharges are contrary to standards to prevent the discharge of
wastewater contain-ing excessive levels of nutrients.
In his November/December 1998 column Phytate, Dr. Hardy reported one solution
is to employ meals from grains geneti-cally modified to produce lower levels
of phytate. However, genetically modified grains are not allowed under
organic standards. Another solution is to add phytase, an enzyme produced by
genetically modified yeast, to fish diets. Prod-ucts from genetically
modified organisms are also prohib-ited.
In addition to grain meals substituted for fishmeal as a protein
source, livestock feed formulators employ a wide range of meat and poultry
byproducts. Meat and bone meal, feather meal, blood meal, and now hydrolyzed
hog's hair, are commercial sources of protein. The proposed aquaculture
standards do not consider the use of these animal products, and careful
consideration should be given to their prohibi-tion. Some consumers attracted
to natural foods choose to not eat red meats and poultry, and rely upon fish
to supply animal protein. By feeding recycled meat and poultry byprod-ucts
(i.e., meat and bone meal, hydrolyzed feather meal, blood meal, and
hydrolyzed hogs hair), along with animal fats (tallow, yellow grease, etc.)
to farm grown fish, this consumer group would eat the meats they seek to
avoid by buying fish. Ironically, these meat-fed fish would be sold as
organically certified.
CREDITABILITY OF ALL AQUACULTURE
This issue of substitutes for fishmeal and oils is con-siderably
broader than organic certification. At present, fish oils are largely used in
fish feed formulations, and unlike the broiler industry, non-fish oils are
not. However, as I have developed in earlier articles in this Magazine, large
scale aquaculture is following the evolution of the broiler industry, and it
may only be a matter of time when lipids low in omega-3 fatty acids and high
in saturated, trans-saturated, mono-unsaturated, and omega-6 fatty acids from
grain oils and animal fats are extensively employed.
With a switch away from fishmeal and fish oil, the consuming public will seek
out and eat large amounts of farm grown fish because of per-ceptions of
healthiness, but not receive the health factors for which they pay. The
credit-ability of all aquaculture would be at stake.
WHY THE PROSCRIPTION OF FISHMEAL AND OIL?
A body of thought with some environmental protectionist is that
fishmeals and oils from wild resources are placing unsustainable harvest
demands on these fisheries. This is coupled with a concern that these fish
could better be used directly for human consumption, particularly by poorly
fed children in developing countries, instead of feeding ani-mals.
The principal source of fishmeal and fish oil for aqua-culture in the United
States is menhaden, a fish unique to US waters in the Gulf of Mexico and off
mid-Atlantic states. Unlike cod and some other ocean fisheries that have been
de-stroyed or heavily impacted by over-fishing by a multitude of fishing
boats from different nations, the menhaden re-source is largely harvested by
one US company, Omega Pro-tein, with their take regulated by the Federal
Government and the several state governments. Omega Protein accounts for 85%
of all menhaden oil produced. There is no evidence that this fishery is
over-harvested. Furthermore, menhaden is an oily and bony fish unsuitable for
consumption by un-dernourished children.
The proscription of fishmeal and oil from wild caught fish is
counter-productive and un-justified. The inclusion of fishmeal and fish oil
from sustainablely harvested wild resources is not only consistent with
organic certifica-tion, but essential if organic standards are to be faithful
in providing high levels of nutri-tion and health. Inclusion of fishmeal and
fish oil in aquaculture feeds should be required and not proscribed.
MUCH VALUE TO BE CREATED
I expect the USDA will adopt some form of organic stan-dards this
June, and a small but significant portion of the US population may be able to
purchase farm-grown seafoods with assurances that their needs for the best
possible nu-trition and health, freshness and safety, wholesomeness, and
environmental sustainability are satisfied. However, if de-prived of
reasonable organic certification for farm grown fish and shellfish, these
discriminating consumers will not know what has been fed the fish they eat.
The establishment of workable organic standards for aquaculture
presents an opportunity for some growers to cre-ate unusual value for their
companies by moving higher up the value chain that they better control. This
is particu-larly true for small farmers.
With the small size and specialized nature of this mar-ket, it is unlikely
that big producers will enter. Big com-panies shun small and specialized
markets. Small markets don't solve their near-term growth needs. A company
produc-ing 30 million pounds of salmon each year in a market grow-ing 15% a
year is not attracted to a market of only 2 mil-lion pounds, even with a
higher growth rate. Big producers do not do well serving small-differentiated
markets, and aquaculture is no different.
Organic aquaculture is an unusual opportunity for small producers willing to
go to great bother to source their feed ingredients carefully, to abide by
restrictions such as maximum stocking densities, keep extensive daily
records, --and most of all, to think, breath, and live organic. Those who do,
while incurring greater production costs, will re-ceive better prices, get
paid on time, and receive other benefits from natural food retailers who seek
them out to become value creating trade partners.
NOW IS THE TIME FOR INDUSTRY INVOLVEMENT!
Before organic certification of aquaculture products occurs, the aquaculture
industry must become involved with the USDA's National Organic Standards
Board to assure that criteria for certification are workable and reasonable
for growers, while providing health, nutrition, safety, and other criteria
sought by consumers in this very special mar-ket. People with opposing
interests like those seeking to proscribe fishmeal and oil from wild caught
fish have been, are, and will be involved in this process.
Interested readers should visit the National Organic Program Website
at . To send email to the livestock committee, click on
National Organic Standards Board, then on NOSB Committees. While the proposed
aquacul-ture standards are not yet posted, they are available from the
Chairman of the Livestock Committee, Mr. Fred Kirsch-mann, at
. He intends to adopt aquacul-ture standards this June.
Like all areas of government rulemaking, it is easier to establish workable
standards with involvement at the out-set, than to attempt change after
adoption. The aquaculture industry learned this important lesson with the
passage of Lacey Act amendments in the early 1980s that had no industry
involvement, and then became the curse of legitimate fish farmers.
Now is the time for the aquaculture community to get involved in the adoption
of organic standards for aquacul-ture, not later. Time is of the essence.
Wait-and-see will only preclude organically aquaculture products from
becoming a valuable segment in our industry. We have a high value creating
opportunity to better serve our markets that must move forward with our
active participation.
George S. Lockwood
Carmel Valley, California
April 25, 1999
My comments:
To The Livestock Committee of the National Organic Standards Board
Reference: Comments on the Draft Recommendations for Organic
Aquaculture
January 25, 1999
Dear members,
We have reviewed the Livestock Draft Recommendations below. We, as certified
organic farmers differ with the Committee's recommendation and feel the Draft
Recommendations are in some places inconsistent with the language and intent
of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. We strongly support the
implementation of organic standards, the organic wild crop management plan
and the certification of wild crop livestock sites for wild aquatic livestock
in the USDA/NOP's Final Rule. A USDA/NOP organic aquaculture standard should
encompass both pond, river, bathtub and ocean raised aquatic livestock as
well as wild crop production of aquatic livestock.
Organic Forum comments are indicated as such within the following Proposed
Aqua-culture Recommendation of the NOSB Livestock Committee below.
Best regards,
Eric Kindberg, certified organic farmer
NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD
ORGANIC AQUACULTURE STANDARDS
Second draft written by Frederick Kirschenmann
Date Submitted: October 20, 1998
Purpose: For review and revision by the NOSB Livestock Committee and
submission to the NOSB
AUTHORIZED METHODS AND MATERIALS FOR
THE PRODUCTION OF ORGANIC FINFISH and SHELLFISH
A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
I. Fish shall be reared in a habitat that meets the basic physiological
requirements and behavioral needs of the species being grown.
2. To avoid escapes of domestically reared fish into the wild, and wild fish
entering a farm, only enclosed, self-contained, ponds and other facilities
will be allowed. Netcages and netpens are not allowed.
Comment:
In pond raised organic aquaculture we feel for each fish rearing pond or
series of rearing ponds, there should be a sediment pond or ponds of similar
size that the rearing pond water flows into before the water exits to the
environment. A similar size sediment pond where fish are not purposely
raised offers a degree of protection against environmental contamination from
fish wastes, and the more likelihood of preventing disease and parasite
contamination of the fish rearing pond. Sediment ponds offer an effective
slowing down of the entrance of unwanted fish and wild aquatic livestock into
the fish rearing pond(s).
B. FEED
1. Feed components must be produced in accordance with USDA
organic standards for livestock feed.
2. Plant-based feed sources must be from organic production.
3. Only feeds with low fishmeal content are allowed (no more than 20%)
Comments:
We believe that 1 and 2 above unduly restricts the sources of protein for
feeding aquatic livestock. Wild harvest aquaculture products are allowed for
crop fertility on organic farms under OFPA and in the private sector
certification standards now. The requirement we feel that offers a safeguard
from possible feed contamination of wild harvested aquatic products is to
require random sample testing from each 2000 pounds of wild aquatic feed.
Item 4 below is in contradiction with Item 1 above. Item 1 requires all feed
to be from "organically produced" sources, while item 4, below, allows
non-organically produced feed.
4. Fishmeal and fish oil must be sourced from waste products of processed
wild, marine fish or from certified organic fish farms. Fishmeal and fishoil
obtained from wild caught fish will not be allowed.
Comment:
The last sentence of item 4 does not seem to be logically supportable and
places an undue burden on organic aquatic livestock producers. The sentence
should be removed.
5. Artificial colors, binders and synthetic astaxanthin are prohibited.
6. Antibiotics in feed and extrudents from fishmeal are prohibited.
7. Feed additives, with the exception of minerals, vitamins, phaffia yeast,
and enzymes of natural origin, are prohibited.
Comment:
Item 7 should be rewritten to be consistent with OFPA and the National List
process. Vitamins and minerals, livestock parasiticides and medicines used
in organic aquatic livestock production must be petitioned, reviewed and
included on the National List by specific use and application. Under OFPA
"Phaffia yeast" and "enzymes of natural origin," unless they are "organically
produced" are not allowed to be fed as feed supplements to aquatic livestock
producing "organically produced" livestock products. Under OFPA, there are
no categories for "feed supplements" or "feed additives" open for inclusion
on the National List.
C. ENVIRONMENT
1. Organic fish farms shall be managed to make optimum use of nutrients and
minimize waste. This can best be accomplished by creating diversified fish
farms, including more than one species and recycling freshwater aquaculture
effluents into cropping systems. If aquaculture effluents are not recycled,
farmers must employ practices to prevent the discharge of wastewater
containing excessive levels of nutrients (e.g. constructing settling ponds,
etc.)
2. Water used in fresh water farms must meet EPA water quality standards and
must be monitored daily for ideal environment (e.g. ammonia, nitrate & oxygen
levels, salinity, pH etc.)
[We may want to specify water quality standards more specifically and add
quality standards for saltwater farms]
3. Stock densities shall be limited to 10 kg of fish per cubic meter of water.
4. When predator control becomes necessary, only non-lethal means shall be
used.
5. All pipe lines, tanks and water reservoirs shall be free of lead (Pb),
impregnating materials, or other substances which have the potential to harm
fish, humans or the environment.
Comment:
Items 1 through 5 represent micro-management of organic aquaculture and
should be removed from the Draft Recommendation. Stocking rates have not
been applied to any other livestock and to retain consistency should not be
applied to aquatic livestock. Organic aquatic producers as all organic
farmers must conform to governmental regulations related to producing food
products. There is no need to further detail those requirements, but at the
most only to state certified organic farmers must conform to all government
regulations.
D. ORIGIN, BREEDING OFffFOCK-
1. Organisms that have been genetically manipulated (e.g. triploiding,
gynogenesis, etc.) or that have been subjected to hormone treatment are
prohibited.
Comment:
Item 1, above, states the general requirements for the production of
"organically produced" livestock products found in OFPA and should be found
as general statements in the USDA/NOP's Final Rule. They do not need to be
reiterated herein.
2. Fish stocks (eggs, hens, parrs, smolts, etc.) shall be sourced from
certified organic fish farms. If organic stock is not available, stock may be
procured from conventional farms provided that they meet the requirements
under D 1 of this section and that two thirds of their lifespan is under
organic management.
Comment:
Allowing one third of the lifespan of aquatic livestock from which
"organically produced" products are derived to not be under organic
management nor organically fed is inconsistent with OFPA and the NOSB
recommendations for raising of organic livestock. Aquatic livestock should
be treated similar to poultry, having to be raised under organic management
and fed "organically produced" from the day old status.
3. Mutilation is not allowed, including for the purpose of inducing
reproduction (e.g. eyestock ablation in shrimp)
Comment:
Consistency in organic livestock production standards should be practiced
here. "Mutilation" by tail docking, ear tagging, caponizing, branding,
castrating are allowed in organically fed livestock. Why prohibit
mutilations only in organically managed aquatic livestock.
E. HEALTH CARE
1. As in any organic system, health in aquaculture systems shall be
maintained principally through prevention. Biosecurity measures to prevent
the introduction of disease from the wild (and vice vets) shall be required.
2. The routine use of any synthetic chemical substances, hormones, or
antibiotics is strictly prohibited. If such have to be used as an emergency
for disease control, the treated fish must be sold as non-organic. Natural
vaccines and natural immunostimulants (e.g. yeast, fungi, etc.) are are
allowed.
3. Hydrogen Peroxide, sodium chloride, quicklime or potassium permanganate
are allowed for parasite control.
Comment:
The first sentence of item 2 above speaking of subtherupeutic use does not
need to be restated as these details are stated in OFPA as applicable to all
livestock. The second sentence of Item 2 speaks to thereuputic use of
medicines, and does not take into consideration the OFPA National List
petition process for the use of livestock medicines. It would be a violation
for the USDA/NOP to outlaw a standard or process that is mandated to take
place under OFPA.
Item 3 substances, if natural, are all allowed unless prohibited on the
National List. All synthetic parasiticides must be petitioned, reviewed,
evaluated and included on the National List by specific use or application in
aquatic and all livestock.
Both 2 and 3 should be removed from the Draft Recommendations.
F. HARVESTING
1. The killing procedure shall be as expeditious and stress free as
possible. Methods such as concussion, carbon dioxide, electrocution, etc. may
be used as appropriate to the species. Water temperature should be gradually
lowered to 4 degrees centigrade prior to killing.
Comment:
What is the reasoning behind reducing water temperature to 4 degrees
centigrade prior to killing? Is this the standard of the industry?
2. Fish processing must conform to all FDA regulations for fish and
fishery products (Federal Register 60 FR 65095)
added: A section on siting (suitable private lands, public lands, etc.) ].
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 25 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Public Comments Requested on Proposed National Aquaculture
Program by USDA-APHIS
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 21:21:57 -0500
***********************************************************************
FEDERAL AQUACULTURE BRIEFS
USDA-CSREES No. 99-13
May 5, 1999
***********************************************************************
Public Comments Requested on Proposed National
Aquaculture Program by
USDA-APHIS
Please share and distribute the following Federal Register notice to
others who may wish to provide comments and recommendations on
programs and regulations pertaining to aquaculture in the U.S. under
consideration by USDA-APHIS.
Gary Jensen
USDA-CSREES
______________________________
[Federal Register: May 4, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 85)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 23795-23796]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the
proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is
to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making
prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Chapter I
[Docket 98-085-1]
RIN 0579-AB09
Aquaculture: Farm-Raised Fin Fish
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.
SUMMARY: We are considering establishing programs and regulations for
farm-raised fin fish. A national program could help protect the health of
farm-raised fin fish, help producers of farm-raised fin fish meet
international trade requirements, and help encourage international trade in
U.S. aquaculture products. We are asking for comments on whether we should
establish such programs and, if so, the type and extent of the programs. We
are also asking for comments on whether to use negotiated rulemaking to
develop regulations for any programs that we may establish.
DATES: Consideration will be given only to comments received on or
before July 6, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Please send an original and three copies of your comment to
Docket No. 98-085-1, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, suite
3C03, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that
your comments refer to Docket No. 98-085-1. Comments received may be
inspected at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to inspect comments are requested
to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to facilitate entry into the comment
reading room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Otis Miller, Jr., National
Aquaculture Coordinator, National Animal Health Programs, VS, APHIS,
4700 River Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231, (301) 734-6954.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has received 21
petitions asking us to promulgate animal health regulations and perhaps
other regulatory programs to deal with farm-raised fin fish as livestock.
These petitions are from State farm bureaus, industry associations,
individual producers, State officials, and businesses that serve
aquaculture industries.
One petition requested that we define domesticated farm-raised fish as
livestock ``so that USDA can provide farmers with needed services identical
to those received by other American farm raised animals.''
Most of the petitions we have received addressed only farm-raised fin
fish. However, several addressed a broader range of aquatic species. One
letter stated that we should recognize the entire industry--``clams,
aquatic plants, alligators, tropical fish, and fish raised for human
consumption''--as ``general farming.'' One stated that we should define
``farmed aquatic animals, such as fish and shrimp,'' as livestock. Another
asked us to define ``domesticated farm-raised fish and shellfish'' as
livestock. Other letters suggested that we consider domestically raised
fish and shellfish as livestock, and stated that ``[a]quatic farmers are a
diverse group growing a number of species of fish, crustaceans, and
mollusks.''
The petitioners are concerned mainly with receiving the same
services that domestic producers of livestock receive for animals
moving in interstate and foreign commerce. Examples are diagnostic and
certification services, protecting the industry by preventing importation
of pests and diseases, and supporting commerce by simplifying interstate
movement (now, each State sets its own requirements).
Based on the petitions, it is difficult for us to determine what
segments of the aquaculture industry want services and exactly what
sevices they want. It is also difficult to determine what the different
petitioners want to accomplish by inviting Federal regulation.
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is
authorized to regulate to protect the health of livestock and poultry in
the United States. We have many regulatory programs covering poultry,
horses, swine, cattle, and other livestock. Our regulatory programs also
cover animals that could transmit diseases or pests of livestock or
poultry. Our programs for ``traditional'' livestock are intended to: (1)
Prevent the importation of diseases and pests; (2) regulate interstate
movement in a uniform manner; (3) provide diagnostic laboratory services;
(4) regulate vaccines and biologic reagents used in animals; and (5)
control and/or eradicate diseases and pests already found in the United
States.
Based on the petitions we have received, we are considering whether to
expand services to farm-raised fin fish. We already provide some services
to aquaculture industries. Specifically, we provide laboratory diagnostic
services, endorse export health certificates for aquatic animals and
aquatic animal products, and license vaccines and biologic reagents for use
in aquatic animals. We also control damage done by wild birds and other
animals to farmed aquatic animals. Some of these services are paid for
through user fees and cooperative agreements. If we were to offer
additional services and programs, we would need funds to pay for them. We
are interested in comments on how such services and programs should be
funded.
What Programs and Regulations Should We Establish?
Before we decide whether to propose regulations covering farm-
raised fin fish, we want the views and recommendations of all
interested persons on the following specific issues:
1. We have received petitions to promulgate rules and regulations
concerning domesticated farm-raised fin fish. However, as many of the
petitions acknowledge, U.S. aquaculture industries include more than just
domesticated fin fish. Letters referred not only to fish, but to clams,
alligators, tropical fish (for aquariums), fish raised for human
consumption, shrimp, mollusks, and crustaceans. Should we consider
regulating only domesticated farm-raised fin fish, or should we consider
regulating other aquatic animals as well? If we should consider a broader
regulatory program, what species should we include, and why?
2. We already provide some services to aquaculture industries. We
provide laboratory diagnostic services, endorse export health certificates
for aquatic animals and aquatic animal products, and license vaccines and
biologic reagents for use in aquatic animals. We also control damage done
by wild birds and other animals to farmed aquatic animals. Should we expand
the range of our services? If we expand our services to aquaculture
industries, what new or additional services should we consider providing?
3. We currently regulate the importation of livestock and poultry and
livestock and poultry products. These regulations are designed to prevent
diseases and pests of livestock and poultry from being introduced into the
United States. Should we consider adopting regulations to prevent the
introduction of diseases and pests of aquatic animal species? If so, should
the regulations be similar to those we have for livestock and poultry? If
not, how should the regulations be different?
4. We work closely with industry and State representatives to
administer many of our current disease control programs. For example, we
work with industry and State representatives to control and eradicate
brucellosis, tuberculosis, and other livestock diseases. If we develop any
regulatory programs for aquatic animal species, what form should our
cooperation take?
5. We currently regulate the interstate movement of livestock and
poultry and livestock and poultry products. These regulations are designed
to prevent diseases and pests of livestock and poultry from being spread
within the United States. Currently, we administer several voluntary
programs designed to help producers control and eliminate certain diseases
in their livestock. The goal of these programs is to eliminate sources of
infection, while helping producers improve their stock. For example, we
have a program covering scrapie in sheep and goats called the Voluntary
Scrapie Flock Certification Program. Should we consider adopting
regulations to prevent the interstate spread of diseases and pests of any
aquatic species? If we were to adopt regulations covering interstate
movement of any aquatic animal species, should we include voluntary
programs to help producers control and eliminate certain diseases? If so,
what species and diseases should be covered? What should we include in such
programs?
How Should We Conduct Rulemaking?
Developing a new regulatory program can be very complicated. It is
important that we establish reasonable goals and adopt workable programs to
achieve them. We will need to collect reliable information on the costs and
benefits of any program. Public participation and input in the rulemaking
process is vital to success.
In the rulemaking process, we can either draft proposed regulations
ourselves or use negotiated rulemaking to develop the proposals. In
negotiated rulemaking, an agency brings together the groups that are
interested in or would be affected by proposed regulations. Working
together, agency employees and representatives of interested and affected
groups negotiate the text of a draft proposed rule.
Whether we draft a proposed rule ourselves, or use negotiated
rulemaking, later steps in the rulemaking process would be the same. We
would publish any proposed rule in the Federal Register, including an
analysis of the costs and benefits, and invite the public to submit
comments. After reviewing all the comments we receive, we would decide upon
what further action to take.
Therefore, we are asking for comments from interested persons
regarding the desirability of using a negotiated rulemaking process
should we decide to proceed with rulemaking affecting farm-raised fin fish
or other aquatic animals.
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5542; 7 U.S.C. 147b; 21 U.S.C. 111-114a,
114b-114c, 114h, 115, 117-130, 134, 134(a)-134(h), 135a, 136, and
136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d).
Done in Washington, DC, this 28 day of April 1999.
Craig A. Reed,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 99-11130 Filed 5-3-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
---
GARY L. JENSEN Federal Express or overnight mail:
USDA/CSREES/PAPPP The Aerospace Center
STOP 2220 901 D Street, S.W.
1400 Independence Ave.SW 8th Floor, Rm. 845
Washington,DC 20250-2220 Washington,DC 20024
Tel: 202/401-6802
Fax: 202/401-1602
Internet: gjensen@reeusda.gov
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 26 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Germination of lettuce in hot weather
From: "William Brown"
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:46:21 -0000
In the cool months of winter we put the seedlings on top of our chest
freezer lid (with heating element installed to prevent condensation) and in
the summers of Hawaii I keep the lettuce seedlings out of the sun for two
days before putting them out under plastic. They will be germinated but not
yet showing above ground. We germinate 1000 lettuce each week. We have
tried almost all varieties of leaf lettuce and find they can be very
specific in their environmental needs so you need to experiment. The two
reds I grow here in sub-tropical Hawaii are Cerize (red oak leaf) and
Revolution (red lolla rossa). Both get a very dark burgundy color for me,
handle well and taste very good. Ibis is a red leaf that also gets very red
and grows well, but the seed is expensive (relatively), handles well. Ruby
gets very red but doesn't like it here. My favorite is a Burpee offering
named Dapple but I haven't seen any lately. This has dark green shoulders,
intense red leaf, very delicious, grows fast and very big. Handles well.
William Brown mahiwai@cmpmail.com
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 27 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: cabbage worms
From: "Wendy Nagurny"
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 22:34:01 -0400
If your cabbages are outside, just place bird perches a few feet above your
plants, spaced at regular intervals. Many species of birds love cabbage
worms, but cannot find a platform from which to hunt. This also works for
many other annoying worms and bugs.
Wendy
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 28 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Hi....
From: "William Brown"
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 17:44:33 -0000
Cabbage worms from the cabbage butterly. Try Bt from your friendly ag
store.
William Brown mahiwai@cmpmail.com
(aka lettuce@hilo.net)
----- Original Message -----
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
|
