Homepage

Updated FIFO calculation by IFFO shows more salmonids produced than fish consumed in 2015

IFFO, The Marine Ingredients Organisation, has calculated new Fish In: Fish Out ratios (FIFO) for 2015 and for the first time FIFO figures for salmonids are below 1. Calculated with FAO data, Fish In: Fish Out ratios (FIFO) have been used by as a way of reviewing the consumption of wild fish by the sector since the 1990s.  Salmonids have drawn attention on this subject in the past, and have been criticised previously for their use of fishmeal and fish oil.  In 2015 the sector produced more fish protein than it consumed. Previously, IFFO provided figures for FIFO for 2000 and 2010 and has now updated these using 2015 production and consumption data.  The 2015 figures retain the trend of reducing FIFOs seen between 2000 and 2010.  Overall fed aquaculture FIFOs have declined from 0.63 to 0.33 to 0.22 over the period.  

IFFO announces finalists for 2017 Leadership and Innovation awards

IFFO is proud to announce the finalists for our 2017 Leadership and Innovation Awards.  The winners of the awards will be announced at the Gala Dinner of the 57th IFFO Annual Conference, held in the vast and historic city of Washington DC. Once again, applicants came from a wide cross section of IFFO’s membership, showing examples of success from both small and large producers and traders from across the globe. 

IFFO responds to the Fish Free Feed (F3) Challenge

While we congratulate the finalists and winners of the HeroX F3 competition (some of whom are IFFO members), we are disappointed that the credibility of this initiative to encourage alternative sources of feed ingredients has been damaged by the organisers’ use of negative messaging, exaggeration and misinformation in relation to marine ingredients.

IFFO is on record as acknowledging the need for a wide range of responsibly sourced and high quality feed ingredients to support the continued growth of the aquaculture industry. We accept that the supply of marine ingredients cannot meet the demand and that alternative ingredients are needed. The reduction in inclusion rates has allowed feed production volumes to continue to increase unhindered, also resulting in only 0.22kg of ingoing fish being needed to grow 1kg of farmed fish, for the most recent calculation based on 2015 data[1]. In contrast to IFFO’s broader position, the F3 organisers’ intention has been to encourage the exclusion of marine ingredients from use in farmed fish feed, reducing choices for feed companies. Although, confusingly, their website states that they are not against the use of fish based raw materials, this is statement is far less prominent than the title of the competition and their statements in the media.

Unfortunately, the F3 challenge organisers have refused our offers to enter into dialogue or meet and provide up-to-date facts, instead choosing to seek publicity through a number of misleading or false statements.

New IFFO and SNP factsheet on Peruvian Anchovy

IFFO, The Marine Ingredients Organisation, and Peru’s National Fisheries Society (SNP) have developed a factsheet covering the main issues in this complex subject, as an aid to understanding the reasons why the market is the way it is. The factsheet looks at Peru’s historic uses of fish, past initiatives and new projects to increase direct human consumption. It concludes by noting that after millions being spent by both the Government and the private sector, direct human consumption remains very low due to a lack of interest and uptake; but the use of anchovy in feed supports global protein production and is an extremely efficient way to contribute to global food security.   

Letter to The Economist: The dangers of misreporting science

Your article makes very sweeping generalisations based on scientific paper that reports on a very small sample size. The authors’ eagerness to attack the fish farming and fishmeal industry has unfortunately caused a lack of perspective and critical appraisal of the facts. While antibiotic resistance is a real concern, the findings in the paper by Wang et al need further investigation, not least of all due to the reported presence of several antibiotics in fishmeal made from whole wild fish that would not have come into contact with antibiotics at any stage. Fishmeal samples are named as being from various countries of origin but were purchased locally in China with no guarantee of their purity or integrity. Given reports of adulteration of imported fishmeal in China, this is clearly a concern.