1

AQUACULTURE CRSP ELEVENTH WORK PLAN EXTERNAL PROGRAM ADVISORY COUNCIL

REPORT (2003–2004)

Table of Contents Overview………………………………………………………………………………….2 Aquaculture CRSP Eleventh Work Plan Investigations………………………………3 Part I – Asia Regional Meeting, Bali, Indonesia……………………………………….7 Asia External Program Advisory Council Report………………………………………...7 Asia Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes………………………………….11 Aquaculture CRSP World Aquaculture Society Session………………………………...15 Aquaculture CRSP Research Abstracts during the WAS Conference…………………….17 Part II – Africa Regional Meeting, Grahamstown, South Africa……………………23 Africa External Program Advisory Council Report……………………………………...23 Africa Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes………………………………..28 Aquaculture CRSP Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa Session and Best Management Practices Workshop………………………………………………………..33 Aquaculture CRSP Research Abstracts during the AASA Conference………………….35 Part III – Americas Regional Meeting………………………………………………...40 Summary of External Program Advisory Council Participation………………………...40 Americas Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes…………………………….41 Appendices………………………………………………………………………………56 Appendix 1. External Advisory Transitional Structure………………………………….56 Appendix 2. Aquaculture CRSP 2005 Awards…………………………………………..57

2

Overview In 2001, the External Evaluation Panel (EEP) submitted a report following a comprehensive 5-year review of the Aquaculture CRSP. This review process was very valuable and the Aquaculture CRSP subsequently decided to conduct comparable external reviews at the end of each work plan. This report represents the first submitted by the External Program Advisory Council (EPAC). The EPAC has evolved within the Aquaculture CRSP to represent an external advisory body, which limits conflicts of interest and enhances objectivity. Each EPAC report is completed by at least one member of the Council. EPAC members are expected to travel to meet in person with participants of the Aquaculture CRSP, participate in Program and Technical Committee meetings, and attend presentations offered by Aquaculture CRSP participants at professional conferences to fully evaluate activities over the specific Work Plan period. This Eleventh Work Plan EPAC report provides a review of activities conducted within the Eleventh Work Plan. During the 2004 Program Meeting, participants decided to experiment with the normal rotation of programmatic meetings by electing to convene three regional Technical Committee meetings during 2005. In response, the Aquaculture CRSP Management Entity organized Technical Committee and Aquaculture CRSP conference sessions in conjunction with the World Aquaculture Society meeting in Bali, Indonesia, May 2005 and the Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa in Grahamstown, South Africa, September 2005. To complete its obligation, and experiment with innovative e-meeting platforms, the final regional meeting for the Americas was organized through a Bulletin Board System in December 2005. EPAC members attended both conferences and monitored online meeting deliberations to review activities conducted within the Eleventh Work Plan. Reviewed activities also include some new projects approved for the Twelfth Work Plan, but just getting underway.

3

Aquaculture CRSP Eleventh Work Plan Investigations 1 AUGUST 2003–31 JULY 2004

Co-Culture of Lotus and Hybrid Catfish to

Recycle Wastes from Intensive Feeding Diana, Yi Environmental

Impacts Analysis

Further Studies on Soil Quality in Aquaculture Ponds in Thailand

Boyd, Boonyaratpalin

Amazon Aquaculture Outreach C. Kohler, S. Kohler, Tello,

Alcantara, Rebaza, Del

Aguila Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) Production

Constraints in Bangladesh Diana, Lin, Yi, Bart, Shivakoti,

Wahab

Sustainable Development and Food Security

Reproductive Performance and Growth of Improved Tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus

Diana, Bart, Mair

Diversification Into Sustainable Tilapia-Shrimp Polyculture and Small-Scale Tilapia Cage Culture in Mexico

Fitzsimmons, Duncan

New Paradigm in Farming of Freshwater Prawn (Macrobrachium rosenbergii) with Closed and Recycle Systems

Diana, Lin, Yi

Integrated Cage-Cum-Pond Culture Systems with High-Valued Fish Species in Cages and Low-Valued Species in Open Ponds

Diana, Lin, Yi, Wahab, Shrestha,

Phuong

Production System Design and Integration

Mitigating Environmental Impact of Cage Culture through Integrated Cage-Cum-Cove Culture System in Tri An Reservoir of Vietnam

Diana, Lin, Yi, Hung

Optimization of Nitrogen Fertilization Regime in Fertilized Nile Tilapia Ponds With Supplemental Feed

Diana, Lin, Yi

Workshop on Fertilization Strategies for Pond Culture in Bangladesh

Diana, Lin, Yi, Wahab

4

Indigenous Species Development

Broodstock Development and Larval Feeding of Amazonian Fishes

C. Kohler, S. Kohler, Abiado,

Dabrowski, Rinchard, Tello,

Alcantara Controlled Reproduction of an Important

Indigenous Species, Spinibarbus denticulatus, in Southeast Asia

Diana, Bart, Trung

Development of Aquaculture Techniques for the Indigenous Species of Southern Mexico, Centropomus undecimalis: Sex Determination and Differentiation and Effects of Temperature

Patino, Pope, Contreras, Marquez, Paramo

Water Quality and Availability

Elimination of Methyltestosterone from Intensive Masculinization Systems: Use of Ultraviolet Irradiation of Water

Schreck, Giannico, Contreras, Marquez

Use of a Wetland to Treat Effluent from a Flow-Through Aquaculture System

Boyd, Sipauba Tavares

Pond Design and Watershed Analyses Training Tollner, Meyer, Pilz

Influence of Daily Feed Allowance on Pond Water and Effluent Quality

Boyd, Lim, Salie, de Wet

Preliminary Work on Site Description, Evaluation, and Development Planning: Tanzania, Ghana, and Kenya

Quagrainie, Duke

Cost Evaluation and Benefit Assessment of Fish Farming in Selected African Nations (Kenya, Ghana and Tanzania)

Quagrainie, Kaliba,

Mapunda, Osewe,

Mnembuka, Amisah, Kumah,

Ngugi An Economic Assessment of Aquaculture in

Rural Africa: The Case of Tanzania, Kenya, and Ghana

Quagrainie, Kaliba,

Mapunda, Osewe,

Mnembuka, Amisah, Kumah,

Ngugi

Economic/ Risk Assessment and Social Analysis

A Cross-National Analysis of the Potential Quagrainie,

5

Economic Impact of Aquaculture in Africa Kaliba, Mapunda,

Osewe, Mnembuka,

Amisah, Kumah, Ngugi

Training Local Farmers on Safe Handling of Steroids and Masculinization Techniques in Central America

Schreck, Giannico, Contreras

Aquaculture CRSP Sponsorship of the Sixth International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture

Fitzsimmons, Bolivar

Aquaculture CRSP—Global Contributions to Sustainable Aquaculture: A Special Session at the 2004 World Aquaculture Conference

Fitzsimmons

Aquaculture Training for Kenyan Fisheries Assistants

Bowman, Langdon, Ngugi,

Omolo Evaluation of Aquaculture Training Provided

to Fisheries Officers and Fisheries Assistants of the Kenya Fisheries Department

Bowman, Langdon, Ngugi, Omolo, Amadiva

Applied Technology and Extension Methodologies

Development of an Aquaculture Handbook for Extension Workers and Trainers of Extension Workers and Sub-Saharan Africa

Bowman, Langdon, Ngugi,

Omolo Mitigating the Effects of High Temperature

and Turbidity on Seed Production of Nile Tilapia from Hapa-in-Pond Systems

Diana, Rakocy, Yi

Evaluation and Improvement of Tilapia Fingerling Production and Availability in Honduras

Molnar, Meyer

Seedstock Development and Availability

Continuation of a Selective Breeding Program for Nile Tilapia to Provide Quality Broodstock for Central America

Schreck, Giannico, Contreras, Fernandez

Disease, Predation Prevention, and Food Safety

Food Safety and Handling: Increasing Local Consumption of Aquaculture Products and Improving Quality

Haws, Tobey, Gaxiola, Ochoa

Fish Nutrition and Feed

Nutrition and Nutrient Utilization in Native Peruvian Fishes

C. Kohler, Lochmann, S.

6

Kohler, Tello, Alcantara

Evaluation of Tilapia Aquaculture Best Practices in Central Luzon, the Philippin

Brown, Bolivar

Technology

Use of Phytochemicals as an Environmentally-Friendly Method to Sex-Reverse Nile Tilapia

Dabrowski, Contreras, Marquez, Paramo

Insulin-like Growth Factor-I as a Growth Indicator in Tilapia

Brown, Borski. Bolivar

Cross-Sectoral and International Extension Exchange and Learning

Haws, Tobey, Gaxiola, Ochoa

Connectivity of Water Resource Status, Environmental Quality, Aquaculture, and Human Health

Haws, Tobey, Gaxiola, Ochoa

Aquaculture and Human Health Impacts

Analysis of Critical Points in Aquaculture Production Affecting Participation and Level of Benefits to Women, Youth, and Disadvantaged Stakeholders

Haws, Tobey, Gaxiola, Ochoa

7

Part I – Asia Regional Meeting, Bali, Indonesia

Asia External Program Advisory Council Report CRSP Technical meeting Firstly, I would like to say that I continue to be very impressed with the high degree of cooperation and collaboration between the members of CRSP. A strong rapport between the host country and developing country participants was apparent and clear evidence of involvement and inclusion of the overseas scientists in the development of the CRSP program. Although little technical detail of work being conducted was presented at the meeting (just an overview of research programs), I was also impressed with the scientific understanding and commitment from the overseas scientists. However, I am unable to comment on how effective the research being conducted is in terms of improving the well being of local fish farmers in each country because this type of information was not presented at the meeting. Overview of research projects: Yang Yi and Jim Diana outlined projects in SE Asia: i) Freshwater prawn research, ii) Tilapia pond research – including temperature and turbidity in hapa-in-pond systems, iii) research involving Bangladesh and Vietnam to start soon, iv) Use of rice straw for freshwater ponds – AIT and Bangladesh, v) reproductive performance of Tilapia ongoing at AIT – how different stocks perform under different environmental conditions and culture systems (nearly finished), vi) effects of Tilapia on indigenous species – Bangladesh and Nepal, vii) controlled reproduction of important indigenous species, such as Spinibarbus denticulatus in SE Asia. Bred in Vietnam using hormones, fry bred to fingerlings but growth rate very slow, viii) establish links with Chinese institutions, especially on environmental impacts. Will be supported by 3 students in China, ix) evaluation of potential for nearshore aquaculture of low trophic species – University of Michigan literature review. Philippines – Med Bolivar, working on Tilapia feeding strategies and stocking density in ponds, also Tilapia/shrimp polyculture. Other Lead Projects: Kenya – impact of aquaculture on rural communities, including Ghana and Tanzania. It is primarily an economic study of fish farming vs other aquaculture enterprises and will include economic modelling. South Africa – Lourens de Wet, developing best management practices for South African aquaculture

8

The meeting largely concentrated on future research directions for the CRSP. As most of the people present were production oriented, the general direction was to continue with production related work and what they are best skilled at. This was particularly the view of Claude Boyd - and to increase the production of food for very low income people. There was considerable discussion on the need to address biodiversity and to a lesser extent biotechnology. However, no definite directions were decided on. It was unfortunate that the discussion papers were not available for reading before the meeting. From my perspective in Australia if the government is requiring certain issues to be addressed then it is important that the research is oriented in that direction, and I assume this is much the same case with USAID. However, this was not particularly recognised by the scientists at the technical meeting. My reading of the biodiversity paper is that USAID is emphasising the impact of invasive species; however this did not seem to be recognised as particularly important by the people at the meeting. There are a couple of projects underway that address this by looking at the effect of introduced Tilapia on endemic species in Bangladesh and Nepal and I suggest this work could be emphasised more. As Tilapia has already been introduced around the globe, in many cases this work is a little late. However, I wonder whether the movements of different strains of Tilapia within and between countries should be addressed from an ecological perspective, instead of just economically. The new direction of the CRSP on the culture of native fish species, for example in Latin America and Thailand, was recognised as falling within the biodiversity agenda. Jim Diana suggested not such a strong focus on Tilapia, however it was recognised that working on multiple indigenous species would result in a reduced focussed effort between research teams. There was also a recognition for the development of BMPs for small scale producers for local consumption and this should include better environmental management. The discussion on biotechnology recognised the large difference between developing and developed countries. Generally it was felt that there was a need to continue with existing projects and existing strengths, especially production optimisation. Research on developing alternate foodstuffs in feeds was discussed, i.e. reducing the amount of fishmeal and trash fish in fish foods. This covers both the biodiversity and biotechnological issues. An assessment of the use of wild caught trash fish in fish feeds and effects on biodiversity in several countries was suggested. Other issues raised as potential research projects included the use of probiotics, nutrient cycling and reuse, and integrated aquaculture. Investigating the impact of aquaculture on the environment was also mentioned (blueprint for aquaculture) and life cycle analysis to determine where in the life cycle ecological efficiencies could be best achieved, e.g. for catfish nutrient release at the end of the culture cycle. Developing more efficient feeding regimes was also suggested as an area for research. The need to look at the whole ecosystem and not just individual farms was also raised.

9

Kwei Lin suggested that the CRSP should look at central themes such as the previous global project, and possibly more of a focus back in the pond. Amrit Bart gave an overview of tsunami activities and the development of holistic community programs funded by AID, such as the Rhode Island ‘Success’ program which has the objective of long term rehabilitation of a community as a model for the region. This includes looking for low impact aquaculture and tourism activities to reduce the effort and numbers of fishers. Amrit made the point that student training in undeveloped countries by the CRSP has significantly developed capacity with an indirect multiplier effect, which is not generally recognised as a positive impact of the CRSP. For example when he visited Myanmar as part of the tsunami effort he realised that many of the researchers there had been trained at AIT through the CRSP and they were subsequently training researchers and technicians in their own country. A general comment – the countries involved in the CRSP differ enormously in their traditional involvement in aquaculture and level of production. In SE Asia aquaculture has been practised for millennia and the volume of aquaculture product is enormous and expanding rapidly, whereas in Africa, for example, there is minimal tradition of fish farming and production is very low. Thus the methods for development of aquaculture, the need for sociological studies and the rate of progress and uptake of information by local farmers from the CRSP funded work is likely to differ significantly between these countries. Is this recognised by USAID? Tilapia and Aquaculture CRSP session at WAS This session got off to a good start with the introductory talk by Kevin Fitzsimmons on an overview of global trade and markets for Tilapia. It was well attended but unfortunately the next two speakers (not associated with the Aquaculture CRSP) did not turn up and so a number of people drifted off to other sessions. Because of the emphasis on Tilapia in this session, most of the speakers were not associated with the Aquaculture CRSP. According to my calculations only 4 of the 18 speakers were definitely from the CRSP, and possibly one or two others. I suspect this is probably not what you had intended. If I had realised earlier I would have sought out talks on CRSP funded projects in other sessions. Regardless, the session was generally well attended by predominately Asians. Yang Yi gave an interesting talk on mitigating the effects of temperature and turbidity on seed production in hapa-in-pond systems. Graham Mair from Australia (don’t know him) gave an excellent talk on the status of genetic research in Tilapia aquaculture, which was very well attended. The talk by M. Wahab from Nepal on polyculture of Tilapia with several species of carp showed a well designed and conducted experiment and was well presented. I unfortunately missed the talk by Lourens de Wet from South Africa. The rest of the talks by non-Aquaculture CRSP people were a mixture of very specific and detailed presentations on genetics and feeding (which were rather difficult for me because

10

I don’t have such detailed experience with Tilapia and also were presented by people who do not have English as a first language) to interesting general topics, such as an overview of the nutrient requirements and feeding of Tilapia. Talks by Aquaculture CRSP people in the FAO/NACA/WAS special session on aquaculture management: practices and principles for the environment and market were excellent and very well attended. Claude Boyd’s talk on certification issues for freshwater finfish was so full that people couldn’t get in the door. This was followed by a very interesting talk by Phuong Nguyen on environmental management of catfish farming in the Mekong River Delta. I was amazed at the rate of growth of this industry and had a brief talk with Phuong afterwards about management of the industry and the potential for environmental degradation. The industry is expanding without any environmental regulation and I suggest that this is a potential area of research for the CRSP. There were a couple of other talks that possibly involved CRSP people and students, however I missed them as they were split across the 10 concurrent sessions. I also didn’t have a list of students involved with the CRSP. The student posters were generally of a very good standard considering that English was not the first language for many people. There were a few duds and no shows, and numbering got muddled up. It was pleasing to see so many Asian students present, who normally wouldn’t be able to attend WAS. Christine Crawford, May 2005 (report date)

11

Asia Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes

Minutes of the Asia Regional ACRSP Technical Committee Meeting May 9, 2005, Bandung Room, Bali International Convention Center

Bali, Indonesia

Attendees

NAME AFFILIATION PROJECT LOCATION Jim Diana (TC Co-Chair) University of Michigan Southeast Asia Yang Yi Asian Institute of Technology Southeast Asia Remedios B. Bolivar CLSU Philippines Pablo Gonzalez-Alonis University of Arizona United States Christine Crawford University of Tasmania Australia Claude E. Boyd Auburn University South Africa, Brazil, Thailand Md. Abdul Wahab Bangladesh Agricultural University Bangladesh C. Kwei Lin University of Michigan Asia Laurens De Wet University of Stellenbosch South Africa Khalid Salie University of Stellenbosch South Africa Kwamena Quagrainie University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff United States Madhav K. Shrestha IASS/TU Nepal Le Thanh Hung University of Agriculture and Forestry Vietnam Amarit Bart Asian Institute of Technology Southeast Asia Kevin Fitzsimmons University of Arizona Philippines Nyung Phuong Can Tho University Southeast Asia

Welcome and Introductions Welcome Remarks were provided by Dr. Jim Diana. He introduced the objectives of the regional meeting. The participants were asked to introduce themselves to the group. Jim announced the composition of the 2005-06 ACRSP Technical Committee: Co-Chairs

Jim Diana Claude Boyd Materials and Methods Subcommittee

Suyapa Meyer (Social and Economic Aspects) Yang Yi (Environmental Effects)

Kevin Fitzsimmons (Production Optimization) Technical Progress Subcommittee

Bill Tollner (Environmental Effects) Maria Haws (Production Optimization)

12

Kwamena Quagrainie (Social and Economic Aspects) Work Plan and Budget Subcommittee

Nancy Gitonga (Social and Economic Aspects) Wilfrido Contreras-Sanchez (Environmental Effects)

Remedios Bolivar (Production Optimization) Project Updates The following gave an informal presentation of project updates they are involved with: Dr. Yang Yi presented an update of different projects he is involved with in Southeast Asia. He also gave an overview about the database project which AIT has managed since 2001. Dr. C. Kwei Lin asked whether the survey questionnaire being used for the Macrobrachium rosenbergii study is the same for Vietnam, Bangladesh and Thailand. Dr. Wahab said that the survey questionnaire that is being used in Bangladesh was provided by Dr. Yang Yi. He also added that it is unique for each of the three countries. Kwei Lin pointed out that the shrimp culture technology is Thailand is so diverse. Dr. Amrit Bart suggested creating a committee of social scientists to help in the design of such survey questionnaires (i.e. data collection and structure of the questionnaire) Dr. Remedios Bolivar gave an update of the ACRSP activities at CLSU, Philippines in collaboration with FIU and the University of Arizona. One of the activities was ISTA6 sponsorship which was held in Manila in September 2004. Dr. Kevin Fitzsimmons added that Proceedings of the ISTA6 was produced as an outcome of this sponsorship. Another update was the proposal on the polyculture of shrimp and tilapia in the Philippines under the Twelfth Work Plan. Dr. Fitzsimmons mentioned that the proposal needs revision. For the FIU collaboration, Dr. Bolivar reported on the different tilapia feeding strategies that were investigated. Jim Diana reported that USAID conducted a review of the ACRSP and aquaculture subsector which turned out to be positive. However, USAID will likely do a broad agriculture-environment sector review before issuing RFAs for new CRSP competitions. Jim also explained how proposals for the ACRSP program have been packaged and reviewed in the past – but this time will be very different. He mentioned that USAID will continue to fund the Eleventh Work Plan, and then hopefully the project will submit a new proposal for a brand new program that adheres to USAIDs priorities, starting in 2006. Policy Round Table Discussion

13

The group was encouraged to read the two USAID documents, one on biodiversity and the other on biotechnology. It was decided by the group to discuss these two issues as a collegial body, rather than in break out groups. Amrit Bart stressed that these issues must not be abandoned as ACRSP has the potential to do both. Jim Diana agreed that ACRSP must continue works on biodiversity although for biotechnology, we can’t claim total credit for technique such as the use of sex-reversal for the production of monosex tilapia which is an area done under the ACRSP but also many other research groups. On indigenous species, Jim Diana mentioned that many of the proposals submitted are expanding on other fish species, in the spirit of focusing our research on promotion of indigenous species. He asked the group whether research should be focused on releases of fish from culture facilities. He further asked the group of what is their view of biodiversity. After some discussion, the group decided not to review or comment specifically on the possible ACRSP policy statements on biodiversity or biotechnology, but rather to accept USAID’s policies on biodiversity and biotechnology. ACRSP Research Agenda for the Future Jim Diana asked the group whether we want to formulate a statement focusing our theme for the next round of proposal writing (i.e. near-shore aquaculture – does this cater the small-scale farmers?) The Africa group is already working on watersheds (with Bill Tollner). Dr. K. Quagrainie mentioned that a lot of NGOs play important role on extension. Kwei Lin indicated that we had lost some focus from the earlier CRSP research, and that we currently seem to have a scattered program of studies rather than a cohesive global plan. He and others would like to see the return to some global experiments that would tie together the various sites. No larger organizing themes emerged from the discussion of future research proposals. Other Regional Topics Dr. Amrit Bart gave an update on an initiative on tsunami rehabilitation activities that will be done in the southern part of Thailand which was affected by the December tsunami. The project is funded by USAID and will approach the issue using a holistic view like adopting a community and teaching the community about low input aquaculture programs. Dr. Bart assured the group that he will find avenues to link these tsunami rehabilitation activities to the ACRSP.

14

Jim Diana mentioned that there a lot of interest on tsunami rehabilitation work. Currently, such work has high potential in the region, and could allow for expanded activites by ACRSP researchers. Kevin Fitzsimmons added that YSI donated funds to the World Aquaculture Society for a tsunami rehabilitation work in Banda Aceh, and that he would be going there as a representative of WAS. Amrit Bart gave an update on ACRSP Ambassadors program. He and Dr. Nancy Gitonga of Kenya were identified as ACRSP Ambassadors. He said the work involves keeping the USAID Mission informed of what ACRSP is, and has been a slow and steady process. Med Bolivar gave an update regarding the cichlid group composed of host country PIs from Honduras, Kenya, Mexico, the Philippines and Thailand which was formed during the annual meeting in Hawaii in 2004. The group developed a proposal with the help of Drs. Hillary Egna and Jim Bowman on Cichlid Training and Information Exchange to exchange information on ACRSP technologies that were developed for tilapia culture in each host country. The proposal will involve site visits to the host countries, hold workshops to share information to colleagues in other host countries. Kevin Fitzsimmons mentioned that one of his students from the University of Arizona, Mr. Pablo Gutierrez who is attending the Regional Technical Committee Meeting as well as the WAS meeting belongs to the project called TIES (Training, Information Exchange Students ) which is funded by USAID. Kevin Fitzsimmons also announced that the ISTA7 which is supported by ACRSP and TIES will be held in Mexico in September of 2006. Closing Comments Jim Diana reminded the group to fill out the meeting evaluation form and provided the different committee members on the ACRSP Awards and Poster the criteria and grading forms. TC Minutes: Remedios Bolivar, TC Member, CLSU, the Philippines TC Chair Approval: Jim Diana, UM, USA ME Approval: Hillary Egna, OSU, USA

15

Aquaculture CRSP World Aquaculture Society Session

World Aquaculture 2005 Bali, Indonesia

Tilapia and Aquaculture CRSP Thursday, May 12, 2005 8:30 -17:30

Chair: Kevin Fitzsimmons Kevin Fitzsimmons* Overview of Global Trade and Markets for Tilapia – 2005 Kim Thai Yong Experiences in the Tilapia Culture and Marketing in Malaysia Isaac Fandika Growth and Reproduction of Oreochromis shiranus Stocked at Different Densities at Bunda College of Agriculture in Malawi Yang Yi* Mitigating the Effects of High Temperature and Turbidity on Seed Production of Nile Tilapia from Hapa-in-Pond Systems Graham C. Mair* The Status and Impact of Genetics Research in Tilapia Aquaculture Harrison Charo-Karisa Estimates of Phenotypic and Genetic Parameters for Carcass Traits in Nile Tilapia Selected for Fast Growth in Low-Input Conditions Jose C. Mota-Velasco Genetic Sex Determination in Nile Tilapia: Comparison of a Sex-Linked Marker and Progeny Testing Yonas Fessehaye Microsatellite-Based Parentage Analysis and Male Reproductive Success in Nile Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus M. A. Wahab* Evaluation of Production Performance of Gift Strain of Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus in Polyculture with Common Carp Cyprinus Carpio and with Two Major Carps Catla catla and Labeo rohita Nahrowi Ramli Effects of Formiò Inclusion Rate on Growth Performance of Infected Tilapia by Vibrio anguillarum

16

Hambali Supriyadi The Incidence of Streptococcosis In Nile Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus Farm in Indonesia Wing-Keong Ng An Overview of the Nutrient Requirements and Feeding of Tilapia Frank Liebert Threonine Requirement of Oreochromis niloticus Depending on Dietary Threonine Efficieny and Protein Deposition Frank Liebert Optimal Lysine : Threonine Ratio of Oreochromis niloticus Depending on the Amino Acid Efficieny in the Feed Zhigang Zhou Yeast Culture Supplementation in the Feed of Hybrid Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus x O. aureus in Cages: Replacement of Antibiotic Lourens F. de Wet* Quantifying the Nutritional Contribution of Natural Productivity in the Pond Culture of Mozambique Tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus Yoram Avnimelech Feeding of Tilapia on Microbial Flocs: Quantitative Evaluation Using Material Balances M. Sharif Uddin Effects of Periphyton Substrates and Addition of Freshwater Prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii On Pond Ecology and Tilapia Oreochromis niloticus Production * Past or present Aquaculture CRSP participant

17

Aquaculture CRSP Research Abstracts during the WAS Conference

Research Conducted within the Eleventh Work Plan

(Printed as retrieved from the World Aquaculture Society)

GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AQUACULTURE CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS Claude E. Boyd* and Jason Clay Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures Auburn University, Alabama 36849 USA ceboyd@acesag.auburn.edu A growing number of consumers desire food products produced by environmentally- and socially-responsible methods. Many also would like additional assurance that the food they buy does not contain potentially harmful chemical or biological contaminants. These desires by consumers represent a potential market for certiproducts, and there is interest in certifying aquaculture products. The label for a certiaquaculture product will only state that the product is from environmentally- and socially-responsible producers and free of contaminants. Consumers know little about aquaculture, and the success of a certiprogram will reside in the conthat consumers have in its label. Thus, a rigorous, transparent process must be followed in developing an overarching aquaculture certiprogram. Some issues will cut across species, but most species will have one or more speciissues that must be addressed. Therefore, production methods for each species must be documented, and possible negative environmental and social impacts and food safety concerns identiand addressed. Some examples of issue identiwill be provided. Based upon the assessment of production methods, impacts and other issues should be discussed and agreed to by a wide range of stakeholders, and certistandards formulated to assure a product that meets consumer expectations. Participating producers may use existing better management practices (BMPs) or devise other appropriate means to comply with measurable standards. A third party must conthat each participating producer is in compliance with the certistandards. An oversight committee should maintain surveillance and modify standards and other aspects of the program as necessary. The information about the program must be posted on a website to inform consumers and other interested parties. Moreover, a publicity and educational program should be initiated to promote the program because label recognition will be critical for success. QUANTIFYING THE NUTRITIONAL CONTRIBUTION OF NATURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN THE POND CULTURE OF MOZAMBIQUE TILAPIA Oreochromis mossambicus Lourens F. de Wet* and Khalid Salie Feed Technology Project: Division of Aquaculture University of Stellenbosch Matieland 7602 South Africa lfdw@sun.ac.za

18

Trial was performed to optimise feeding management regimes of tilapia culture in earthen ponds, considering the utilisation of natural pond productivity. The experiment was performed at the Elsenburg aquaculture facility of the Division of Aquaculture, University of Stellenbosch. Fish were kept in 40 hapa cages (1m x 1m x 1.5m) that were partially (80%) submerged in 5 earthen ponds. The ponds were fertilized prior to the stocking of the to ensure adequate natural pond productivity during stocking. Mozambique tilapia with an average weight of 17.855 1.5910 grams were obtained from the Divisions Welgevallen hatchery of which 50 were stocked in each cage at the start of the trial. The were fed a commercial tilapia starter diet 3 times a day for the duration of the trial (111 days). The experimental layout consisted of 8 replicates of 5 treatments (20, 40, 60, 80 and 100 percent of ad libitum feed intake). Daily ad libitum feed intake was calculated from a feeding management software package of the supplying feed company (AquaNutro Tilapia Feeding Management Assistant). Results were analysed for signidifferences using one-way ANOVA and Tukeys pairwise comparison test for the production performance parameters, viz. specigrowth rate (SGR), feed intake (FI) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) at 27, 55 and 111 days. At 27 and 55 days no signiimprovement in both SGR and FCR were observed above levels of 60 and 80% of ad libitum feed intake respectively. At 111 days these values were 80 and 60% for SGR and FCR respectively. Extrapolation of SGR and FCR values to 0% ad libitum artifeed intake allowed for the calculation of natural food intake, which was 0.34, 0.29 and 0.20% of bodyweight per day feed intake at 27, 55 and 111 days respectively. These results may help quantify the natural pond productivity towards the planning of feeding management regimes for Mozambique tilapia. OVERVIEW OF GLOBAL TRADE AND MARKETS FOR TILAPIA 2005 Fitzsimmons, K.* and Gonzalez, P. University of Arizona 2601 E. Airport Drive Tucson, Arizona 85706 USA kevfitz@ag.arizona.edu Tilapia are the second most widely farmed group of fishes after the carps. The growth of tilapia products in international seafood trade has been rapid and the future prospects are of interest to growers, seafood marketers and consumers. Global production of farmed tilapia with almost 1,650,000 metric tons is described with individual country statistics reported. Trade in various tilapia products is reported with trends in fillet and other value added products described. New production from Latin America, Africa and Asia is described. Tilapia-shrimp polyculture is providing significant quantities of new product that has been added to supplies. New markets in Europe and for organic food retailers are also described. Short overviews of advanced breeding programs and other research that has made major contributions to the growth of the industry are provided. Future prospects of major research programs will be reviewed.

19

STUDY ON THE USE OF RUBBER OILCAKE AS AN ALTERNATIVE PROTEIN SOURCE FOR HYBRID Clarias CATFISH Le Thanh Hung Faculty of Fisheries Nong Lam University HCM City, Vietnam lthungts@hcm.vnn.vn Rubber oilcake (ROC) is a by-product of rubber oil extraction. Its crude protein content can reach to 30-32% when shell of rubber seed is removed. Moreover, it is in deof some essential amino acids such as lysine, methionine, and contains cyanhydric acid (HCN) that is toxic to animal. In the study, six iso-nitrogenous and iso-caloric rations of 25% crude proteins and 16 KJ/g crude energy were formulated, containing 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% rubber oilcake as a substitution of After 8 weeks of feeding six rations to hybrid Clarias, the 10% inclusion of ROC into rations does not affect growth rate and feed utilization when compared to the control. Higher inclusion of ROC into the rations results in depressing growth and feed utilization but does not have any inon survival rates, even at 50% inclusion rate. In the second trial, 0.5% lysine, 0.5% methionine and 0.5% dicalci-phosphate (DCP) were added to iso-nitrogenous and iso-caloric rations that contain 20%, 25%, 30%, 35% and 40% rubber oilcake. After 8 weeks of feeding, the trial shows that the lysine, methionine and DCP inclusion into rubber oilcake based rations considerably ameliorate growth rate and feed utilization when compared to non inclusion ration. Note: NT0, NT10, NT20, NT30, NT40, NT50 treatment contains 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% rubber oilcake SMALL-SCALE FISH FARMING IN THE WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE, SOUTH AFRICA: TEN YEARS OF AQUACULTURE AS A SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MODEL Khalid Salie* and Johan van Stade Division of Aquaculture University of Stellenbosch Private Bag X1 Matieland, 7602 South Africa ks1@sun.ac.za The Division of Aquaculture, University of Stellenbosch, in collaboration with the Hands-on Fish Farmers Co-operative Limited, co-manage a Small-Scale Fish Farming Programme in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. The objective of the Programme is to promote aquaculture as a viable business enterprise for local communities, thus ensuring their participation in a growing industry. An operational strategy is used whereby farmers are responsible for outgrowing of to marketable size. The candidate species are rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) and koi-carp (Cyprinus carpio). The implementation of projects is market-driven, and

20

pre-arranged uptake agreements are negotiated with processors. The Programme has strong institutional support and the managers facilitate the delivery of feed, technology and access to markets. Eleven projects have been implemented during the past 10 years. To evaluate the impact of the Programme, a socio-economic evaluation study has been conducted. The study focussed on the following issues: Technology transfer and support dependency Quality of production and environmental management Economic and deliverables Institutional involvement/support Success of the development strategy Challenges to the model Results indicated that the modes of technology transfer to small-scale farmers have been successful and signikey skills have been acquired. Farmers are functioning on limited support within 3 years. Their quality of production is comparable to any large-scale commercial farmers. Farms are subjected to fortnightly water sampling for trend analyses. Aquaculture has established itself as a source of job creation and complementary income to farm household communities. The government has identiaquaculture as an economic growing sector in the Western Cape Province. Institutional support is provided for project implementation and research and development. The success of the model is manifested in that 30 projects are envisaged for the next 3 years. Both funding and markets have been procured for the extension of the programme. Although the Programme has achieved tremendous success in bringing aquaculture to the people, many challenges are still to be faced. The results of this study have provided crucial information to optimise delivery for both Programme managers and farmers. EVALUATION OF PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF GIFT STRAIN OF TILAPIA Oreochromis niloticus IN POLYCULTURE WITH COMMON CARP Cyprinus carpio AND WITH TWO MAJOR CARPS Catla catla AND Labeo rohita Wahab, M.A.*, A.J.M. Rakibullah, M.S. Uddin and O.A. Masud Department of Fisheries Management Bangladesh Agricultural University Mymensingh-2202, Bangladesh wahabma@bdonline.com To evaluate the production performance of GIFT strain of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in polyculture with common carp (Cyprinus carpio) and with two major carps (Catla catla and Labeo rohita), an on-station trial was conducted at the Fisheries Field Laboratory, Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU), Mymensingh. Three treatments: (1) GIFT monoculture, (2) GIFT-common carp polyculture (GIFT-CC) and (3) GIFT-catla-rohu polyculture (GIFT-C-R) were tested in this experiment with a stocking density of 20,000 ha-1. Water quality analysis showed that the mean values of water temperature, secchi and nitrate-nitrogen were not significantly different among the treatments. Significant differences (P<0.05) were observed in case of dissolved oxygen, pH, total alkalinity, phosphate-phosphorus, ammonia-nitrogen and chlorophyll a.

21

A total of 38 genera of phytoplankton and 16 genera of zooplankton were identified from the pond water. Phytoplankton population was mostly dominated by Chlorophyceae (17 genera), whereas zooplankton population was dominated by Crustacea (9 genera) over the experimental period. There was no significant difference in the abundance of plankton among the treatments except Euglenophyceae and Cyanophyceae, which were significantly higher (P<0.05) in treatment 2. Benthos population was dominated by Chironomids in treatment 1 (71.53%) and 3 (72.79%) and by Oligochaets in treatment 2 (47.33%). The abundance was significantly higher (P<0.01) in treatment 3 (6943.21 m-2) than treatments 1 (4167.90 m-2) and 2 (922.22 m-2). Survival rate of tilapia ranged between 83.54% and 93.75%, with the highest survival in treatment 3. Survival rates of common carp, catla and rohu were 92.92%, 90.83% and 99.17%, respectively. Highest specific growth rate (2.32% bw d-1) and weight gain (105.89g) of tilapia were found in treatment 3. The total gross and net yields in treatments 1, 2 and 3 were 1.55 and 1.41 t ha-1, 2.23 and 1.81 t ha-1, and 1.90 and 1.37 t ha-1, respectively, with significantly higher (P<0.05) yield in treatment 2. The net economic returns in treatments 1, 2 and 3 were 26,750, 27,375 and 4,250 Tk ha-1, respectively, with significantly higher (p<0.05) economic returns in treatments 1 and 2. Considering the production and economic benefits the best performance was observed in treatment 2, GIFT- common carp polyculture. MITIGATING THE EFFECTS OF HIGH TEMPERATURE AND TURBIDITY ON SEED PRODUCTION OF NILE TILAPIA FROM HAPA-IN-POND SYSTEMS Yang Yi*, James E. Rakocy and James S. Diana Aquaculture and Aquatic Resources Management School of Environment, Resources and Development Asian Institute of Technology Pathumthani, Thailand yangyi@ait.ac.th A study, consisting of two experiments, was conducted at the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand, for 95 days for Experiment A and 113 days for Experiment B during May 2003-March 2004, to investigate effects of high temperature and turbidity on seed production of Nile tilapia. Experiment A was conducted using a randomized complete block design in a 300-m2 earthen pond of 1.6 m deep, and had three treatments with three replicates each: (A) 70-cm water depth in hapas (control); (B) 100-cm water depth in hapas; and (C) 140-cm water depth in hapas. Experiment B was conducted using a complete randomized design in six 200-m2 earthen ponds of 1.2 m deep, and had two treatments with three replicates each: (A) without underwater walkways (control); (B) with underwater walkways. Egg production was increased by about 72% and 96% in the 100- and 140-cm treatments, compared to the control. There was no signidifference in mean individual egg weight among all three treatments (P > 0.05). Fertilization rates in the two deeper treatments (37.49% and 42.05% in the 100- and 140-cm deep treatments, respectively) were signihigher than that (21.06%) in the control (P < 0.05), however, hatching rates were not

22

signidifferent among all three treatments (P > 0.05). Lowering water temperature by using deep ponds is an effective way to increase reproductive performance of Nile tilapia during the hot season. The turbidity at the end of the experiment and its change throughout the experiment was signilower in the treatment with walkways than in the treatment without walkways (P < 0.05), however, there was no signidifference in egg production, fertilization rate and hatching rates between the two treatments (P > 0.05). Lowering turbidity and fouling caused by egg collection through underwater walkways may not be effective in improving reproductive performance. However, further research is needed on the effects of fouling on reproductive performance of Nile tilapia.

23

Part II – Africa Regional Meeting, Grahamstown, South Africa

Africa External Program Advisory Council Report External Program Advisory Council Report: ACRSP Technical Committee

Meeting, Conference Session and BMP Workshop Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

12-17 September 2005 The Aquaculture Collaborative Research Support Program (ACRSP) held an Africa regional Technical Committee meeting to discuss various research priorities and future direction on September 13, 2005 in Grahamstown, South Africa. Additionally, a formal ACRSP session was organized in conjunction with the Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa (AASA) biannual conference. Finally, ACRSP convened a 2-day Best Management Practices (BMP) workshop at AASA. Following is a brief assessment of the Technical Committee meeting, the formal ACRSP session at the conference, and the BMP workshop. Technical Committee Meeting - 13 September The technical meeting was chaired by Claude E. Boyd. Fifteen individuals attended the meeting. The goals of the meeting were to identify potential areas of key research topics for future ACRSP projects, prioritize these key research needs, discuss the issue of intellectual property rights, and to review and comment on the applicability of the biodiversity and biotechnology policy statements formed by USAID for use by programs such as ACRSP. The attendees formed a matrix of research needs and assigned priority levels (Table 1). Table 1. Prioritization of key research needs in future ACRSP projects. Numbers represent priority level (i.e., 1 = highest priority). Research needs South

Africa Kenya Ghana Tanzania

Alternative/additional species development

5 2 2 2

Improvement of stock 6 3 3 3 Feeds and nutrition 1 5 5 5 Environmental impacts 4 4 1 1 Socio-economic issues 2 6 4 4 Water and land use 3 1 6 6 There was consensus that the actual research needs themselves were fairly consistent with past research needs. There was little comment on the consistency of the prioritization. As an employee of an environmental conservation organization it was somewhat discouraging that the environmental impacts ranked so low on research priorities for

24

some countries. However, the group expressed concern in ranking the research topics, as all topics were of importance in each country. Additionally, it appeared that in some countries the environmental impacts of aquaculture were not present because there was so little development of the industry. This is understandable, but I am suspect of any aquaculture operations or investments that do not see environmental impacts as a high priority considering the scrutiny the aquaculture industry has undergone, and the realization that environmental sustainability is closely related to financial sustainability to a producer. There was little debate or discussion on the biodiversity and biotechnology policy statements by the attendees, but this was, in part, a result of some people not having time to review the document prior to the meeting (All TC members were in receipt of these documents as of March 2004 but not all attendees were TC members). There was, however, some general comments on biodiversity that were of interest. One comment that arouse was that ACRSP should maintain a portion of their research portfolio so as to allow habitat protection to be incorporated. This is key for Africa as the aquaculture international trade industry is less developed than other parts of the world, and investment in operations to culture controversial or exotic species is a potential area of concern. Another issue that was discussed was the need for greater exchange of information. This appears to be an area of concern for the ACRSP, as many of the people attending the Technical Committee meeting were unfamiliar with what other country representatives are doing1. Further, many of the better practices are already in use in other parts of the world but information transfer is lacking. That stated it is apparent that this is the very reason ACRSP put on this BMP workshop. There was little discussion on the intellectual property policy. ACRSP Session - 12 September The formal ACRSP session at the meeting provided an array of research projects. The research topics addressed production, socio-economic development and assessment, and environmental monitoring concerns regarding rural African aquaculture. It is impressive to see the applicability of the research to the development of the industry. It is apparent that issues of financial feasibility are required for the continuing development of the aquaculture industry in Africa. The research topics presented were all of importance to the development of the aquaculture industry in Africa. Of considerable interest during this session were the socio-economic/markets for the ontogeny of the industry. Clearly, there is opportunity for rural, subsistence farmers to enter markets to obtain capital for seafood products. Knowledge of the structure of these rural markets appears to be a roadblock for producers. Additionally, as producers try to enter these markets, food quality and safety

1 ME comment: All TC members are familiar with other countries as part of their responsibility to the TC. Important to note here is that less than half of the attendees at this particular meeting have not attended any past ACRSP meeting, or are very recent additions to the ACRSP group.

25

will become an issue as in the case of many producers there will be significant transportation concerns and costs. Start-up capital for this diversification should be explored. One of the presentations addressed concerns for the Lake Victoria ecosystem. It was good to hear that the ACRSP was funding research to address the environmental concerns regarding the impacts that appear to be increasing in Lake Victoria. The African catfish is an important economic and nutritional product in many of the countries represented at the ACRSP and other sessions. The major impedence to the success of this industry appears to be the low survival of fingerlings to market size. This topic was addressed during the ACRSP session and further research is necessary to promote what could be a profitable species for rural aquaculture. With the increase of basa and tra exports from Vietnam into Europe it is important to note that there is potential for species such as the African catfish to enter this market. Other research that was presented made it apparent that producer education is an important component in the ACRSP portfolio and of critical importance is the continuation of this type of outreach. However, the issue was revisited that the negative environmental impacts of aquaculture are not apparent in certain regions because the industry is not well developed. It became quite clear during these presentations that a portion of the ACRSP’s portfolio could be directed towards producer empowerment. The corruption and inequalities that have been observed in other nations with developing aquaculture industries might be suppressed should there be a clear vision for the sustainable business practices in African aquaculture. There is already a good bit of work present to sway producers to work cooperatively, but investigations into more formal coops might complement the market and socio-economic research being conducted. BMP Workshop - 15-16 September The BMP workshop was a compilation of researchers in environmental sciences, aquaculture production, engineering and nutrition. There was weak attendance on the first day of the workshop as a field trip for conference attendees was scheduled, but there was a better showing on the second day2. The goal of the workshop was to provide information on how and why BMPs are developed. With the increased African aquaculture production, it seemed quite timely to introduce this information. However, there is a definite lag in the information Africans are purveyed to on this subject. Again, since export-scale and even rural, extensive aquaculture is a relatively recent activity in some parts of the continent, the threats of environmental degradation and possible social conflict were not at the forefront. Granted aquaculture is a business to many, but there should be more acknowledgements by researchers that in providing a more profitable and efficient production methodology, environmental and social concerns should be

2 ME comment: C.E. Boyd reported that 40 producers, scientists, and students attended the workshop.

26

addressed for the sustainability of the industry. Claude Boyd addressed this by having NGO participation present for attendees to see first hand what the concerns of the environmentalists are. There was a slight bit of animosity from some of the industry towards the NGO concerns. However, it is par for the course and quite usual. I believe the discussions that ensued regarding NGO criticisms of the aquaculture industry are quite good to hash out since there is little resolve in making polarized comments without looking for compromise. The most adamant issues that were raised were that NGOs treated the aquaculture industry more harshly than any other type of agriculture. It is quite well known that aquaculture has been under much scrutiny and the learning curve is steep. There have been negative impacts of aquaculture and I believe there has been less leeway given to the industry because many of the sites that have been impacted are coastal zones rich in diversity and aesthetic appeal. Additionally, it was made clear that some NGOs are promoting certain forms of aquaculture. It was disappointing to find out that the person presenting on market considerations was not present, as now more than ever there is industry and public awareness of environmental concerns surrounding seafood consumption and production. Feeds and feeding practices were examined from a feed nutrition and environmental impact perspective. It became quite evident that feeds and feeding practices may represent the largest challenge to the environmental and financial sustainability of the aquaculture industry. As feed components were examined, fish meal and oil were explained in a different way than I had understood before. The digestibility of the feed is probably the single most important factor when examining wild fish utilization and nutrient pollution. Feeds that contain a high proportion of fish oil or meal are more digestible and produce less waste than feeds containing plant meals. There is an inherent paradox to this as wild fish stocks are declining and soon with the expansion of high order, carnivorous, off-shore aquaculture these resources will be further stressed. Yet on the other side the plant materials are less digestible leading to more excrement and water pollution. This is an issue that has not gained much attention in the NGO realm and needs to be addressed more by NGOs and researchers alike. The culture systems presentation and discussion was factual and there was little discussion that followed. Nevertheless there was some concern raised by the speaker that the longevity of a farm can be extended by adequate site selection and proper construction. The remainder of the workshop dealt with the process of developing BMPs and their use. Examples of BMP development were brought up for the Alabama catfish industry as well as Massachusetts shellfish growers, and the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association. There were different processes for each of these groups, and the stakeholder involvement seemed to be somewhat lacking, but more stakeholder involvement is indicative of the more controversial species and there is likely not to be much criticism of the shellfish or catfish industry. It became apparent that more and more seafood buyers and retailers are

27

using BMPs as screening processes. Walmart is looking into this for salmon; Ahold is already doing this for salmon; and the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch Program (who advises retailers on buying practices) has incorporated the existence of BMPs into there analytical criteria to rank seafood. I believe that everyone who attended the workshop walked away with a better feel for how BMPs are developed and used and the components and time it takes to develop them. Informal discussions followed the workshop and there appeared to be interest in developing BMPs for certain facets of Africa’s aquaculture industry. The workshop was productive and the message was well-received and understood. Conclusions The work of the ACRSP is far more directed at a specific mission than many other organizations that fund aquaculture research. There is tremendous benefit to be obtained by aquaculture producers in Africa and the education and outreach ACRSP has offered to the people of Africa is of high quality and is consistent with much of my own personal beliefs on sustainable development. Aaron A. McNevin (EPAC proxy for Jason Clay), September 2005 (report date) World Wildlife Fund 1250 24th Street NW Washington, DC 20037 USA

28

Africa Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes

Minutes of the Africa Regional ACRSP Technical Committee Meeting September 13, 2005, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

Welcome and Introductions:

C. E. Boyd welcomed the group and briefly outlined the agenda for the meeting. The participants were asked to fill out a roster by providing name, affiliation, address, nationality and gender. This information is listed below: Name Affiliation Designation Nationality Gender Claude E. Boyd Auburn University TC Co-Chair USA M Kevin Fitzsimmons University of Arizona TC Member USA M Kwamena Quagrainie

Purdue University TC Member Ghana M

Ernest T. Tollner University of Georgia TC Member USA M Steve Amisah Kwame Nkrumah University PI Ghana M Lourens de Wet Stellenbosch University PI RSA M Chhorn Lim USDA/Auburn University PI USA M Aaron McNevin World Wildlife Fund EAP USA M Mucai Muchiri Moi University PI Kenya M Charles Ngugi Moi University PI Kenya M Kajitanus Osewe Fisheries Division Tanzania PI Tanzania M Odipo Osano Moi University PI Kenya M Khalid Salie Stellenbosch University PI RSA M Norman Munala Moi University Student Kenya M Emmanuel Kawda University of Malawi Observer Malawi M Technical Committee Business:

The co-chairs and subcommittee members of the Technical Committee for 2005-2006 were announced by C. E. Boyd. The voting members of the Technical Committee in attendance for the Africa Regional Meeting were identified as follows: Ernest W. Tollner, C. E. Boyd, Kwamena Quagrainie, and Kevin Fitzsimmons. CRSP Research Topics for the Future:

The participants were asked to discuss aquaculture and aquatic resources management research priorities for future research by the ACRSP in the Africa region. There was considerable input by all participants, and the following list (un-prioritized) was developed:

• Alternative and additional species development • Improvement of stocks

- Seed production (including breeding) - Refinement in production systems - Water quality improvements

• Feeds and nutrition - Feed ingredients - Nutrition value and nutrient availability

29

• Environmental impacts - Species - Systems - Water quality

• Socio-economic issues - Small scale operations - Large scale operations - Comparisons

• Water and land issues - Watershed management - Water use - Land use - Ownership - Regulatory structure

The participants could not agree to a single prioritized list for Africa. They felt

that priorities differed by country. Thus, the participant(s) from each country were asked to prioritize the topics for their nation (Table 1). Table 1. Prioritization of key research needs in future CRSP projects. Numbers represent priority level (i.e., 1 = highest priority). Research needs South

Africa Kenya Ghana Tanzania

Alternative/additional species development

5 2 2 2

Improvement of stock 6 3 3 3 Feeds and nutrition 1 5 5 5 Environmental impacts 4 4 1 1 Socio-economic issues 2 6 4 4 Water and land use 3 1 6 6 The major points raised during the discussion of research priorities are listed below:

• Participants from Kenya stressed there are obviously issues that are important yet out of the realm of capabilities of the CRSP. Genetic manipulation was given as an example.

• Bill Tollner pointed out that the key issues listed in Table 1 are the typical

priorities decided upon in previous CRSP technical meetings for other regions.

• It is easier to identify possible negative environmental impacts now than in the past, because the industry has reached the point where these impacts are readily observable.

• Water and land use will become a larger issue in the future because of FAO’s

desire to quantify global use of these resources.

30

• There was a general consensus that ranking these issues to make some more

important than others was a good approach, but all attendees agreed that all of the research topics in Table 1 are significant.

• All participants agreed that there needs to be cooperation between countries and

an information exchange program.

When asked to prioritize training, education, and outreach priorities in Africa, the participants suggested using the same ranking given for research topics (Table 1). However, K. Salie and L. de Wet of South Africa emphasized that South Africa was far ahead of other African nations in technological and commercial development of aquaculture. They also pointed out that South Africa had many examples of successful training, education, and outreach from other areas of agriculture and rural development that could be models for programs in other African nations. They suggested that South Africa could serve as a center to coordinate aquaculture training, education, and outreach activities for future ACRSP efforts in Africa. Policy Discussion: None of the participants objected to the biodiversity and biotechnology policy statements of USAID. However, there was considerable discussion of biodiversity, and the major points from this exchange were as follows:

• Certain species of shellfish should be included in addition to finfish.

• Bill Tollner suggested that the CRSP should maintain a portion of the research portfolio for focus on habitat protection, including effects of non-native aquaculture species on biodiversity.

• The idea that consumption and culture of lesser-known, under-utilized or

disappearing species should be promoted to enhance biodiversity conservation and utilization was advanced by S. Amisah of Ghana and this was corroborated by K.Osewe of Tanzania.

• Several participants thought that genetic surveys of native and non-native species

(phenotypic and genotypic surveys) would provide valuable information. Although not directly related to aquaculture, this information could be important to future research in aquaculture.

• There was general agreement that more information is needed and greater

information exchange within and between countries should be encouraged.

With regards to intellectual property policy, the participants wanted to avoid discussing this issue because:

31

• Each university typically has developed its own policy, and this policy must be followed in obtaining grants and contracts.

• Training on these issues would be required if the ACRSP wants to pursue

intellectual property rights policy because few participants have much knowledge of the topic.

• Lawyers and other legal experts employed by contracting institutions are far more

qualified than scientists to address concerns of this topic. Other Regional Topics: The following items were presented:

• The HCPI project was given by C. Ngugi from Kenya. The team made a visit to Thailand and the Philippines and will visit Mexico and Honduras in the near future.

• Training missions have taken place in Ghana with particular attention paid to

instruction on record keeping. Training manuals have been distributed.

• Training of 300 extension officers and trainers is being conducted in Kenya. A 5-day visit with 10 small-scale farmers to train on various aquaculture activities is planned.

There also was a discussion about the desirability of PIs being funded to visit PIs

in other countries. There should be more communication among CRSP members outside technical

meetings with the realization that this is a personal obligation that could not be funded by CRSP.

Closing Comments: C. E. Boyd urged all participants to attend the WAS meeting and the ACRSP Technical Meeting in Florence, Italy in 2006. Kevin Fitzsimmons stated that some funding would be available from ACRSP for travel to the 2006 meeting. He urged participants to correspond with Hillary Egna and him about this matter. Boyd also emphasized that there would be another “letter-writing” request in support of ACRSP. Hillary Egna will request the letters in a few weeks. The letters should emphasize that aquaculture is important to the world food supply, that the ACRSP has been effective and well managed, and that ACRSP should be continued. C. E. Boyd also provided an update about the future of ACRSP. It will end on 31 July 2006, but an extension will be requested by Hillary Egna. Hopefully, this will be a cost extension but the likelier scenario is a no-cost extension. PIs should be aware that holding too much un-encumbered budget would be detrimental to a cost extension. The “letter-writing” activity mentioned earlier likely will be extremely important in determining if the aquaculture CRSP continues into the future.

32

There was a request by Boyd for additional questions and comments. As there were none, the meeting was adjourned. Minutes recorded by Dr. Aaron McNevin. Minutes expanded by C. E. Boyd to include greater detail.

33

Aquaculture CRSP Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa Session

Monday, 12 September, 14:00–16:55

Chair: Kevin Fitzsimmons 14:00 Introduction 14:05 N. Munala, M. Muchiri and B.C.C. Wangila Factors determining structure and development of fish farming among small-scale operators in Western Kenya 14:25 O. Osano and W. Admiraal Use of chironomids and Xenopus laevis as biosensors of aquaculture media quality 14:45 C.C. Ngugi, J. Bowman, and K. Veverica Factors influencing growth and survival of African catfish Clarias gariepinus juveniles and their implications for aquaculture development in Kenya 15:05 E.W. Tollner, M. Muchiri, G. Habron and N. Gitonga Hydraulic, water quality and social assessment of the Nzoia Basin, Kenya Fishery 15:25 TEA BREAK – Downstairs Foyer 15:55 K. Quagrainie and S. Amisah Tilapia farming: a comparison of enterprise profitability among Ghanaian farmers 16:15 O.O. Kajitanus Status of the fish farming and socio-economic structure and situation of farmers in Tanzania 16:35 R.M. Mugo, M. Muchiri, D. Liti Financial Returns from a Tilapia and catfish enterprise using maize, Wheat and rice bran as supplemental feed in fertilised ponds.

34

Best Management Practices Workshop Workshop Organizers: USAID Aquaculture CRSP (Oregon State University); University of Stellenbosch (Khalid Salie and Lourens De Wet); Auburn University (Claude E. Boyd and Chhorn Lim) Objectives: This workshop is sponsored by the Aquaculture CRSP and has the following objectives: 1. Discuss the general environmental issues affecting aquaculture. 2. Discuss the purpose of codes of conduct and best management practices with examples of their use. 3. Present guidelines for developing best management practices for aquaculture. Participation: Invitations will be extended to selected commercial aquaculturists, researchers, extension specialists, government policy makers, environmentalists, and aquaculture students. Others interested in attending are welcome to register for Workshop E on the conference registration form. Abstract: Sustainability and environmental protection are major issues in aquaculture. Unsustainable projects are economically damaging, and they usually are the endeavours that cause the most environmental harm. Two main reasons for some aquaculture projects failure to achieve economic and environmental sustainability are selection of inferior sites and application of inappropriate management procedures. The aquaculture industry has been embroiled in controversy about its environmental record and its long-term sustainability. In response to these criticisms, aquaculture organizations began to develop codes of practice and best management practices (BMPs) for voluntary adoption by their members or clients. As one might expect, these instruments are highly variable in content and format. However, the better ones are developed through a collaborative, transparent stakeholder process involving several rounds of review and revision. The BMPs are designed to prevent or mitigate possible negative impacts identified in an environmental assessment of the industry. Consumers are becoming more environmentally aware and seeking products with a good environmental record. An increasing number of brokers and institutional buyers of fish, shrimp, and other aquatic products are seeking to do business with farms that use environmentally-responsible culture methods. This trend is expected to continue, and BMPs will become an important environmental and marketing tool in aquaculture. The particular combination of BMPs needed to assure environmentally-responsible operations varies among culture techniques and species. Different combinations of BMPs are necessary in different regions and at different sites, and BMP development should be done at a relatively local level. This workshop will provide a thorough discussion of environment issues in aquaculture and present guidelines for developing aquaculture BMPs.

35

Aquaculture CRSP Research Abstracts during the AASA Conference Research Conducted within the Eleventh Work Plan

(Printed as retrieved from the Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa)

C1 Factors determining structure and development of fish farming among

small-scale operators in Western Kenya Munala, N., *Muchiri, M. and Wangila, B.C.C. *Author for correspondence: Department of Fisheries, Moi University, PO Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya; E-Mail: muchirim@africaonline.co.ke

Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing food production activities in the world.

However, in Africa it accounts for only 2% of the total domestic fish production, and is essentially a rural, secondary and part-time activity. Aquaculture contributes about 0.5% of Kenya’s total national fish production. A socio-economic study was conducted in Kericho and Kisii districts in western Kenya. Seventy-six fish farmers were randomly selected for the study and questionnaire administered to them. Although fish farming was started in the 1980s and 1990s, it was evident that certain social and economic factors necessary for its development have not been addressed and this has caused the sub-sector to stagnate. This paper reports the findings of the wide-ranging factors that determine structure and development of fish farming in western Kenya. The main factors are availability of suitable land, financial capacity of farmers and limited extension support. Other factors include age and gender stratification as well as religious beliefs. It is suggested that government intervention is required to transform the sub-sector to levels that go beyond mere subsistence. The recommendations made here are based on issues of particular importance to the region, and to the country as a whole. Key Words: Aquaculture sub-sector, socio economics, Kenya C2 Use of chironomids and Xenopus laevis as biosensors of aquaculture

media quality Osano, O * and Admiraal, W+

*Moi University, School of Environmental Studies, P. O. Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya.Email: odipo@africaonline.co.ke +Department of Aquatic Ecology and Ecotoxicology, IBED, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 320, 1098 SM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Suitability of sediment inhabiting chironomids and African clawed frog, Xenopus

laevis to analyze sediment and water matrix quality, respectively, intended for aquaculture is explored.

Distribution and Shannon-Weiner diversity indices of chironomid species along river Nzoia (ca 252 km) is determined. Acute lethal 96-h (Chironomus riparius and Xenopus laevis) and chronic toxicity (emergence of chironimids) using locally applied chloroacetanilide pesticides (Alachor and Metolachlor) and their respective environmentally stable degradation products (2,6-diethylaniline and 2-ethyl-6-methylaniline) is compared to known data for fish.

36

Chironomids and X laevis are found in all the river’s geographical zones and diversity of chironomids are relatively lowered in sections draining industrial effluents. The LC50 (96-h, C. riparius) of 63.5, 46.8, 104.7 and 99.7 and LC50 (96-h, X. laevis) of 22.6, 47.9, 130.0 and 508.8 µM/L for Alachor, Metolachlor, 2,6-diethylaniline and 2-ethyl-6-methylanine, respectively, are comparable to the LC5096-h toxicity of alachlor to rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and cat-fish (Clarius spp) of 35.6 and 61.9 µM/L, respectively. The LOEC for emergence of C. riparius exposed to alachlor (0.7 µM/L) is less than the lowest reported NOEC for fish.

Chironomids and X. laevis are appropriate and relevant biosensor tools for aquaculture media quality assessment. C3 Factors influencing growth and survival of African catfish Clarias

gariepinus juveniles and their implications for aquaculture development in Kenya Charles C. Ngugi*, C.C., Bowman, J.,2 and Veverica, K.3

*Department of Fisheries, Moi University, P. O. Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya; e-mail:cngugi@africaonline.co.ke; TEL: 254-53-2063206; FAX: 254-53-2063257 2Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA 3Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures, Auburn University, Alabama, USA In Kenya the demand for fingerlings of the African catfish, Clarias gariepinus, is

quite high but larval survival has typically been very low, remaining a major constraint to production. Four studies focusing on increasing larval survival were undertaken at Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya. In an experiment comparing growth and survival of Clarias larvae fed Artemia, rotifers, or freeze-dried Cyclops in 30-L glass aquaria, Artemia and rotifers performed best; however, rotifers would be preferred due to high cost of Artemia cysts. In a second experiment, where aquaria were stocked at densities of 5, 10, 20, and 30 larvae per litre, the optimum stocking density was found to be 10 larvae per litre. In the third experiment, twelve 1-m3 hapas placed in a single 300-m2 pond were stocked at densities of 100, 200, and 400 Clarias larvae per m2. Faster growth and higher survival rates were observed for larvae reared at the lower densities. For the fourth experiment, twelve 1-m3 hapas placed in a 300-m2 pond were provided with 0, 30, 60, and 100% cover using cut grasses spread over the surface. Growth and survival were best in hapas with 100% cover and poorest in hapas without any cover.

C4 Hydraulic, water quality and social assessment of the Nzoia Basin,

Kenya Fishery E.W. Tollner1, M. Muchiri, G. Habron and N. Gitonga 1Professor, Biol. & Agr. Engr. Dept., University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 Dean, School of Fisheries, Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya Director, Kenyan Department of Fisheries, Nairobi, Kenya Developing agriculture and industries are threatening the sustainability of the

Lake Victoria fishery. The government of Kenya and Moi University are concerned with

37

putting policies in place that will ensure that watersheds feeding Lake Victoria are developed in a sustainable manner. The aquaculture CRSP is embarking on a project to identify a test watershed and develop capacity at a regional university to enable future local efforts to protect national watersheds. The Nzoia basin was selected based on a preliminary visit with Moi University and Fisheries personnel in the fall of 2003, using accepted principles for watershed assessment. The Nzoia is approximately 70 miles in length and Moi University is near one of the tributaries to the Nzoia River. In this visit, a preliminary work plan was established and a project team assembled. Project activities include building the capacity of Moi University to conduct watershed assessment by making key measurement capabilities and GIS integration; laying a foundation for some hydrologic and BMP modeling efforts; Hydrologic modeling and BMP modeling efforts; Hydrologic modeling and BMP modeling foundation; and, organising a watershed assessment focus group and survey analyses center. The presentation will discuss progress and future plans and will also review a sister project in Bahar Dar, Ethiopia.

C5 Tilapia farming: a comparison of enterprise profitability among

Ghanaian Farmers Quagrainie, K. * & S. Amisah Department of Aquaculture/ Fisheries, University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, Pine Bluff, AR, 71603, USA, kquagrainie@uaex.edu

Efficient management of a tilapia farm can make the difference between profits

and losses even in years with unfavourable prices and costs. Farm management involves more than just taking care of the biological processes involved; it also includes paying close attention to economic and financial measures of the farm business. A comparison is made of economic and financial indicators of 10 fish farmers each in the Brong-Ahafo and Ashanti regions of Ghana, analysing the performance of the tilapia farm businesses. Results suggested that fish farming in the Ashanti region was more profitable than fish farming in the Brong-Ahafo region. Profitability in the Brong-Ahafo region applied to farmers producing fingerlings for sale. Break-even production averaged 913 kg in the Brong-Ahafo region compared to 877 kg for the Ashanti region. Based on the results, a training program for farmers is planned that involves record keeping and financial analyses. Adequate and reliable records are needed to formulate sample budgets needed to teach analyses of profitability of fish farming. The training will also teach developing an enterprise budgeting, partial budgeting and preparation of income statement. This training should assist fish farmers and managers to make more informed management decisions on the farms.

C6 Status of the fish farming and socio-economic structure and situation

of farmers in Tanzania Kajitanus, O. O. Aquaculture Collaborative Research Support Program (ACRSP) of the USAID and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Tanzania. Email: osewe60@yahoo.com

38

The integration of aquaculture with agriculture may be a viable entry point for rural fish farmers. IAA encourages production diversification of the labour force and locally available inputs without causing negative effects to the pond dynamics and culture system.

The ACRSP organisation of the USAID in collaborating with URT conducted a survey for rural fish farming. Field study conducted in 6 fish farming potential regions in Tanzania whereby 250 fish farmers were interviewed.

The main objective of the study was to collect baseline information on the current status of aquaculture, study and evaluate the existing fish farmers’ socio-economic structure, design and develop low cost technologies suitable for rural communities in order to improve farmers’ livelihoods.

The results showed that very little capital investment received by the farmers from financial institutions, household labour force dominates whilst very little labour force were hired, pond size range from 100 m2 to 300 m2, investment and production were poorly recorded and extension services is required to the level of an individual farmers. It is the view of the authors that government should reformulate its fish farming policy to ease loan provision viable extension package delivery. With good policy and management, aquaculture may realise the positive benefits as improved water and nutrient resources management and aquaculture entrepreneurship encouragement in near future. C7 Financial returns from a tilapia and catfish enterprise using maize,

wheat and rice bran as supplemental feed in fertilised ponds Mugo, R.M., *Muchiri, M. & Liti, D. *Presenting author and author for correspondence: Department of Fisheries, Moi University, PO Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya, e-mail: muchirim@africaonline.co.ke An experiment to compare financial returns from the sale of Nile tilapia

(Oreochromis niloticus) and African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) was conducted for 250 days at Sagana Fish Farm, Kenya. Enterprise budgets were used as decision-making tools. Variable costs were feed, fertiliser, labour, and fingerlings. Ponds were the only fixed assets considered.

Ponds were stocked with 14-g tilapia and 60.5-g catfish fingerlings, bought at **Ksh 3.00 and Ksh 4.00 per fingerling, respectively. Ponds were fertilized with urea and Diammonium phosphate (DAP) at rates of 20 kg N and 8 kg P ha-1 wk-1. Urea and DAP cost Ksh 22.00 and Ksh 27.60 per kilogram, respectively. Maize bran, wheat bran, and rice bran were used as supplemental feeds. The cost of maize bran was Ksh 8.60; wheat bran, Ksh 7.10; and rice bran, Ksh 5.50 per kg. Field labour was paid at Ksh 120 per person per day while night security personnel were paid Ksh 150 per person per night. Ponds, valued at Ksh 50,000 per pond, were amortised by straight-line method for 15 years. Interest on operating and fixed capital was calculated at 24% per annum. Revenue increased by Ksh 59,100 when using maize bran, and Ksh 50,927 when using wheat bran, above of what would have been earned when using rice bran. Maize bran cost Ksh 14,998 more than rice bran per ha, while wheat bran cost Ksh 7, 059 more. The net effect was that Ksh 42,173 more was earned when feeding tilapia on WB than when feeding RB.

39

Feeding with MB earned Ksh 40,502 more than feeding with RB. Wheat bran and maize bran treatments made gross profits of Ksh 24,375 and Ksh 22,703, respectively, while rice bran made a loss of KSh 17,800.

Considering that formulated fish feeds are not readily available in Kenya and very expensive and of doubtful quality when available, it is suggested, based on results from this study, that small-scale fish farmers can make decent profits by using locally available farm by-products as feed. **Exchange rate: US$1.00 = Ksh.75.00 Key words: Small-scale fish farming enterprise, tilapia, catfish, farm by-products

40

Part III – Americas Regional Meeting

Summary of External Program Advisory Council Participation During the 2004 Program Meeting, participants decided to experiment with the normal rotation of programmatic meetings by electing to convene three regional meetings during 2005. Two regional Technical Committee meetings were convened in Asia and Africa in conjunction with scientific conferences in 2005. Participants from the Americas region agreed to participate in a Bulletin Board System electronic meeting organized by the Aquaculture CRSP Management Entity to meet its obligations to convene three regional meetings. This meeting provided an excellent opportunity for the Management Entity to experiment with novel electronic meeting platforms that might become an effective means for future discussion groups that would otherwise require unnecessary travel or result in awkward email communication. EPAC members Christine Crawford and Aaron McNevin (proxy for Jason Clay) participated in the Americas region electronic discussion to monitor online deliberations. No formal write-up for the Americas meeting was required given the nature of the electronic meeting platform.

41

Americas Regional Technical Committee Meeting Minutes

Minutes of the Americas Regional ACRSP Technical Committee Meeting December 5-16, 2005, Electronic Bulletin Board System Platform

The Americas regional TC meeting was conducted through an electronic bulletin board system (BBS). Minutes were compiled following the 2-week meeting period (5-16 December 2005). For ease of reading, each topic of discussion is listed with the ACRSP opening statement and a brief summary of the group discussion. A transcript of all bulletin board postings is provided as an appendix, with very minimal editing. Welcome and Introductions All participants were emailed an individual username, password and set of instructions to navigate the BBS. Participants were encouraged to participate fully in the discussion and visit the BBS periodically throughout the meeting time to add to the discussion as necessary. Registered participants in the Americas TC regional meeting included (alphabetical order): Name Affiliation Designation Nationality Gender Steve Amisah Kwame Nkrumah Univ. PI Ghana M Remedios Bolivar Central Luzon State

Univ. TC Member Philippines F

Jim Bowman Oregon State University PI USA M Claude Boyd Auburn University TC Co-Chair USA M Chris Bridger ACRSP TC ex-officio Canada M William Camargo SIUC Participant Colombia M Wilfrido Contreras UJAT TC Member Mexico M Christine Crawford University of Tasmania Observer (EPAC) Australia F Konrad Dabrowski Ohio State University PI USA M Jim Diana University of Michigan TC Co-Chair USA M Hillary Egna ACRSP TC ex-officio USA F Grant Feist Oregon State University Participant USA M Kevin Fitzsimmons University of Arizona TC Member USA M Maria Haws University of Hawaii TC Member USA F Chris Kohler SIUC PI USA M Rebecca Lochmann Univ. Arkansas Pine

Bluff PI USA F

Aaron McNevin World Wildlife Fund Observer (EPAC) USA M Suyapa Meyer Zamorano TC Member Honduras F Harry Rea USAID TC ex-officio USA M Gustavo Rodriguez Ohio State University Participant Mexico M Rodrigo Roubach INPA Participant Peru M Ernest T. Tollner University of Georgia TC Member USA M

42

Technical Committee Business The 2005-06 Technical Committee was listed to update all participants of the present membership. Participants were reminded that only TC members are permitted to vote on issues that might arise during this regional TC meeting. Aquaculture CRSP Research Priorities for the Future ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:41 pm) Acquiring input from participants in the Americas region will ensure that your research needs are addressed. Please list what you think are the top aquaculture and aquatic resources management research priorities for the Americas region. Some items that you list might require an additional sentence or two to further explain their significance. Additional information will also allow more discussion on your choices from other meeting participants. Also, please consider listing your choices in order with the highest priority listed first. Discussion Summary No specific list of research priorities for the Americas region resulted from the discussions. However, comments were made that while production research is still considered a priority, environmental impacts and water and land uses are receiving greater attention for research. A considerable amount of discussion revolved around the importance of producing native species in the Americas region, particularly as a means for sustainable aquaculture development. Market considerations must be addressed while developing culture methods for these non-traditional native species. Finally, a few participants noted the importance of collaborating broadly during research activities, and especially reaching out to environmental non-governmental organizations from the outset. Aquaculture CRSP Outreach Priorities in the Americas ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:41 pm) Local farmers may never adopt research studies that occur without exposure to appropriate extension and outreach activities. We wish to acquire input from participants in the Americas to prioritize training, education, and outreach activities in your region. Please develop a list of the top training, education, and outreach needs associated with aquaculture and aquatic resources management in the Americas region. Some items that you list might require an additional sentence or two to further explain their significance. Additional information will also allow more discussion on your choices from other meeting participants. Also, please consider listing your choices in order with the highest priority listed first. Discussion Summary An Americas outreach and extension priority list did not result from the discussion. However, numerous participants provided ideas for future outreach needs, which is some part reflected under research needs. Environmental and land/water use workshops are necessary, which might also consider watershed scale planning and use of BMPs. Also, continuing efforts involving train-the-trainer workshops will be worthwhile. Of course, outreach efforts must be tailored to meet the needs of local/regional participants and their

43

specific issues and aquaculture scale of operation. Finally, numerous outreach vehicles exist (e.g., workshops, websites, publications, and short-courses) that should all receive program attention as they reach slightly different audiences while complementing one another. Policy Discussion: How can the Aquaculture CRSP be involved to maintain Biodiversity of indigenous aquatic species in the Americas? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:40 pm) During the 2004 Technical Committee meeting, a point of discussion was the need for Aquaculture CRSP policy statements and guidelines. One policy statement focused on biodiversity. While the Aquaculture CRSP has not developed a specific policy statement, at a minimum the Aquaculture CRSP must follow US Government and USAID guidance on biodiversity (see below). However, for discussion is whether the Aquaculture CRSP wants to develop stricter guidance or not. Biodiversity remains a very important topic for research and education in all Aquaculture CRSP regions, particularly as it relates to indigenous species. Please discuss ways that the Aquaculture CRSP can be involved to maintain biodiversity of indigenous species in the Americas and suggest possible activities for biodiversity support. USAID describes the importance of biodiversity to its mission and its approach to conservation at http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/biodiversity/index.html. In addition, a US Presidential Executive Order on Invasive Species (http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/laws/execorder.shtml) outlines the responsibilities of federal agencies related to invasive species. Please review these documents and provide comments as necessary. Are these statements as written adequate for an Aquaculture CRSP policy at a minimum? If you think a stricter policy would better serve the Aquaculture CRSP, please explain. Discussion Summary There was no dissention to adopting the USAID policy on biodiversity as presented. All participants stressed the importance of preserving local biodiversity. Coupled with this was the need for aquaculture to develop in a manner that minimizes the impact on local biodiversity. Aquaculture can also play a key role in restocking programs for fisheries that are presently overexploited or otherwise reduced in numbers. Policy Discussion: Is the USAID guideline on Biotechnology adequate for the Aquaculture CRSP or is a stricter policy required? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:40 pm) During the 2004 Technical Committee meeting, a point of discussion was the need for Aquaculture CRSP policy statements and guidelines. One policy statement focused on biotechnology. While the Aquaculture CRSP has not developed a specific policy statement on the issue, biotechnology remains a very important topic for research and education in all Aquaculture CRSP regions. At a minimum, the Aquaculture CRSP must follow US Government and USAID policy.

44

USAID has developed a specific policy related to biotechnology research, which can be reviewed at http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/agriculture/biotechnology. While the Aquaculture CRSP will adopt this statement in accordance with USAID, we can develop a more specific biotechnology statement, tailored to the Aquaculture CRSP mission, which considers aquatic research and uses the USAID statement as its base. What are your opinions on the need for a more specific Aquaculture CRSP biotechnology policy statement? Discussion Summary While a couple of participants agreed to adopting the USAID policy on biotechnology as is, another individual suggested that the Aquaculture CRSP might use a risk assessment approach in developing a more specific policy that addresses sensitive issues, including introduced species. Additional discussion would be warranted at a later time. Policy Discussion: What are the necessary elements to formulate an Intellectual Property policy? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:39 pm) Intellectual property issues are becoming very important throughout the world as researchers create proprietary solutions to the world’s issues. Intellectual property can be a complex issue for Aquaculture CRSP research, given the fact that our activities are the products of collaboration involving numerous institutions located in different countries. What are your concerns and opinions regarding intellectual property and Aquaculture CRSP research? Should the Aquaculture CRSP develop an intellectual property policy statement? What should be included in such a statement? Discussion Summary Participants agreed that the Aquaculture CRSP does not have to be engaged in developing an intellectual property policy, as individual universities are active in this issue. Closing Comments Participants were thanked for their input during the Americas regional TC meeting. Participants were reminded of the 2006 Aquaculture CRSP Annual Meeting in Florence, Italy on 8-9 May 2006 just prior to the World Aquaculture Society conference. The meeting was extended (by email communication) over the weekend to allow final comments to be posted and finally adjourned 8:00 am Monday 19 December 2005.

45

Transcript of Bulletin Board Postings Welcome and Introductions ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:43 pm): Welcome to the Aquaculture CRSP Americas TC regional meeting! During the 2004 Program Meeting in Hawaii, participants chose to convene regional meetings in alternate years with full program meetings to be held every two years. To this end, regional meetings have already been held in Asia (WAS Bali) and Africa (AASA South Africa), and this meeting for the Americas (5-16 December 2005) will complete all regional meetings necessary. A full Program Meeting will follow these regional meetings in 2006, to be convened prior to the World Aquaculture Society conference in Florence, Italy. The Americas TC regional meeting will follow along the same agenda items as the other two meetings. This will ensure that Aquaculture CRSP participants in all regions have equal opportunity to comment on the issues important to the program. In the Americas case, because of the electronic format, each of you has the opportunity to provide your comments in written form. In the main Discussion Area, there are seven other discussion topics for you to review and comment on. Please visit the Bulletin Board System (BBS) website periodically throughout the allocated 2-week period, as other participants may post comments at any time, some possibly in direct response to your own, which you may wish to further comment on. Use of a BBS platform to conduct the Americas TC regional meeting represents a first for the Aquaculture CRSP. We hope that you enjoy this experience and that this proves to be an effective means of communication for you. We thank you all for allowing us to experiment with modern technology platforms to discuss important programmatic issues with colleagues across large distances. We will follow-up with you to complete a meeting evaluation form following the close of the Americas TC regional meeting. This evaluation will address the topics discussed during this meeting, as well as your experience using the BBS for a regional TC meeting. ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 4:20 pm) Registered participants in the Americas TC regional meeting include (alphabetical order): Steve Amisah PI Remedios Bolivar TC Member Jim Bowman PI Claude Boyd TC Co-Chair Chris Bridger ACRSP RPM/TC ex-officio William Camargo Participant Wilfrido Contreras TC Member Christine Crawford Observer Konrad Dabrowski PI

46

Jim Diana TC Co-Chair Hillary Egna ACRSP Director/TC ex-officio Grant Feist Participant Kevin Fitzsimmons TC Member Maria Haws TC Member Chris Kohler PI Rebecca Lochmann PI Suyapa Meyer TC Member Harry Rea USAID/TC ex-officio Gustavo Rodriguez Participant Rodrigo Roubach Participant Bill Tollner TC Member Aaron McNevin Observer Roubach (Posted Dec 9, 2005, 6:28 pm): Hi all. Let me take this space to introduce myself to this forum. I am a PI (and former aquaculture department head) from INPA, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, with headquarters in Manaus (in Central Amazon) and since September I was appointed as the Aquaculture project manager at the Secretaria Especial de Pesca e Aquicultura/SEAP in the federal government in Brasilia/DF. Therefore, there are several issues being discussed here, which the Brazilian government through SEAP, are dealing with right now, and I would like to comment on those in the separate forums. Boyd (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 9:57 am) At the BMP workshop in South Africa, Aaron McNevin made some comments about the changing perception by environmentalists of aquaculture and its role in world food supply. I invite him to briefly summarize these comments as bulleted points. I think that these comments would help any doubters among us understand the importance of increasing efforts on environmental issues, watersheds, Best Management Practices (BMPs), etc. McNevin (Posted Dec 15, 2005, 7:49 am) I want to start by saying I was not in the trenches as most of you were during the 1990s when tensions between environmentalists and industry were most strained. I don’t think that there is much that can be done to remedy any of the hard feelings or distrust that was formed in the past. However, I wouldn’t mind sharing my perspective on the NGOs (the ones WWF collaborates with) today. • Many of the groups we work with (Seafood Watch, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, Environmental Defense, FISHWISE, Blue Oceans Institute, and the Seafood Choices Alliance) have positioned themselves to view aquaculture as more or less the better alternative to capture fisheries. This is not to say that all of these groups including WWF support all types of aquaculture, but it represents a definite shift in the way aquaculture was once perceived. • Most if not all of these groups are promoting certain forms of aquaculture over others and this support should not be pushed away, rather complimented

47

• Many of these NGOs are working with seafood buyers and retailers to direct them to sustainable sources or simply less harmful sources of seafood. Although they may not have the most connections to the industry they are looked to buy these seafood purveyors to promote corporate social responsibility. Whether persons agree that NGOs should be playing this role is irrelevant because they are and will continue to be looked to by the seafood industry for this “protection”. • There are facets within the NGO realm that have actually lent or supported lending of funds for certain aquaculture projects • BMPs have played a critical role in much of the aquaculture evaluations NGOs have made, i.e. seafood cards. There is an actual component in these evaluations on effectiveness and implementation of BMPs. • Some of these NGOs have been struggling with the same issues academics have been struggling with regarding determination of the trophic status of coastal ecosystems, quantification of non-point source pollution and the effect it has on aquaculture facilities and their ability to meet water quality requirements, and the source and possible replacements for wild fish in formulated and unformulated feeds. The reality is that many of the researchers in the aquaculture community are working with NGOs these days also, whether it is directly or the researchers are simply used as a source of information. I believe that this signals an opportunity for more collaboration to reach mutual goals, i.e. sustainability. As Dr. Boyd has made clear it is very difficult simply to state something as fact in a peer-reviewed scientific journal these days and expect NGOs to whole-heartedly agree. Part of this is the nature of science in that it is always changing, but maybe more so these days we find conflicting and contradictory conclusions in different journals. I do not say this to take away from one’s research or scientific credibility, but merely to inform you that there is debate over the credibility of some research. I feel that WWF has taken a firm position to listen to the research and try to build a consensus on research findings and try to reduce the rhetoric of non-credible industry research and NGO “fuzzy science”. Polarity is the enemy here, and I think this situation demands more communication. Technical Committee Business ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:42 pm) The Technical Committee for 2005-06 took office in May 2005, and therefore more than halfway through the term. The present TC composition is: ACRSP TC composition 2005-06 Co-Chairs Jim Diana Claude Boyd Materials and Methods Subcommittee Suyapa Meyer (Social and Economic Aspects) Yang Yi (Environmental Effects) Kevin Fitzsimmons (Production Optimization)

48

Technical Progress Subcommittee Bill Tollner (Environmental Effects) Maria Haws (Production Optimization) Kwamena Quagrainie (Social and Economic Aspects) Work Plan and Budget Subcommittee Nancy Gitonga (Social and Economic Aspects) Wilfrido Contreras-Sanchez (Environmental Effects) Remedios Bolivar (Production Optimization) ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:42 pm) The TC will strive to update the TC Bylaws. Our goal will be to have the Bylaws updated prior to the Aquaculture CRSP Annual Meeting in Florence, Italy for ratification by TC members. ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:42 pm) As with other TC meetings, only those participants that are TC members are permitted to vote on any issue that might arise during this meeting that will require a vote for adoption. Such instances include a motion tabled by a TC or ex-officio member during this TC meeting. Aquaculture CRSP Research Priorities for the Future ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:41 pm) Acquiring input from participants in the Americas region will ensure that your research needs are addressed. Please list what you think are the top aquaculture and aquatic resources management research priorities for the Americas region. Some items that you list might require an additional sentence or two to further explain their significance. Additional information will also allow more discussion on your choices from other meeting participants. Also, please consider listing your choices in order with the highest priority listed first. Boyd (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 9:45 am) There has been considerable research on production, and more emphasis on environmental impacts and water and land issues may be appropriate for future research. At the regional TC meeting in Africa, a long list of research needs was made and the participants could not agree on priority. Thus, the priorities were made by each nation. Possibly a shorter list and more agreement in priorities will be obtained for the Americas. Tollner (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 11:02 am) I also attended the Africa meeting and agree with Claude's assessment. I did sense an acknowledgement of the need to consider environmental aspects. I viewed this as significant in itself.

49

Production aspects were collectively viewed as higher priority, which I find not surprising and not necessarily inappropriate given the CRSP historical mission.

McNevin (Posted Dec 7, 2005, 6:35 am) My thoughts too, although I got the sense that because the production intensity in some places is low the realized threat of environmental degradation is not at the forefront. Understandable, but I think an environmental component would be good. Fitzsimmons (Posted Dec 12, 2005, 1:48 pm) We have seen an upsurge in interest from host countries and host country students on native species culture and sustainable production issues. We can expect these trends to continue as polyculture and integrated farming techniques continue to draw interest. Lochmann (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 7:28 am) I did not attend the Africa meeting, but an emphasis on culture of native species in the America's should be highly sustainable: many of these fishes already have market acceptability, and increasing the availability of cultured fishes should help meet market demand while mitigating environmental damage caused by overfishing and introduction of exotic species. Kohler (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 8:36 am) I remain a firm believer in sustainable development of native species for the Americas. The Amazon River, for example, contains the largest diversity of freshwater fishes in the world. We have barely scratched the surface of this diverse ichthyofauna for aquaculture development. I also agree with others that environmental issues are important. In many countries of the region, tilapia and shrimp culture are at industrial scales. It is important that aquaculture not contribute to environmental degradation. I think issues related to contaminants are also very important. Chilean salmon were found to contain less contaminants than salmon from Scotland, and this has proved to be an excellent marketing advantage. I would be curious to know the relative amounts of contaminants in tilapia and shrimp from the Americas compared to say Asia. Therapeutants (both legal and illegal) also play into this picture. Amisah (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 9:27 am) I think it is only real and natural that we do not all have the same or sometimes even similar priorities. America is not exactly the same as Africa, and Africa priorities are not the same as those of the Americas. There are several factors that contribute to these differences in priority settings and differences and these further relate to several issues, which include markets, culture, economy, environment and funding. Boyd (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 10:02 am) I will respond to two points recently made on this topic. I agree with Aaron's comment that more environmental emphasis is needed. However, this needs to be done with the collaboration of some environmental advocate groups. Otherwise, the environmentalists will not believe our findings no matter how hard we promote them.

50

Doing a lot of research on alternate, native species does not seem extremely productive. We could progress much faster by concentrating on major species for which culture techniques have been developed and markets are available. Meyer (Posted Dec 15, 2005, 5:23 am) Doing research in new species, in this case native species will give us the answers to those questions. We should look into the environmental and the socioeconomic impact of culturing native species. In my visit to Mexico (Tabasco) I saw a good example of the culture of alligator fish, a native species of northern Central America (Mexico and Guatemala). The demand for this fish is very well established in the Mexican domestic market and can have a potential export market to the US, only remember how many Mexicans live in the US. Thus what I want to say is that domestic markets are important to native aquaculture species, especially when the farmers are at the medium and small level and also these species can be considered as an export product to ethnic markets in other countries. Kohler (Posted Dec 16, 2005, 2:34 pm) Native species aquaculture can hit the global markets just as fast as the old exotic standbys. Look at what happened with a number of species now found in the marketplace. If it has the right culture qualities, taste good and can be raised cost effectively, markets can open rapidly. Contreras (Posted Dec 17, 2005, 9:51 am) The two topics that have been touched are very important in the Americas: environmental issues (I agree that working with environmental groups should be pursued) and native species culture. Both in Mexico and the Amazon several groups have demonstrated that the incorporation of native species into aquaculture systems is feasible and economically viable. In Tabasco we have opened three centers for native species reproduction. We have incorporated tilapia practices to Petenia splendida and Cichlasoma urophthalmus culture and these two species have been incorporated in small and medium scale systems. However more research is needed to improve production. The culture of tropical gars has increased exponentially in southern Mexico and there are many farmers requesting fry to stock ponds and restock lagoons. Two more topics that I consider important in Central and South America are: recirculating systems and farm management and administration. Many farmers are struggling with lack of water and medium and large farms are not doing very well in terms of elaborating on good management programs. Aquaculture CRSP Outreach Priorities in the Americas ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:41 pm) Local farmers may never adopt research studies that occur without exposure to appropriate extension and outreach activities. We wish to acquire input from participants in the Americas to prioritize training, education, and outreach activities in your region. Please develop a list of the top training, education, and outreach needs associated with aquaculture and aquatic resources management in the Americas region. Some items that

51

you list might require an additional sentence or two to further explain their significance. Additional information will also allow more discussion on your choices from other meeting participants. Also, please consider listing your choices in order with the highest priority listed first. Boyd (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 9:50 am) I think that a series of workshops on land and water use and environmental issues would be useful in the Americas. However, additional effort to disseminate information from previous ACRSP research also could be useful. Tollner (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 10:54 am) I believe aquaculture work should be migrating towards a larger scale that includes surrounding environment. The concept of watershed assessment and BMP development is consistent with this philosophy. Some workshops designed to consider impacts of various BMPs on aquaculture production potential are a next step towards this end. McNevin (Posted Dec 7, 2005, 6:39 am) Is there any way to see all the projects ACRSP is currently funding to get an idea of what might be key as far as outreach priorities? Meyer (Posted Dec 8, 2005, 6:01 am) In Central America (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua) we have been offering courses and workshops on tilapia production for the last 3 years and the more we teach the demand for courses appears to rise. We have demands from Dominican Republic and Haiti also. Printed materials that accompany the training are a must. We have a new project with FINTRAC (USAID) for Honduras but for the rest of Central America, Mexico and South America there is a need for training. I would suggest courses for trainers (NGO and Government agents, universities and agriculture centers staff), that has a duration probably of three months at Zamorano and a follow up program in their countries. Fitzsimmons (Posted Dec 12, 2005, 1:43 pm) Yes, workshops, websites, publications, and short-courses all serve these needs. We need to continue to support each of these as they reach slightly different targets and mutually support the other outreach efforts. The wider mission of sustainability (watersheds, BMPs, social impacts, economic viability) can also be addressed across these outreach methods. Kohler (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 8:52 am) Our outreach efforts in the Amazon Region have been very successful. Our workshops are always well attended and there seems to be an insatiable demand for more. There is much demand for "training the trainers" so that we have a larger cadre of local extensionists. New producers have a different set of needs than do the industrial scale producers. Workshops and training programs need to be tailored to specific needs at the local level. There would also seem to be an opportunity to do some training of Peace Corps volunteers. We have done a little of that for Ecuador.

52

Boyd (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 9:59 am) I agree with the approach suggested by Tollner. All watershed-aquaculture interactions should be considered in developing sustainable aquaculture. Many in aquaculture have not thought beyond practices used to produce fish, shrimp, etc. Thus, an outreach effort to promote this broader view of aquaculture could be useful. Contreras (Posted Dec 17, 2005, 10:05 am) We have found that workshops are very good for reaching farmers and extension agents. However, these should be implemented at the regional level, because many farmers cannot move beyond borders and travel expenses cannot be affordable. We have had very good results working with workshops in Guatemala, Mexico and Honduras and the response from farmers is encouraging. In Central and South America topics such as site selection (at the watershed level); recirculating systems; farm design, management and administration; technology transfer; and incorporation of native species can be good topics to address, since they are highly needed. Policy Discussion: How can the Aquaculture CRSP be involved to maintain Biodiversity of indigenous aquatic species in the Americas? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:40 pm) During the 2004 Technical Committee meeting, a point of discussion was the need for Aquaculture CRSP policy statements and guidelines. One policy statement focused on biodiversity. While the Aquaculture CRSP has not developed a specific policy statement, at a minimum the Aquaculture CRSP must follow US Government and USAID guidance on biodiversity (see below). However, for discussion is whether the Aquaculture CRSP wants to develop stricter guidance or not. Biodiversity remains a very important topic for research and education in all Aquaculture CRSP regions, particularly as it relates to indigenous species. Please discuss ways that the Aquaculture CRSP can be involved to maintain biodiversity of indigenous species in the Americas and suggest possible activities for biodiversity support. USAID describes the importance of biodiversity to its mission and its approach to conservation at http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/biodiversity/index.html. In addition, a US Presidential Executive Order on Invasive Species (http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/laws/execorder.shtml) outlines the responsibilities of federal agencies related to invasive species. Please review these documents and provide comments as necessary. Are these statements as written adequate for an Aquaculture CRSP policy at a minimum? If you think a stricter policy would better serve the Aquaculture CRSP, please explain. Boyd (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 9:51 am)

53

I favor using the USAID policy on biodiversity without developing a more specific statement for ACRSP. Meyer (Posted Dec 8, 2005, 5:39 am) Biodiversity support programs are in great demand in the Americas. In our interaction with other universities (Universidad Juarez of Tabasco, Universidad San Carlos de Guatemala, Universidad Catolica Agropecuaria de Nicaragua, and Universidad Catolica de Temuco en Chile) all agreed that we have to find ways to: manage, research and repopulate native species (fish and mollusks) in the natural water bodies (rivers, estuaries and lakes). These initiatives are not only aimed to preserve or maintain biodiversity but also they can have an important impact in rural socioeconomic development of communities in the way of providing fishing sources for consumption and for sale. Another issue that this kind of initiative can address is ethnic groups support; many of these groups don’t have land to build ponds, they live from hunting and fishing and some agriculture. The native species are preferred for consumption in our countries if they are available. In Zamorano, the Center for Biodiversity has been created (which I am collaborating with). It is in the very initial stage but we are looking into creating alliances with other institutions and programs to create umbrella programs as this one in Aquaculture Native Species. The Universities above mentioned, have agreed to participate. I would be very interested to form an interest group in the ACRSP to find ways to push forward this idea. Also we look for guidance. Kohler (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 8:57 am) I agree about the importance of maintaining the rich flora and fauna of the region. Aquaculture should be developed with the goal of being as environmentally benign as possible. Opportunities should also exist for using aquaculture as a "captive conservation" measure to re-populate threatened species. Amisah (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 9:08 am) Whilst there may be several opportunities for Aquaculture CRSP to make contributions to enhance biodiversity of indigenous species in the US, CRSP can only do so within the constraints imposed by the Policy of the US on Biodiversity and the Global Biodiversity Support Programme. I, therefore, agree with Professor Boyd. Contreras (Posted Dec 17, 2005, 10:20 am) I agree with Suyapa, CRSP projects with native species have helped with re-introduction of fish in several places. In Mexico we have worked with government officials and NGOs to re-stock fish in urban lagoons and areas were fisheries were depleted. However, research is needed to evaluate the impacts of these introductions. Perhaps, CRSP research can be directed towards this, since aquaculture is not limited to ponds or cages only. Production of fish for fisheries support can be an interesting area to address, especially since several issues are relevant (genetics, stock movement across borders, etc.).

54

Policy Discussion: Is the USAID guideline on Biotechnology adequate for the Aquaculture CRSP or is a stricter policy required? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:40 pm) During the 2004 Technical Committee meeting, a point of discussion was the need for Aquaculture CRSP policy statements and guidelines. One policy statement focused on biotechnology. While the Aquaculture CRSP has not developed a specific policy statement on the issue, biotechnology remains a very important topic for research and education in all Aquaculture CRSP regions. At a minimum, the Aquaculture CRSP must follow US Government and USAID policy. USAID has developed a specific policy related to biotechnology research, which can be reviewed at http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/agriculture/biotechnology. While the Aquaculture CRSP will adopt this statement in accordance with USAID, we can develop a more specific biotechnology statement, tailored to the Aquaculture CRSP mission, which considers aquatic research and uses the USAID statement as its base. What are your opinions on the need for a more specific Aquaculture CRSP biotechnology policy statement? Boyd (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 9:53 am) I favor using the USAID policy on biotechnology without developing a more specific statement for ACRSP. Fitzsimmons (Posted Dec 12, 2005, 2:00 pm) Existing policy seems to be sufficient for A CRSP purposes. Efforts to be more specific would not seem to be warranted considering we are not doing genetic engineering or other high-risk activities. Kohler (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 8:43 am) Depending upon definition, GMOs can include domesticated fish and hybrids, for example. I don't subscribe to that definition, but others do. Nevertheless, perhaps we should consider looking at the biotechnology issue from a risk assessment approach using a variety of definitions for GMOs, including introduced species? Policy Discussion: What are the necessary elements to formulate an Intellectual Property policy? ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:39 pm) Intellectual property issues are becoming very important throughout the world as researchers create proprietary solutions to the world’s issues. Intellectual property can be a complex issue for Aquaculture CRSP research, given the fact that our activities are the products of collaboration involving numerous institutions located in different countries. What are your concerns and opinions regarding intellectual property and Aquaculture CRSP research? Should the Aquaculture CRSP develop an intellectual property policy statement? What should be included in such a statement? Boyd (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 9:52 am)

55

I believe that the universities participating in ACRSP have their own policies about intellectual rights that must be followed in preparing proposals. Thus, this does not seem to be a high priority topic. Tollner (Posted Dec 6, 2005, 10:50 am) I agree that intellectual property issues are, for US PIs at least, dictated by the respective universities. For host country institutions that desire to have more of a presence in this arena, the CRSP could facilitate meeting(s) that brought together selected US and HC institutions to attempt the development of a template for other HC institutions to consider. In the larger context, this issue does not seem to be a major one. Kohler (Posted Dec 14, 2005, 8:58 am) I agree with comments made above. Contreras (Posted Dec 17, 2005, 10:30 am) I also agree, the universities participating in ACRSP have their own policies about intellectual rights and no conflicts have arisen. Each contract has statements regarding intellectual property claims. I believe this can continue as it is. Closing Comments ACRSP (Posted Dec 3, 2005, 3:38 pm) Thank you for participating in this Americas TC regional meeting! Please visit this site every few days over the meeting period 5-16 December 2005 to ensure you have an opportunity to read and comment on all postings. Please mark your calendars to attend the 2006 Aquaculture CRSP Annual Meeting in Florence, Italy on 8-9 May 2006 just prior to the World Aquaculture Society conference. A more detailed letter, with a meeting agenda, will be sent to the Aquaculture CRSP email list in the weeks ahead. Upcoming Aquaculture CRSP workshops are listed in the new issue of Aquanews.

56

Appendices

Appendix 1. External Advisory Transitional Structure

External oversight of the Aquaculture CRSP has recently transitioned to meet program reporting needs. The impetus for this transition was the new BIFAD regulations that were released in 2003. The Board of Directors was changed to a Board of Advisors in that same year. In 2004, the BIFAD regulations were vetted and subsequently the Board of Advisors and External Evaluation Panel were combined to form the External Advisory Panel (EAP). Subsequently, the EAP transitioned to the External Program Advisory Council.

57

Appendix 2. Aquaculture CRSP 2005 Awards Pre-Conference Professional Awards The Aquaculture CRSP provided numerous pre-conference professional awards in 2005. These awards are typically provided to young professional and awarded to individuals based upon the following criteria: providing a presentation during the conference related to past or present Aquaculture CRSP research, scientific merit based upon submitted abstract, demonstrated financial need and matching leverage funds, and regional distribution. World Aquaculture Society, Bali, Indonesia Khalid Salie, Division of Aquaculture University of Stellenbosch, South Africa “Small-Scale Fish Farming in the Western Cape Province, South Africa: Ten Years of Aquaculture as a Socio-Economic Development Model” Lourens de Wet, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa “Quantifying the Nutritional Contribution of Natural Productivity in the Pond Culture of Mozambique Tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus” Le Thanh Hung “Study on the Use of Rubber Oilcake as an Alternative Protein Source for Hybrid Clarias Catfish” Aquaculture Association of Southern Africa, Grahamstown, South Africa Mucai Muchiri, Department of Fisheries, Moi University, PO Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya “Financial returns from a tilapia and catfish enterprise using maize, wheat and rice bran as supplemental feed in fertilised ponds” Norman Munala, Department of Fisheries, Moi University, PO Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya “Factors determining structure and development of fish farming among small scale operators in Western Kenya” Charles Ngugi, Depart. of Fisheries, Moi University, P. O. Box 3900, Eldoret, Kenya. “Factors influencing growth and survival of African catfish Clarias gariepinus juveniles and their implications for aquaculture development in Kenya” Kajitanus Osewe, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Tanzania “Status of the fish farming and socio-economic structure and situation of farmers in Tanzania” Kwamena Quagrainie, Department of Aquaculture/ Fisheries, University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, Pine Bluff, AR, 71603, USA “Tilapia farming: a comparison of enterprise profitability among Ghanaian Farmers”

58

Ernest W. Tollner, Biol. & Agr. Engr. Dept., University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 “Hydraulic, water quality and social assessment of the Nzoia Basin, Kenya Fishery” Best Student Poster Awards The Aquaculture CRSP sponsored three student poster awards at the Aquaculture America 2005 meeting in New Orleans, US in January 2005 and World Aquaculture Society meeting in Bali, Indonesia in May 2005. One first place and two runner-up awards were given to those posters judged as the best representatives of the broad research and development theme “to advance sustainable aquaculture.” All posters submitted by students were considered and judging was conducted using accepted Aquaculture CRSP guidelines. Specific judging criteria focused on value of the contribution to sustainable aquaculture development, technical quality of the study and level of involvement required, presentation and use of graphics, and overall applicability and benefits of the results. Aquaculture America, New Orleans, US Aquaculture CRSP awards were presented to the winning students during the USAS Student Reception. In addition, Dr. James Avault kindly donated a copy of his book “Fundamentals of Aquaculture: A Step-by-Step Guide to Commercial Aquaculture” to each of the winning students. The highest judged student posters at Aquaculture America 2005 were as follows: First Place: Peng Li, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University "Evaluation of the prebiotic Grobiotic-A and brewers yeast as dietary supplements for sub-adult hybrid striped bass Morone chrysops X M. saxatilis challenged in situ with Mycobacterium marinum." Second Place: Joseph Sawdy, Department of Animal Sciences, The Ohio State University "Whole muscle 1-D protein fingerprints of yellow perch Perca flavescens correlate with total body weight and length." Roberto Quintana, Aquaculture Research Station, Louisiana State University "Rapid estimation of gonad-to-body ratio in oysters." World Aquaculture Society, Bali, Indonesia Aquaculture CRSP awards were presented to the winning students during the USAS Student Reception. The highest judged student posters at the World Aquaculture Society 2005 meeting were as follows: First Place: Charlie Price, Institute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland

59

“Effects of Pesticide Residues on Vegetables Grown in Ditch Dyke Systems and Implementation of Pesticide Minimisations Experiments in Central Thailand” Second Place: Shanti Dwita Lestari, Fisheries Product Technology Department of Fisheries and Marine Science Faculty, Bogor Agricultural Institute, Indonesia “The Water Quality of Aquaculture Sites by Using Lactobacillus sp. as a Probiotic Microbial Species” Cristian Gallardo-Escárate, Centro de Investigación Científica y de ducación Superior de Ensenada, Ensenada, B.C. México “Karyotype Analysis and Chromosomal Localization by Fish rDNA, Telomeric (TAAGGG)n, and (GATA)n Repeats in Haliotis fulgens (Archeogastropoda: Haliotidae)”