Information on fish and fishmeal from the Gulf

At Daybrook Fisheries, one of the two Menhaden fish meal and oil processors in the Gulf of Mexico, product safety is our primary concern. We understand the importance of the questions raised concerning Gulf of Mexico fish-based ingredients on Petfood-Connection.com and offer the following in response.
First and foremost the petfood industry can rest assured that Daybrook values the petfood business and will prioritize their safety concerns and tonnage requirements, you will receive fishmeal and it will be tested to comply with known contaminant limits.

1) PETFOOD VOLUME: The US petfood industry is a very large consumer of menhaden meal but still only makes up about 25-35% of the total annual menhaden fishmeal sales. All contracted sales to date have received timely shipments and nobody has had any shipment problems.

2) FISHING: Fishing is continuing and has thru-out the Deep-water Horizon oil spill; however it has been restricted to areas away from any oil impact zones. Daybrook only fishes in open areas that have been tested by the NOAA Fisheries Service found to be free of contamination. Additionally EPA is testing water quality and Louisiana departments of Health and Hospitals as well as Wildlife and Fisheries are routinely analyzing the seafood throughout our fishing areas and none have found any results of concerning levels.

3) SAFETY CONCERNS: No fish are being caught in closed areas. No fish kills have been reported; menhaden are filter feeders and are not being observed in areas of oil. We are testing our catch and have not found any concerning results. Weekly samples of fishmeal production are submitted to an outside certified laboratory for testing contamination elements related to the oil spill. Analysis for individual polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and total aliphatic hydrocarbons with detection limits down to the ppm and ppb levels have shown very low levels or below detection levels. While regulatory authorities have not set maximum limits on most of the PAH’s, the EU has set a limit for both fresh and smoked fish for human consumption on one PAH, Benzo(a)pyrene, and all of our tests have shown that this chemical is below detection limits. The US has set some criteria for reopening closed fishing areas which covers 8 different PAH’s and all of our results are 1 to 4 orders of magnitude below those limits or below detection limits.

4) US FISHMEAL INDUSTRY: There are two companies operating four menhaden processing plants in the Gulf and one on the Atlantic. Two of the Gulf plants “traditional fishing grounds” have been closed by federal and state authorities. Until such time that they are re-opened those boats will travel much further west in order to fish. The increased travel time and greater competition in the reduced open areas has led to a decrease in the catch.

5) PRODUCTION VOLUME: The menhaden industry normally produces between 150,000 and 200,000 ST of meal and 70,000 to 100,000 ST of oil per year over the past decade. The global production is typically around 6 million MT of meal and 1 million MT of oil so the US only makes up about 3% of the world’s meal and 7+% of the world’s oil.

6) BOTTOM LINE: Neither the petfood manufacturers nor consumers should have any concern about the supply or safety of Menhaden fishmeal. There is no doubt that this catastrophe is having a significant impact on our industry but as it relates to the petfood segment we currently have and expect to continue to have ample supplies of safe, high quality, meal for our friends and loyal customers in the petfood segment.

Scott Herbert
VP - Market Development
Daybrook Holdings

Ethoxyquin Toxic to Fish & Invert's: How the Industry Should Respond

While researching the effects of Ethoxyquin on pet freshwater invertebrates, I found a 2005 reassessment of inert ingredient tolerance of ethoxyquin, commissioned by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The reassessment states that "studies indicate that ethoxyquin is toxic to aquatic invertebrates, and mildly toxic to fish" when ingested. To my knowledge, the studies cited are the only ones conducted on fish and invertebrates.
The rumor that all fish foods contain ethoxyquin because all fishmeal contains it, is probably what fueled the latest backlash by consumers of dog and cat food. It was further fueled by the suggestion that ethoxyquin could be hidden from the label list of ingredients if it was used to preserve an ingredient in the fish food. This rumor was perpetuated by a fish food manufacturer who was attempting to justify the inclusion of ethoxyquin in their product, and consequently made these statements online.
There are, of course, sources of ethoxyquin-free fishmeal and more are popping up all the time due to the increase in demand for 'natural' products. The rumor stating that all fishmeal MUST contain ethoxyquin would only apply to fishmeal being transported by boat and even then, a special exemption may be obtained. The second rumor stemming from this misleading information regarding labeling is entirely false - ethoxyquin content specifically must be stated on the label, whether it was added intentionally or inadvertently through an ingredient.
This is a classic case of inaccurate information found online by consumers and the damage it can cause to the pet food industry, especially when the source seems reputable.
This brings us to the three points that I will address in this article:
1. Ethoxyquin should not be used in fish/invertebrate food.2. What should we do when a baseless rumor spreads like wildfire online?3. How can the fish food industry turn this fish poo into a salmon steak?
Ethoxyquin should not be used in fish food
This may be a simple matter of educating the manufacturers of fish food, or perhaps informing them that consumers are aware of these facts and they're going to lose money if they don't remove it from their product. We do not increase the bottom line by using less expensive preservatives, if our preservative of choice results in the loss of sales. That is precisely what many manufacturers of dog and cat food concluded when they decided to no longer use ethoxyquin, even though there were no studies proving that it is toxic to mammals.
It is crucial that this preservative no longer be used in fish/invertebrate food, not only to please consumers as it was with dog and cat food, but because it threatens the health of the very creatures its designed to feed. Invertebrates are commonly found in freshwater aquariums today - both shrimp and snails are wildly popular. Those who only keep fish are not at all comforted by the knowledge that ethoxyquin is 'mildly' toxic to fish.
I was unable to obtain a copy of the studies cited by the EPA, but perhaps someone else will have better access to the proper channels. I did contact Wildlife International as they conducted the study for the EPA, but they are unable to release the studies without the EPA's consent. Following are the studies you will be asking the EPA about:
MRID No. 43978101 (1996) Ethoxyquin Technical A Dietary LC50 Study with the Northern Bobwhite
MRID No. 43978301 (1996) Ethoxyquin A 96-Hour Flow-Through Acute Toxicity Test with the Rainbow Trout
MRID No. 43978401 (1996) A 43-Hour Flow-Through Acute Toxicity Test with the Cladoceran
Read the entire blog on Petfood-Connection.