Aquaculture Europe 2014

October 14-17, 2014

Donostia–San Sebastián, Spain

HOW CAn Feed management CONTRIBUTE TO SUSTAINABILITY? challenges and future PRospects

Chris Noble & Bjørn-Steinar Sæther
 
Nofima, The Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research, Muninbakken 9-13, P.O. Box 6122, NO-9291 Tromsø, Norway. Email: bjorn-steinar.saether@nofima.no

Although substantial advances have been made in optimising diets and feeding regimes, feed is still one of the principal cost drivers for both the freshwater and marine phases of Norwegian salmon aquaculture. Farmers still face major challenges in this area as the industry strives to grow in an environmentally, ethically and economically sustainable manor. A way to address this problem is to optimize feed management, which governs ration size, feed delivery rate, the duration and frequency of feed delivery and the temporal and spatial delivery of the feed. However, feed management strategies can be diverse and the farmers must meet the daily challenges of how best to feed their fish in relation to their chosen production strategy. In both marine cage and freshwater tank production, these strategies include a) pursuing a maximal growth strategy that can e.g. reduce the length of the production cycle, b) feeding efficiently to reduce Feed Conversion Ratios (FCRs) and avoid feed waste, or c) optimising feed distribution to avoid underfeeding and product a fish of a uniform size, or a combination of these factors. This presentation will review how aquacultural feed management can address these challenges in marine cage farming and how these strategies fit into the wider scope of precision livestock farming (PLF). Challenges facing the farmers include how to feed large groups of fish to satiation when held in large scale production systems and also when subject to potentially exposed open marine environments.  The decisions involved in meeting these challenges are critical for the overall farm performance: the current presentation will also highlight the potential costs of getting it wrong and the benefits of getting it right.