Sustainable aquaculture is not synonymous with fish protection, the appeal to the government not to forget about them

Italy is among the European countries that consume the most fish, we are talking about 30 kilos per capita per year, and spends the most on fish products:we are talking about over 880 million euros between 2020 and 2021 according to Eumofa data.

According to the most recent calculations published byBees, the Italian fish farmers' association, fish farming in Italy has exceeded three hundred million euros in turnover and produces 54 thousand tons of fish of twenty different species, distributed in more than seven hundred production sites.In first place in terms of production volume are the trout, raised in the order of 29 thousand tons every year, followed by sea ​​bream and sea bass with over 17 thousand.

And the number of individuals bred? It is not available, as instead happens for chickens, pigs, cows and other vertebrates, and this says a lot about the perception that our society at large has of these animals, which are currently the most exploited numerically but those least protected by the laws.

One of ours investigation popular these days shows how fish are raised in a factory in the province of Treviso.The images are very strong:a sturgeon is violently slammed to the ground, some literally hooked in the mouth and thrown into the baskets, others are broken in half and there is a lot of blood both in the water and on the ground.

The controls do not help prevent these situations:according to what was declared by the production manager, the veterinarians failed to contest some illicit practices and would notify the company before proceeding with the visits.But many of the documented practices are legal, because, as we mentioned at the beginning, there is a lack of adequate protection for this species, both at European and national level.

The welfare of fish

Indeed, in Italy, farms like this could be certified as per "sustainable aquaculture", a labeling developed by the Ministry of Agriculture together with the associations of fish producers (Api) and shellfish producers (Ama) in 2020 which risks profoundly confusing citizens.In the certification specification In fact, there is no clear definition of fish welfare, as well as basic parameters necessary to eliminate the main causes of suffering for fish in farms.Among these certainly the one linked to the lack of more appropriate stunning and killing methods for the different species of fish which in fact translates into the widespread use of bloody and painful practices.

In the case of the farm we investigated, culling occurs in a regular manner irregular, with violence against animals and avoidable suffering, such as applying electrical cable clamps directly to the gills of fish, a particularly sensitive part of the body.When electric current is used, as recommended by the European Commission, the animals are kept out of the water and therefore the electric discharge does not circulate uniformly between the animals, which are therefore not stunned effectively and immediately.

In reality, however, most of the trout raised in the facility are not stunned with electric current, as required by the recommendations.Four out of five trout are destined to become fillets, therefore their Sales aesthetics are key.But when the electrical parameters used during stunning are not appropriate, on meat blood stains may form.This would undermine the appearance of the product, which would risk remaining unsold.Therefore eighty percent of the trout raised in this plant come killed by asphyxiation.

The fish are recognized by numerous institutions such as the World Organization for Animal Health, the world organization for animal health, as sentient beings, therefore capable of feeling pain or fear.This means that their well-being cannot be ignored when we talk about sustainability, as in the case of ministerial labelling, otherwise we will have to talk about a certification that is in all respects misleading.