The Seafood Industry E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 1544

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Beschreibung

The Seafood Industry: Species, Products, Processing, and Safety, Second Edition is a completely updated and contemporary revision of Flick and Martin's classic publication, The Seafood Industry. Covering all aspects of the commercial fish and shellfish industries - from harvest through consumption - the book thoroughly describes the commercial fishery of the western hemisphere. The international audience will also find the coverage accessible because, although species and regulations may differ, the techniques described are similar worldwide,. The second edition contains a significant expansion of the material included in the first edition. Examples include: high pressure processing; inclusion of additional major crustacean species of commerce; fishery centers and development programs; handling methods on fishing vessels; and new chapters on Toxins, Allergies, and Sensitivities; Composition and Quality; and Risk Management and HACCP; and Processing Fin Fish. The Seafood Industry: Species, Products, Processing, and Safety, comprehensive in scope and current with today's issues, will prove to be a great asset to any industry professional or seafood technologist working in the field.

Leseprobe

Contents

Cover

Dedication

Title Page

Copyright

Preface

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Contributors

1: A History of the Seafood Industry

The fish curing industry

Fish canning

Canning salmon

The shrimp fishery

Canning oysters, clams, and crabs

The fish canning industry

The haddock fishery

Early Pacific fisheries

The menhaden fishery

The whaling industry

An overview of our heritage

Further reading

2: Harvesting Techniques

Classification of harvesting techniques

Fishing optimization

Miscellaneous and experimental gear

Acknowledgment

Further reading

3: Groundfish

Introduction

Historical perspective

Species

Acknowledgments

References

Webliography

4: Pelagic Fish

Introduction

Species

Physical adaptation

Musculature

Preservation

Nutritional value

Labeling

Quality factors

Acknowledgments

References

Webliography

5: Major Cultured Species

Importance of aquaculture

Production environments and systems

Common aquacultured species

Conclusions

References

Webliography

6: Shellfish—Mollusks

Mollusk farms and fisheries

The mollusk and public health

West Coast

Atlantic and Gulf Coasts

Acknowledgment

References

Webliography

7: Shellfish—Crustaceans

Crabs

Shrimp

Lobster

Further reading

8: Underutilized (Latent) Fishery Species

History of research programs on underutilized (latent) fishery species

Fishery development foundations

Saltenstall-Kennedy fishery development funds and sea grant research programs on underutilized (latent) species

Examples of past and current underutilized (latent) species development efforts

Spin-offs from underutilized (latent) species research

Nongovernmental organization and consumer pressure for sustainable management

Future trends

Acknowledgments

References

Webilography

9: Processing Finfish

Filleting

Mince

Batters and breading

Acknowledgments

References

Webliography

10: Surimi and Fish Protein Isolate

Introduction

Fish protein isolate

References

11: Waste (By-Product) Utilization

Human consumption

Aquacultural, agricultural, and bulk food uses

Nonnutritional uses

References

12: Processing Mollusks

Processing for the live market

Processing for the fresh market

Further processing

Postharvest processes

Postharvest processing validation/verification guidance for Vibrio vulnificus and Vibrio parahaemolyticus

Flavoring agents from processing effluents

Acknowledgment

References

Further reading

13: Processing Crustaceans

Crabs

Lobster

Shrimp

Crawfish

Acknowledgment

References

Webliography

14: Freshwater Fish

Current status

Other fisheries

Markets/processing

Composition and quality

Selected species

Acknowledgments

Further reading

Webliography

15: Nutrition and Preparation

Introduction

Major nutrients

Nutrition labeling for seafood

Buying seafood

Preparation

Acknowledgment

Further reading

Webliography

16: Species Identification of Seafood

Significance of problem

Types of species substitution

Background

Comparison of protein- and DNA-based methods

DNA-based methods

General summary of DNA-based methods

Current regulatory activity

Current commercial applications

Online resources

Challenges and emerging trends

Conclusions

References

Further reading

Webliography

17: Packaging

Why package?

Package selection

Handling characteristics of packaging materials

Acknowledgment

References

Further reading

18: Freezing

Factors affecting frozen shelf life

Storage temperature

Packaging

Thawing

Temperature indicators

Acknowledgment

References

Further reading

19: Handling of Fresh Fish

Review of fish spoilage

Temperature effect

Bruises and cuts

Bacterial contamination

Washing and sanitizing

Further reading

20: Shellfish—Biological Safety

Shrimp

Oysters

Mussels

Hepatitis A

Toxins

Parasites

Conclusions

References

21: Allergens, Decomposition, and Toxins

Allergens

Decomposition

Seafood toxins

Distribution

Concepts and strategies for managing seafood toxins

History

Summary

References

Further reading

22: Cleaning and Sanitation

Cleaning

Sanitizing

Writing sanitation standard operating procedures

Acknowledgments

Further reading

Webliography

23: Implementing the Seafood HACCP Regulation

Overview of the seafood HACCP regulation and principles

HACCP training

Internet HACCP resources

Generic HACCP plans and forms

Discussion list

HACCP inspection

Webliography

24: Aquaculture

History of aquaculture

Types of aquaculture

Advantages and disadvantages of aquaculture

Basic requirements of aquaculture

Aquaculture production

Culture systems and techniques

Current issues related to aquaculture production

Future of aquaculture

Acknowledgment

References

25: Waste Treatment

Seafood wastewater

Wastewater guidelines

Waste treatment

Residuals management

Conclusions

Acknowledgment

References

Further reading

26: Fish Meal and Oil

Introduction

Production of fish meal

Production of crude fish oil

Production of stickwater concentrate

Other production methods

Pollution control

Markets

References

Further reading

Webliography

27: Regulations

Food and Drug Administration

Poisonous and deleterious substances

Good manufacturing practices

Nutrient content descriptors

National Marine Fisheries Service

Lacey Act

US Customs

Other legislation

State regulations

Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference

Federal Trade Commission

Appendix

Further reading

28: Smoked, Cured, and Dried Fish

Economic importance

Principles of smoking, drying, and curing

Smoked fish processing

Spoilage and contamination of smoked fish

Dried salted fish

Government regulations

Quality control

Acknowledgment

References

Further reading

29: Transportation, Distribution, Warehousing, and Food Security

Transportation

Distributors that take ownership of product

Warehousing

Food security guidelines

Further reading

Index

This book is dedicated to the memory of

Kevin P. Granata

1961–2007

Dr. Granata was recognized for his scholarly, creative, and innovative research and teaching programs in biomechanics, specializing in muscular-skeletal dynamics and control.

Beginning in 2003, Dr. Granata was a Professor at Virginia Tech in the Engineering Science and Mechanics Department as well as the Virginia Tech-Wake Forest University School of Biomedical Engineering and Sciences.

A devoted husband and father, Dr. Granata was also dedicated to mentorship of his undergraduate and graduate students. He also took time from his demanding academic life to serve as a Boy Scout leader and a lacrosse coach.

While Dr. Granata will always be missed by his family, colleagues, and students, the memory of his loss will be overshadowed by the enthusiasm, thoughtfulness, and dedication to excellence he brought to all endeavors.

This edition first published 2012 © 2012 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. First edition © 1990 by Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell's publishing program has been merged with Wiley's global Scientific, Technical and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell.

Registered office: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial offices: 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK 2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of Ronald J. Roberts to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The seafood industry : species, products, processing, and safety / edited by Linda Ankenman Granata, George J. Flick, Jr., and Roy E. Martin. – 2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8138-0258-9 (hbk. : alk. paper) 1. Seafood industry. I. Granata, Linda Ankenman. II. Flick, George J. III. Martin, Roy E. HD9450.5.S39 2012 338.3′727–dc23 2011037448

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Preface

Although there are excellent books on specific aspects of the seafood industry, few, if any, offer both the breadth and depth of information that the editors and authors of The Seafood Industry, 2nd edition, provide here.

The Seafood Industry, 2nd edition, is designed to cover the spectrum of seafood topics, taking the products from the water to the dinner plate and every stop in between. Information and insights into commercially important species of finfish and shellfish and their handling and processing are furnished. New chapters added for this edition include one on HACCP regulation, surimi, waste (by-product) utilization, species identification, biological safety of shellfish, and toxins, allergens, and sensitivities.

The information is written so that the processor, wholesale buyer, retailer, or consumer can understand it and put it to practical application. Yet, the student and the scientist can find much valuable information within the various chapters.

The editors and authors have made every effort to furnish the most up-to-date information and technologies available. However, as with any dynamic industry, change is constant. Fishery stocks ebb and flow, consumption patterns shift, new technologies are devised and implemented, and government rules and regulations are rewritten and enacted.

In seeking the best information available, chapter authors were selected from among the most knowledgeable seafood experts from around the United States.

Although this book is intended to encompass the vast topic of seafood and the industry built around this resource, certain limitations had to be imposed. The materials focus primarily on the industry in the United States, although innovations or activities in other countries have an impact on the US industry; those are covered. Each chapter in The Seafood Industry could receive—and in many cases has received—book length treatments. However, for this text, the editors decided to provide information on as wide an array of topics as possible and then to give each topic as much detail as space permitted.

We have drawn together what we feel is the broadest spectrum of information currently available on this dynamic industry. It is our sincere hope that this information will serve the seafood industry, those interested in this important industry, and the consumer.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

As with any undertaking of this size and scope, there are many people who need to be thanked and whose efforts need to be recognized. First, we owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the various authors who have readily given their valuable time and expertise to make this book what it is.

We would also like to acknowledge the National Sea Grant College Program and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture for their financial support that helped make this publication possible. In addition, two individuals at Virginia Tech should be singled out. We would like to thank Sarah Diersing and Sheila Holliman, who also read over the manuscript to check for punctuation, format, and spelling.

Contributors

LeeAnn Applewhite. APL Sciences, Inc., Gainesville, FL.

Peter J. Bechtel. USDA Agricultural Research Service, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK.

Anthony P. Bimbo. International Fisheries Technology, Kilmarnock, VA.

Gregory D. Boardman. Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Brian G. Bosworth. Catfish Genetics Research Unit, USDA, Stoneville, MS.

Laura S. Douglas. Food Science & Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Robin Downey. Pacific Coast Oyster Growers Association, Olympia, WA.

George J. Flick, Jr. Food Science & Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Linda Ankenman Granata. Food Science & Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Sherwood Hall. FDA, College Park, MD.

Doris T. Hicks. Sea Grant College Program, University of Delaware, Rehoboth Beach, DE.

Michael Jahncke. Virginia Seafood Agriculture Research & Extension Center, Hampton, VA.

Joseph E. Marcy. FS&T Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Daniel Kauffman. Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research & Extension Center, Hampton, VA.

Edward Kolbe. FIC Experimental Station, Oregon State University, Portland, OR.

Donald E. Kramer. Alaska Sea Grant, Marine Advisory Service, Vancouver, British Columbia.

David D. Kuhn. Food Science & Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Lori S. Marsh. Food Science & Technology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

Roy E. Martin. Hickory Ridge Court, Spring Hill, FL.

Michael Morrissey. Food Innovation Center, FIC Experimental Station, Oregon State University, Portland, OR.

Michael J. Oesterling. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Clayton House, Gloucester Point, VA.

Jae W. Park. Seafood Research and Education Center, Oregon State University, Astoria, OR.

Nina Gritzai Parkinson. NGP Consulting, Brentwood, CA.

Lyn D. Peters. (Retired from) Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

Rosalee Rasmussen. APL Sciences, Inc., Gainesville, FL.

Thomas E. Rippen. Sea Grant Extension Program, Richard A. Henson Center, Princess Anne, MD.

Denise Skonberg. Department of Food Science & Human Nutrition, University of Maine, Orono, ME.

Pamela D. Tom. Food Science and Technology, Sea Grant Extension Program, Davis, CA.

1

A History of the Seafood Industry

Roy E. Martin

Humans fished before the dawn of written history using bird's beaks for hooks and plant stalks for line. Early cave pictures show drawings of fish and fishing. Mounds of cast-off shells from prerecorded times have been found in China, Denmark, Brazil, and the United States. Although fishing was difficult because of a lack of efficient gear, it was easy to walk out at low tide and pick up shellfish, or spear fish in shallow water.

As populations grew, people tended to settle near the sea or large river systems where fish and shellfish were readily abundant as food, and sea-lanes became important for commerce, trade, communication, and transport. The need for more food and bigger fish encouraged fishermen to develop new gear design and more efficient methods of fishing and to travel even farther from shore. As a result of larger catches, the fishing enterprise expanded from a small boat, local village business to one that permitted additional onshore people to enter the business.

Fishing was often the reason, accidentally or not, for discovering new lands, finding new travel routes using trade as an excuse for expansion, and sometimes going to war. As nations organized large fishing fleets, they became sea powers.

The enormous fishing grounds of the North Atlantic lured European fishermen westward even before 1500. In fact, commercial fishing was the first industry of the New World; cod was the draw of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. So numerous were these fish that in the early 1600s the Englishman Bartholomew Gosnold named a nearby peninsula Cape Cod. Fish were salted and packed in barrels, then shipped back to England. The state seal of Massachusetts has a codfish on its crest and shield.

The fishing industry is diverse and many segments developed independently.

The fish curing industry

The fish curing industry of the North Atlantic coast of North America dates back to the year 1500, at least, and legends of activities go back even earlier. An extensive fish curing industry was carried on for more than 100 years before there was a permanent settlement. As early as 1580, over three hundred ships from Europe were salting cod in this area. Newfoundland was colonized because of the fish curing industry, which remains a factor in the province's economic life.

Early colonists in New England and the Maritime Provinces could not have survived without the salt cod and the smoked herring they prepared. Although fish meant food to these colonists, cured fish soon became their capital resource and their stock in trade for purchasing supplies. Cod, their most abundant fish, could be manufactured into a durable protein food product, withstand the primitive shipping and storage conditions of the day, and was comparatively low in price. Other cured fish such as smoked halibut and herring, pickled sturgeon, and salt salmon were soon being shipped abroad. Out of this grew the so-called triangular trade: salt fish to Europe; manufactured goods from Europe to the West Indies; and sugar, rum, and molasses to New England.

The trade in salt fish stimulated other industries, and capital was gradually accumulated so that the colonists could go into the shipping business. Before the end of the sixteenth century, more efficient, faster vessels were developed to meet the needs of an expanding fishery.

The fish curing industry continued to grow and prosper, dominating the economic life of the New England colonies in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The large amount of money to be made led to disputes between the British and the French over fishing grounds and fish curing locations. Both groups wanted to secure this trade for themselves. Attempts were made to establish fishing boundaries, but they were poorly defined, and fishing rights over a wide area was the cause of frequent bickering, sometimes flaring up into undeclared warfare. The fishermen and curers of New England and Nova Scotia played an important part in England's conquest of Canada, because for them the fishing rights meant life or death.

The disputes did not end with the ousting of the French, but continued between the New England colonists and the English. The English Parliament in 1775 prohibited the New England colonies from trading directly with foreign countries and prevented New England vessels from fishing on the banks off Newfoundland, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and on the coasts of Labrador and Nova Scotia where they had been accustomed to fishing. This restriction meant ruin to the New England fish curing industry, and the edict was one of the causes of the Revolutionary War.

The treaty of peace negotiated in 1783 was delayed because the American delegates insisted on securing favorable fishery rights. They regarded these rights as so important that they refused to sign a general treaty of peace that left the fishing rights for later adjudication. Finally, the American delegation obtained a treaty article on fisheries that granted favorable conditions to the United States.

The New England fish curing industry generally prospered under the new republic and was able to secure salt cod markets in southern Europe and the Mediterranean. Disputes again arose with Great Britain over trade, the interpretation of fishery rights, and the conscription of American fisherman and seamen into the Royal Navy. Restrictions and embargoes were imposed by both Great Britain and the United States, resulting in a decline in the salt fish industry after 1807. The War of 1812 almost ruined the industry; the war was so unpopular among shipping, commercial, and fish curing groups that there was a move toward secession in some New England states.

At the end of the War of 1812, the British claimed that the war abrogated the treaty of 1783; the United States claimed that the treaty was still valid. The British seized some American fishing vessels, and it seemed for a time that a new war might break out. Tension was eased by the signing of a new fishery convention in 1818. However, it was followed by a whole series of disputes about interpretation, at times resulting in severe diplomatic tension for the United States with Great Britain and with Canada.

Trouble occurred less frequently during the last decades of the nineteenth century as refrigeration developed and wider markets were created in the United States for fresh fish, making salting and drying of fish on the northeastern coast less important.

Fish canning

An overview of the US fish preserving industry during the past half century shows a decline in production of cured fish but an almost continuous growth in the canning industry.

The first record of canned seafood in the United States was in 1815 when Ezra Daggert and Thomas Kensett canned salmon, lobsters, and oysters on a site near what is now Battery Park in New York City. In 1825, Kensett applied for US patents for “preserving of animal, vegetable, and other perishable foods,” but these patents were not granted until some 10 years later, presumably because patent officials doubted the idea's practicality. For years following these early canning operations, there was no significant development in seafood canning.

The production increase was gradual over a 25-year period beginning in 1844. The first large increase in demand came during the Civil War when preserved foods were needed for the troops. This increased demand also created additional consumers for canned seafood. Men who became acquainted with these products in the army demanded canned foods on their return home and introduced them to their neighbors.

Kensett was the first to break away from home kitchen methods and deserves credit for developing the first canned product, oysters, to receive wide distribution. The pioneer development of the industry in the Chesapeake Bay area, the first important canning center, is due to his efforts. Others are said to have engaged in the industry in the Baltimore area before Kensett, and it is believed that oysters were canned as early as 1819. However, the first systematic effort at large-scale development was made by Kensett in 1844 when he began packing oysters in Baltimore. Oysters were the first canned product that became popular. Large inland cities could get fresh Baltimore oysters packed in ice through the winter, but people in smaller communities seldom enjoyed such a luxury. The countryman's greatest treat when he went to town was an oyster stew. Baltimore and Boston firms canned oysters, so they would keep for months and could be bought at any country grocery store by people who had never eaten a fresh oyster.

Tin containers for packaging processed foods were first used in the 1840s. Sardines were first canned in Maine about 1850; a turtle cannery was established in Florida in 1866; a cannery for menhaden was established on Long Island in 1872; and it is known that mackerel, clams, lobsters, and crabs were being canned by 1880. It is probable that tuna, alewives, and shad were not canned until early in the twentieth century. The production of canned products in the United States and Alaska in 1880 had an estimated value of $15 million.

Canning salmon

Salmon canning industry, one of the most important canning industries, had its beginnings during the Civil War period. Although it is claimed that the first salmon canned on the American continent was the Atlantic salmon packed in St. Johns, New Brunswick, in 1839, the salmon fishery was never of economic importance on the Atlantic Coast. The industry really began in California, where George and William Hume with A.S. Hapgood started the Pacific salmon canning industry. The Hume Brothers, who had worked as fishermen at their home in Maine, went to California as Forty-niners. They noticed that salmon were plentiful in the Sacramento River and believed that money might be made canning the fish. They went back to Maine on a visit, persuaded Hapgood, a lobster canner, to return west with them, and the first Pacific salmon pack was made in Sacramento in 1864.

Using these primitive methods, 2000 cases of salmon were canned that first year and sold at 5 dollars per dozen cans to a San Francisco merchant. Reacting to reports of extremely favorable conditions on the Columbia River, the Humes moved to Eagle Cliff, Washington, and made the first pack of Columbia River salmon in 1866.

As a result, the rush to pack salmon was on, and within a few years hundreds of operations were set up on the Columbia River and in Alaska. Having to make cans by hand hampered operations, but because of the great demand, the pack by 1876 was 450,000 cases.

As the sale of canned salmon increased steadily, the industry sought new and profitable locations, first at New Westminster on the Fraser River in British Columbia in 1867; then at Mukilteo, on Puget Sound, Washington Territory, in 1877; and, although Alaska is today the most important salmon canning area, its first cannery was not built until 1878 at Klawak, on Prince of Wales Islands.

Today, consumers have many canned fish and seafood products available, thanks to the ingenuity of the fishery industry. Canned fishery products total more than 750 million lbs and are worth over $1.0 billion.

The shrimp fishery

The shrimp industry, as it is known today, began off the coasts of Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Around 1915, the first shrimp trawl was employed from open skiffs converted from the bluefish hook and line fishery. Gasoline engines became the major source of power during the 1920s. A small single otter trawl was manually operated from the vessel. Flat nets of a very simple design were utilized during the early days. Interestingly, this trawl proved so efficient that it is still used today.

During the 1930s, diesel engines were first utilized aboard shrimp boats, eventually making it possible to use larger and more powerful vessels. The use of larger trawls coincided with this important evolutionary process in the shrimping industry. The large offshore vessels used today were not necessary then because fisheries were confined to inshore waters.

Expansion of fisheries occurred significantly after World War II aided by the availability of large war surplus diesel engines. Numerous fishermen entered the fishery during the postwar boom.

The offshore white shrimp grounds were fished on a significant scale. Fishermen regularly ventured into water more than 18.3 m (60 ft) deep in pursuit of shrimp. White shrimp became such a highly exploited resource that production declined.

During the late 1940s, several changes contributed to the evolution of shrimping vessels and gear. Declining stocks of white shrimp led fishermen to direct their efforts toward catching brown shrimp, a deepwater fishery, that when established changed the requirements of vessels and shrimping methods. The establishment of brown shrimp fisheries also generated interest in the pink shrimp that stocks Florida's Tortugas grounds.

The increased interest in shrimp led to improvements in gear technology. First, the two-seam balloon trawl was introduced (1947) in the Gulf. This net, with its redesigned jib, was an improvement over the earlier flat net, producing a better overhand and more even mesh strain than the flat net. Greater horsepower meant larger trawl capabilities and increased harvesting capacities. Numerous fishermen increased their trawl sizes, vessels of 15.2–16.8 m (50–55 ft) and up to 18.3 m (60 ft) were beginning to appear at the close of the 1940s. During this period, some electrical devices, including fathometers and automatic pilots, also came into common use.

Perhaps more advancements were introduced into the shrimp industry in the 1950s than during any other period. This decade saw further increases in horsepower, electronics, and gear improvements. The four-seam balloon (semi balloon) trawl was introduced in 1950. It spread more effectively than the flat and two-seam balloons and maintained a better shape in the water.

Spec Harris of Freeport, Louisiana, designed the western jib, which is essentially a flat net with modification to the corner pieces. It is still the most commonly used trawl in the Texas Gulf shrimp fishery.

The shift to deepwater brown and pink shrimp grounds necessitated larger vessels, a need compounded by the discovery and development of the fishing grounds off Mexico. A distant water fleet required larger vessels that could remain away from port for an extended period of time. Increased power, often surpassing 200 horsepower, coincided with larger vessel development.

The most important gear modification during the 1950s was the conversion to double rigged vessels. Two smaller trawls actually caught more shrimp than an equal size single trawl. This concept created a more efficient onboard handling operation and enhanced safety at sea. Also, during this period, synthetic twines came into use, increasing strength and durability of trawls.

Advancements in marine electronics continued. Virtually all vessels began using depth sounders. Radio capability was the most significant electronic change during the decade. With radios becoming common, a communications link was established that significantly enhanced harvesting efficiency. The ability to communicate with other vessels aided extensively in the location of shrimp, and greater safety at sea was ensured. Radio direction finders were installed on a number of vessels.

During the 1960s, increasing horsepower and a corresponding tendency to use larger vessels were the most significant changes to occur. Expansion of fisheries into South America greatly influenced vessel length; shrimp trawlers 22.2 m (73 ft) in length were regularly constructed.

Some larger Texas trawlers began towing a third rig from the stern of their vessels, using an A-frame to accommodate this modification, but fishermen had mixed results with the technique. The primary difficulty was that of a “robbing” effect from the trawls being towed too close together. Vessels with longer than usual outriggers were able to overcome this problem.

Further implementation of electronics continued. Radar came into use, and depth sounders and related equipment were improved. Some fishermen began experimenting with military surplus Loran equipment and rapidly identified the benefits of the navigational devices.

During the early 1970s, length of vessels increased more than the amount of engine horsepower. Although several types of engines with larger horsepower were installed on some boats, most new engines remained in the 365 horsepower range. A remarkable increase in the number of steel hull vessels occurred, although wooden vessels continued to be added to the industry at a significant rate, and the first fiberglass and aluminum trawlers entered the fisheries.

In roughly the same period, Gulf fishermen perfected a trawling technique utilizing two small nets, twin trawls, on the single cable. Again, the theory was that two smaller nets are more efficient than a single larger one. This gear modification significantly increased trawl efficiency, and the majority of Gulf shrimp trawlers soon adopted this technique, utilizing four trawls per vessel instead of two.

Another gear modification was tried although not generally accepted, but recent technological advancements may present new opportunities. The former Bureau of Commercial Fisheries gear unit developed an electric shrimp trawl designed to shock burrowing shrimp from the seabed. Experiments proved that brown shrimp could be harvested during the daytime utilizing this gear. This innovation could have been an excellent opportunity for expanding potential shrimping efforts because brown shrimp could be harvested only at night. Several trawlers experimenting with this gear achieved significant daytime catches. However, a few inherent problems with the system resulted in a profound inconsistency of catch. Because of its high expense and inconsistencies, the electronic trawl was ultimately abandoned. Recent modifications to the electronic shrimp trawl have been introduced in the United Kingdom where several vessels have adopted its use.

Improvements in electronics increased shrimping productivity. In addition to radar and depth recorders, the navigational equipment Loran A became a universal tool in the shrimping fleet, providing locations of productive fishing grounds and helping fishermen avoid numerous hazards to trawl gear.

More recently, several other gear changes have been introduced to the shrimping industry. The National Marine Fisheries Service developed a Trawl Efficiency Device, an apparatus to exclude bycatch (any species other than the targeted species) from shrimp trawls, it is also known as a Turtle Excluder Device (TED). The TED consists of a frame that is installed between the body and cod end (closed saclike part) of the trawl. Shrimp are allowed to pass through the apparatus while larger fish, turtles, and debris are rerouted through an exit.

Rapid improvement of marine electronics occurred in the early 1980s. The Loran C Navigational System's increased accuracy has aided shrimping operations. Track plotters associated with Loran C have proven effective in defining concentrations of shrimp and trawlable bottom areas. Another electronic device, the depth recorder, has been greatly improved. Recent production of chromascopes, machines that record in color, assist in defining bottom types and fish compositions of the seabed. These recorders have increased shrimp harvesting.

On the processing end of the business, the freezing of shrimp was probably the single most important factor governing the progress of the shrimp industry. The adaptability of shrimp to the freezing process allowed more time for marketing and distribution and eased the urgency that previously dictated sales policies and prices for the producer. The growth of the entire frozen food industry resulted in wider distribution for shrimp. Facilities for handling frozen vegetables and fruits were likewise suited for handling frozen seafood.

Canning oysters, clams, and crabs

Although Baltimore was the center of the oyster canning industry for many years, oysters are packed there only occasionally today. The catch in the Chesapeake Bay region has decreased greatly, and it is now more profitable to market these oysters fresh. The greater portion of the oyster pack is now prepared on the Gulf Coast. The most recent development in the oyster industry is the establishment of oyster canning on the Pacific Coast. The introduction of the Japanese or “Pacific” oyster created a surplus, which was unmarketable in the raw condition. After several years of experimental work, this oyster was canned commercially in 1931. The pack in that year was 7930 cases, increasing to 118,853 cases in 1936.

The first clam cannery in the United States was started in 1878 at Pine Point, Maine. The pack of canned clam products was small for some years because of considerable difficulty with discoloration, but production slowly increased when this problem was overcome. P.F. Halferty developed a method for canning minced razor clams about 1900, building up a commercial clam canning industry in Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. The inclusion of minced clams, broth, and clam chowder in the list of products increased the value of canned clams until now where they are fifth in order of importance of canned fishery products, thereby displacing oysters.

Crab was first canned in the United States by James McMenamin of Norfolk, Virginia, in 1878. The greatest difficulty was with discoloration. In 1936, a method to overcome discoloration was developed, and in 1938, the Harris Company packed the common or blue crab of the Atlantic Coast commercially. Although the crab canning process is said to have been developed in 1892, the Japanese industry was not established on a commercial scale until 1908. Japanese canned crab began to enter the US markets in appreciable quantities during World War I. In 1931, imports amounted to almost double the domestic production of fresh and canned crabmeat. A domestic crab canning industry has been developed in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington; processing and other technical difficulties have been overcome and a market has been developed in the Pacific Coast states.

The fish canning industry

Because of the large supply of groundfish in the North Atlantic, numerous attempts have been made to develop a canning industry, but they have not been particularly successful because of competition with other canned fishery products or insufficient advertising. Cod and haddock products such as fish flakes, fish cakes or balls, and finnan haddie (smoked haddock) have not found a wide market outside the New England area and are packed on a limited scale. Fish cakes were first packed in Boston in 1878, and finnan haddie was first packed about 1890. Fish flakes, or “salad fish,” the flaked meat of cod and haddock, are believed to have been developed by the Burnham and Morrill Company of Portland, Maine, in 1898.

At the turn of the century, the industry was experimenting with a variety of products; pickled sturgeon, carp, shark meat, and menhaden that are not found on the market today. Some of these packs did not make good products; others were not in sufficient demand; in other instances, the cost of raw material became too great for profitable operation.

In the year 1900, the annual pack of canned fishery products was less than half of what is produced today, and it was thought that production could not be increased greatly or even maintained. At the same time, these gloomy predictions were being made, the canning of fishery products was actually at the threshold of its greatest development.

Canned tuna is one of the more recently developed canned fishery products, first packed commercially in 1909. The packing of tuna began at the Southern California Fish Company, which began experiments in 1905. The raw material was albacore, which when cooked resembled chicken in taste and flavor. This characteristic flavor added impetus to the experiments, but it was not until 1907 that the efforts were rewarded. The first successful pack was produced in 1909 when 2000 cases were packed and marketed.

Mackerel was canned in small quantities in New England as early as 1843, but its introduction into the general canned food market did not occur until 1927 when George Ogawa put up a pack of 10,725 cases of California mackerel “salmon style,” priced to compete with cheaper varieties of salmon. Production of Pacific mackerel increased to 388,500 cases in 1928 and reached a peak of 1,795,700 cases of 48 one-pound (454 g) cans in 1935.

Sardines were first packed in France in 1834, and by 1860, a substantial market had been created for French sardines in the United States. Efforts were made to establish an American industry in 1871 utilizing young menhaden as raw material. In 1877, Julius Wolff began canning small herring at Eastport, Maine, and is credited with starting the first really successful American sardine cannery. By 1906, a large number of sardine canners were operating in northern Maine and nearby Canada. Several efforts were made during the 1890s to establish sardine canning on Puget Sound or in Alaska where large quantities of herring were available, but all of these operations were short-lived.

The famed California sardine industry began in 1900 when Frank E. Booth moved to Monterey, California. Booth and his father were already involved in the canning of salmon in their Pittsburg, California, plant. It was his background in the canning and packing of fish that prompted Booth to consider the possibility of canning the abundant Monterey Bay sardine. Upon his move to the bayside community, Booth founded the F.E. Booth Company in a plant near the aged and historic Monterey Customs House.

Not long after Booth launched his California sardines, a second man, also destined to become an important figure in Monterey's multimillion dollar sardine industry, arrived. Knute Hovden, a recent immigrant from Norway, a graduate of the Norwegian National Fisheries College, and a skillfully trained professional in the fish packing field, teamed with Booth. Under them, the highly competitive and extremely profitable Monterey Bay sardine canning industry continued to develop and expand.

With Booth and Hovden perfecting the canning phase, the biggest problem became getting a steady supply of fish. Able to handle 5 tons (4.5 × 103 kg) of sardines per day, but with an inconsistent daily catch, Booth and Hovden sought ways to increase and ensure the size of the catch.

In 1904, Pietro Ferrante arrived in Monterey with many years of fishing experience, and quickly gained a reputation as both a man of vision and of considerable fishing talent. It was only natural that Ferrante soon joined forces with Booth and Hovden. Ferrante was convinced that a new approach to catching sardines was needed if they were to reap the bounty of the bay. Remembering the lampara boat and net method of fishing he had been familiar with in the Mediterranean, Ferrante redesigned the lampara net and adapted it for Monterey's deepwater bay. The lampara net is designed to encircle an entire school of fish. The word lampara was derived from the Italian word lampo, meaning lightning, because the net was designed for a fast cast and haul. Ferrante also urged other Italian fishermen in California to come to Monterey and join him in the hunt for sardines.

With the aid of the lampara net and with the knowledge and skill of the newly arrived fishermen, the sleepy bay community experienced a gradual but significant change. By 1913, the canning industry had “come of age,” and was no longer looked upon as being in the crude and experimental stage. In keeping up with the canners, the fishing crews were catching as many as 25 tons (2.3 × 104 kg) of sardines in a single night. (The ideal fishing conditions were on dark moonless nights when the fishermen could best spot the phosphorescent glow of a school of sardines and, in turn, know where to place their nets.)

With the supply of fish no longer a problem, Hovden branched out and opened his own cannery in 1914 on what was then an uncluttered stretch of Monterey beach. Others followed, and it was not long before the shoreline was lined with the noises and smells of several canneries. By 1918, Monterey boasted a total of nine canning plants and packed a total of 1.4 million cases of sardines as compared with a mere 75,000 cases 3 years before.

The early 1920s were the peak years of the lampara boat and net method of fishing. With the introduction of the half-ring net in 1925, the half-ring boat also appeared. This boat differed only slightly from the lampara boat, boasting a winch, a mast, and a boom. With the use of the rings, more fish could be caught per haul as the net rings pursed (or pocketed) the net, thus trapping the fish and making it difficult for them to escape.

In time, the lampara boats and the half-ring boats became outmoded with the introduction of the popular purse seiner, whose net, when full of trapped fish, formed a purse. With the word seine describing the type of net commonly used by the sardine fishermen, the vessel became known as a purse seiner. Varying in size, the largest of the purse seiners approached 30.5 m (100 ft) and carried nets capable of encircling the width of a football field and dropping to a depth equaling the height of a ten-story building. This new class of boat was capable of fishing hundreds of miles at sea and carrying 9.07 × 104 kg to 1.36 × 105 kg (100–150 tons) of fish. With the purse seiner, the sardine fishing in and around the Monterey Bay area took on an added dimension.

Through the 1930s and into the 1940s, the Monterey fishing fleet and its supporting cast of canneries continued to grow and prosper. In 1930, the catch was 1.44 × 108 kg (159,000 tons); by 1935, it had jumped to 2.09 × 108 kg (230,000 tons); and during the early 1940s, there were years when the catch approached the almost unbelievable figure of 2.27 × 108 kg (a quarter of a million tons).

With the constant and abundant supply of fish, cannery operators learned that not only was there money to be made in canning fish but in the processing of fish by-products as well. With fish meal becoming widely used for poultry and livestock feed, as well as being in demand as fertilizer, the oil from the fish (which at one time was considered waste) was sought for use in the manufacture of soap, paint mixer, vitamins, glycerin (for ammunition), shortening, salad oil, and the tanning of leather. By 1945, Monterey boasted 19 canneries and 20 reduction plants for the development of fish by-products, and a fishing fleet of over one hundred vessels. During this period, Monterey was known as the sardine capital of the world, and in total tonnage ranked third among the world's major fishing ports second only to Stavanger, Norway, and Hull, England.

During 1939, the catch was 1.95 × 106 kg (215,000 tons or 430 million lbs) of sardines, which with an average of approximately three fish to the pound represented a staggering 1.2 billion individual sardines. If the total number of sardines caught were placed end to end, the row would stretch 327,592 km (203,600 mi) a distance nearly equal to that from the earth to the moon. The same row of fish if placed end to end around the equator would circle the earth eight times with over 5792 km (3600 mi) of fish left over.

Although 1945 was the high point of Monterey's sardine industry, 1946 marked the beginning of its decline. Fish continued to be caught and canneries continued to work, but the handwriting was on the wall. The 1946 catch was nearly 9.1 × 107 kg (100,000 tons) under the 1945 mark, with the 1947 catch being over 9.1 × 107 kg (100,000 tons) less than that. The 1948 catch plummeted to a disastrous 1.3 × 107 kg (14,000 tons). Much of that amount was trucked to the Monterey canneries from more abundant fishing grounds to the south.

In 1949, the industry, for unknown reasons, received a most welcome shot in the arm as the catch jumped to 37.2 × 106 kg (41,000 tons). During the 1950 season, the fleet recorded a catch of 119 × 106 kg (132,000 tons). Even though the 1950 catch was over 9.1 × 107 kg (100,000 tons) less than the catch of 1945, the industry's dollar turnover was the greatest in its history. As the 1950 season came to a close, for all intents and purposes, so did Monterey's sardine industry. The 1951 catch was embarrassingly small, and by 1952 canneries were closing at such a rapid rate that only a brief mention of their closing made the local papers.

As the canneries closed, many of the purse seiners found their way to various southern ports where sardines were still to be caught. With the harbor relatively empty of purse seiners and much of Cannery Row on the auction block, Monterey's sardine industry became little more than a memory. The industry had gone from boom to bust in less than 50 years because of polluted water, warmer climates, changes in currents, recurring cycles, and, of course, the distinct possibility that the once abundant sardines were simply fished out.

The haddock fishery

Compared with the cod fishery, which was centuries old, a substantial commercial haddock fishery was developed much later in New England. Cod were considered best for salting (haddock were unsuitable for that purpose), but use of ice made trade in fresh fish possible and haddock came into its own, growing quickly in public esteem. Haddock fillets cut and frozen at dockside soon found acceptance far inland.

On the haddock grounds, dory fishing with hook-and-line yielded slowly to trawling after the turn of the century. Beam trawls were supplanted by otter trawls, improved versions of which are now the main commercial gear. However, hook-and-line fishermen persisted alongside trawler men for a long time. In the late 1920s, roughly half the catch was still taken by longlines, and a small fraction still is.

Between 1891 and 1901, US haddock landings averaged nearly 2.5 × 107 kg (27,500 tons) annually. Catches grew in size with an increasing number of trawlers through the 1920s until a peak of 119 × 106 kg (132,000 tons) was reached in 1929. Operating under the mistaken notion that fish resources were infinite, there was an all-out effort to harvest as much as possible to meet the demands of the marketplace. After 1929, haddock resources showed signs of stress. Fishermen and fishery scientists worried as catches dropped sharply, and many fishermen were forced to switch to other species. In the 1930s, the US Bureau of Fisheries initiated biological studies of haddock and a new system of statistical reporting.

When fishermen stopped over fishing haddock, average US catches settled to about 6.35 × 107 kg (70,000 tons) annually, 4.7 × 107 kg (52,000 tons) of these from Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine. These levels, close to the estimated long-term sustainable catch, prevailed from the mid-1930s to 1960.

In 1949, it was agreed by all countries concerned that scientific management of the fish resources in this region be carried out cooperatively, and a treaty that year founded the International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries (ICNAF). Haddock off the US coast were not a target of European fishermen in ICNAF's early years; nevertheless, haddock stocks soon benefited from ICNAF research and regulation. Investigations of the effects of trawl mesh size on catches showed that enlarged mesh openings would reduce waste of undersized groundfish. When new mesh regulations were issued in 1953, harvesting became more efficient and discards of small haddock were fewer.

During the 1960s, unprecedented numbers of foreign vessels, many from the Soviet Union, appeared on the principal haddock grounds off Georges Bank. At first, the Soviets mainly sought Atlantic herring and silver hake, but in the mid-1960s, their attention was drawn to large numbers of young haddock spawned in 1962 and 1963. At the same time, US and Canadian fishermen intensified their own efforts to catch haddock. The result was an all-time peak catch in 1965 of 165,000 tons, three times the estimated annual sustainable yield for Georges Bank. The collapse of the resource followed soon after.

ICNAF moved to reverse the disaster, making major spawning grounds off limits to trawlers in the spring and cutting the allowable catch for 1970 and 1971 to 1.1 × 107 kg (12,000 tons) from Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine. This number was halved during four of the five succeeding years; in 1974, it was set at zero, with a bycatch allowance of 5.4 × 106 kg (6000 tons). Recovery of haddock stocks began, but too slowly for New England fishermen. They joined in support of a new law providing more direct control over exploitation of traditional resources. In this way, collapse of the Georges Bank haddock resource played a significant part in enactment of the present “200 mile-limit (322 km) law,” the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (MFCMA).

Under MFCMA, the United States took unilateral control of most fish and shellfish within a 322 km (200 mi) zone off the coast, and management was required to be based on “optimum yield” (maximum sustainable yield modified by certain economic, social, and ecological considerations). Eight Regional Fishery Management Councils came into being. Management of the haddock stock fell to the New England Council, which gave it top priority. Optimum yield, in the council's judgment, would be the yield that would most effectively speed recovery of the stocks. So, they set this limit at 5636 metric tons (6200 tons) to be taken only incidentally when fishing for other species. Of this total, 5454.5 metric tons (6000 tons) were designated for commercial harvest, and 181.8 metric tons (200 tons) for recreational fishermen.

The 322 km (200 mi) declaration gave the United States control over the destiny of its industry. With management authority over its coastal zone and the decision-making authority over the fish resources within it, the United States could take the steps necessary to ensure future resource supply through effective conservation measures.

As the new council took over, the haddock 1975 year class was the first good one in years. Assessments in 1977 showed it to be much stronger than the overall average, and many times stronger than those produced during the years of collapse. Haddock were so plentiful that fishermen on some grounds could avoid them only by keeping their nets out of the water. Catch limits had suddenly become quite impractical, but they were cumbersome to change under MFCMA. Massive discarding at sea was one result; misreporting of catches was another. Council managers could not change limits until November 1977, and by that time much damage had been done. Thousands of tons of haddock had been wasted and masses of data vital for management planning lost.

Thereafter, constraints on the fishery were progressively eased. By the 1979–1980 fishing year, optimum yield for Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine had been raised to 2.95 × 107 kg (32,500 tons) on the strength of the 1975 year class, and 1979 survey results revealed that still another good year class, from 1978, would recruit to the Georges Bank fishery in 1980. With two such year classes in the water, there was reason to hope for recovery of New England's haddock fishery. Unfortunately, recruitment did not continue to improve; subsequent year classes have been weak, adding little to the resource. Evidence shows stocks sinking again toward levels seen a decade ago. Recovery may require the kind of circumstances for recruitment success that occurs rarely.

Early Pacific fisheries

Early fisheries on the Pacific did not affect US international relations to the same extent as the Atlantic fisheries, because the development was much more recent and different in character. The difference, possibly, is because development occurred at a period when canning and refrigeration were replacing curing as the principal methods of preservation, and also when more fishing took place in clearly defined territorial waters.

Although there have been numerous disputes between Canada and the United States over Pacific fisheries, they have been minor compared with those in the Atlantic. In the 1930s, Japan moved into fishing grounds off the coast of Alaska and interfered with US vessels that were catching and salting cod. The cod fishermen threatened to shoot any Japanese obstructing their operations. Japanese fishing was a matter of great concern to the Pacific coast fishermen, but little notice was taken nationally until it was shown that the Japanese were catching salmon despite an understanding to the contrary. The controversy was still unsettled when Japan and the United States went to war in 1941.

Cured fish were the first manufactured products prepared on the Pacific coast, where for centuries Native Americans had an extensive dried salmon industry on the Columbia River. The fish were traded to the tribes in the plains of the interior. Native Americans still dry small amounts of salmon for their own use. The Russians operated a commercial salted-salmon industry in Alaska at the beginning of the nineteenth century, shipping products as far as St. Petersburg. Soon afterward, the Northwest Fur Company started a salmon salting business on the Columbia River. The Northwest Company merged with the Hudson Bay Company that shipped salted salmon to Hawaii, Australia, China, Japan, and the eastern United States. American fishermen salted salmon in Alaska while it was still under Russian possession. A number of the large salmon canneries of today began as salmon salteries.

The presence of cod off the coast of Alaska was discovered in the 1860s, and the possibility of building a prosperous salt cod industry was one argument for the purchase of Alaska. Recent, but still incomplete, studies have established that the Pacific banks are larger and of greater potential production than the Grand Banks off the coast of Newfoundland.

During World War II, the Pacific coast fish curing industry was much more adversely affected than its counterpart on the Atlantic coast. With the Alaskan area considered a combat zone, almost all fishing and fish curing activities were stopped, and all but one of the cod salting vessels was requisitioned by the government. The loss of foreign markets and the effect of pricing regulations were other unfavorable factors.

The menhaden fishery

Menhaden are herring-like fish that inhabit the coastal waters of the western Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. The menhaden fishery is the largest of all fisheries in the United States and the basis of one of the leading fishing industries in the world.

Fishing for menhaden is one of the oldest industries in the United States. North American Native Indians taught early settlers to place a fish in each hill of Indian corn. Although menhaden probably were never widely used this way, the practice led to their use for enriching soils when crops along the New England coast and on Long Island began to fail in the late 1700s. By 1820, a fishery was organized for the purpose of supplying menhaden for fertilizer.

During the War of 1812, the use of fish oils in paints led to the utilization of menhaden for this purpose. The early menhaden oil industry was centered in New England where the large, oily fish were encountered in abundance along the coast during the summer. Despite the highly profitable market for menhaden oil, the industry grew rather slowly until about 1860 when the introduction of the mechanical screw press and the use of steam power made the oil recovery process practical using a factory operation. During the following decade, many new factories were built and improvements in the methods of catching and processing the fish followed. Development of suitable methods of preserving the fish press cake, accumulated from the oil extraction process, also provided the basis of another phase of the menhaden oil industry that was to continue for the next 50 years, the production of fish fertilizer. By 1870, more than 90 menhaden reduction plants had been established from Maine to North Carolina.

Prior to 1875, the New England states accounted for the greatest part of the annual menhaden production. In 1876, the catch amounted to approximately 1.5 × 108 kg (170,000 tons) from which nearly 11 × 106 L (3 million gal) of oil and over 45.4 × 103 kg (50,000 tons) of fertilizer were produced. Maine accounted for nearly half the total fish production in that year. Several years later, the fish failed to appear in the waters north of Cape Cod, and except for certain seasons, the fish have not been abundant in the coastal waters in that area since.

Following the collapse of the New England fishery, the industry expanded southward and by 1900 was centered in New Jersey and Virginia. Although menhaden were known to be in the Gulf of Mexico during the early years of the oil industry on the Atlantic coast, it was apparently the collapse of the New England fishery that motivated development of the Gulf fishery. Records show that menhaden were landed on the west coast of Florida and in Texas waters prior to 1902, but there are no records of further landings in those states until 1918. The first landings of menhaden in Mississippi waters were reported in 1939 and in Louisiana in 1948.

Records of menhaden landings in the first decade of the twentieth century are lacking, but in 1912 the catch amounted to 3.2 × 108 kg (356,000 tons), the largest reported to that time, with Virginia accounting for more than half the total production in that year. Although incomplete, records show that, except for 2 or 3 years, the total annual menhaden catch from 1912 to the beginning of World War II remained relatively stable, fluctuating between 1.1 × 108 kg (118,000 tons) and 3.7 × 108 kg (406,000 tons) and averaging 2.2 × 108 kg (243,000 tons). The discovery of vitamin B12 as an important constituent of the animal protein factor found in fish meal made menhaden even more valuable, and following World War II the catch increased markedly. Growth of the fishery catch during the 1950s more than doubled. In 1981, more than 25 reduction plants received and processed the fish into meal, oil, and condensed solubles. Today, after many years of industry consolidation, only six major plants exist.

Most of the fish meal is used as animal and fish feed. While historically most of the fish oil was sold to Europe for use in the production of margarine, today, that picture has dramatically changed. To use menhaden oil for human use in the United States, it needs Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Through research that began in 1977 and a successful petitioning of the FDA, partially hydrogenated menhaden oil was approved in 1989, for specific use in margarine in 1995, and as refined oil in various food products in 1997.

As a major source of the heart healthy omega-3 fatty acids, menhaden fish oil will continue to be in demand as will meal for aquaculture (Table 1.1).

Table 1.1 Menhaden figures for 1997.

ProductAmountValueMenhaden landings1.482 billion lb (672 tons)$1.25 millionMeal produced563 million lb$ 218 millionOil produced12 million lb (20 million gal)$60 million

The whaling industry

Whaling, too, has its place in history. This industry was well established in Europe before the American colonists took up the work. There is also evidence that the Native Americans practiced offshore whaling. Whaling to some meant food, but more important was the use of whale oil for lamps and candles. These by-products stimulated the industry's growth.

Early in colonial history, Boston was the center of the whaling industry, then Nantucket, and finally New Bedford. Bigger, stronger ships were built that became factory, home, and storehouse, all in one. Expeditions for the sperm whale often lasted as long as 3 or 4 years.

The need for whale oil declined sharply after oil was discovered in Pennsylvania in 1859, and the East Coast industry suffered further decline when the New England whaling fleet was destroyed during the Civil War. The opening of the West shifted the focal point of the industry there. Bowhead whaling from California to Alaska replaced most of the East Coast fishery. By the end of the 1800s, whales in the Northern Hemisphere were becoming scarce. Therefore, world whalers turned their sights to the Antarctic. In 1931, there were 41 whaling factory ships operating with an annual catch of about 40,000 whales. With sailing restrictions during World War II, the industry declined again.

In 1946, the International Whaling Commission was established to place restrictions and quotas on the taking of certain species of whales that were becoming rare and were in danger of extinction.

In 1971, the US government, in support of the commission and yielding to public pressure, ordered an end to whaling by US fishermen; the only exception was that Alaskan Eskimos could maintain a small catch for sustenance purposes only. To further discourage worldwide whaling, the United States forbids the sale of whale products.

An overview of our heritage

Ports such as Gloucester, New Bedford, Boston, San Francisco, Monterey, San Pedro, San Diego, and Seattle were home to some of our earliest commercial companies.