In Virginia and throughout the United States, interest in fish farming for profit or as a hobby has increased in the past few years. Encouraged by the success of trout farmers in western states and catfish farmers in southern states, prospective fish farmers question if similar opportunities exist in Virginia's fresh waters.

Conservative estimates place the correct number of farm ponds in Virginia at over 50,000. These ponds range in size from less than one acre to over 30 acres in size. Unfortunately, many of these ponds are so poorly constructed that they fail to serve the purpose for which they were originally designed; some may be unsafe.

Aquatic plants growing in ponds and lakes are beneficial for fish and wildlife. They provide food, dissolved oxygen, and spawning and nesting habitat for fish and waterfowl.

Fish die as a result of a wide variety of natural and unnatural causes. Fish may die of old age, starvation, body injury, stress, suffocation, water pollution, diseases, parasites, predation, toxic algae, severe weather, and other reasons.

At times landowners may be confronted with serious water losses resulting from the sudden collapse or gradual deterioration of earthen pond dams, irrigation canals, and drainage ditches. Although the loss of water from small earthen impoundments is frequently due to faulty construction, it may also be the result of undetected biological forces.

“Liming,” as the word suggests, is the addition of limestone (calcite), primarily calcium carbonate (CaCO3), to neutralize acid waters and soils and buffer them from rapid fluctuations in pH. Limestone typically is applied to lawns, gardens, pastures, and croplands to supply calcium, an essential plant nutrient, and to decrease soil acidity.

Fish farming is an ancient practice that can provide many profitable opportunities today. The raising and selling of fish on a commercial basis has proven to be economically successful throughout the United States.

Marine finfish production is a rapidly expanding field, both in research and industrial aquaculture. A driving force behind this growth is the inherently high value placed upon marine finfish products in the marketplace.

Aquaculture continues to be the fastest growing sector of food production world-wide. The Virginia aquaculture industry produces a variety of different foodfish, baitfish, shellfish, and ornamental species. Likewise, a variety of different production methods are implemented across the state, including pond production and indoor, intensive recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS). Continued expansion of aquaculture in the state, as well as across the region and country, demands attention to both environmental and economic sustainability.

This document provides the background, rationale, and detailed production protocols for all stages of high-quality Artemia culture.

Amyloodinium ocellatum (abbr. A.ocellatum) is a marine dinoflagellate. While most marine dinoflagellates (small protozoan organisms) exist as free living members of the planktonic community, some such as A. ocellatum live at least a portion of their life cycle as parasitic organisms.

Trichodina spp. are a group of dorsal-ventrally flattened oval ciliated protozoan parasites of marine and freshwater species of finfish.

Baitfish farmers raise several different species of fish, often called minnows, to sell as live bait for anglers across the United States. The most popular and commonly raised baitfish species is the golden shiner. Many baitfish farms are located within a major flyway used by migrating birds. A variety of different migratory birds arrive at baitfish farms each fall, feed on fish on the farms, and then depart on spring migration. Baitfish farmers have reported major losses of fish from these avian predators.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

The economic effects of the implementation of regulations on aquaculture farms in the United States, while of concern, are not well understood. A national survey was conducted of salmonid (trout and salmon) farms in 17 states of the United States to measure on‐farm regulatory costs and to identify which regulations were the most costly to this industry segment. The response rate was 63%, with a coverage rate of 94.5% of the U.S. production of salmonids. Results of this study show that the on‐farm regulatory cost burden is substantial and has negatively affected the U.S. salmonid industry's ability to respond to strong demand for U.S. farm‐raised salmonid products. Results also suggest that the regulatory system has contributed to the decline in the number of U.S. salmonid farms. While regulations will necessarily have some degree of cost to farms, the magnitude of the on‐farm regulatory cost burden on U.S. salmonid farms calls for concerted efforts to identify and implement innovative regulatory monitoring and compliance frameworks that reduce the on‐farm regulatory cost burden.

In response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) disease pandemic, a collaborative initiative was launched by The Ohio State University, Virginia Tech, and Engle-Stone Aquatic$, LLC to assess the impacts of the pandemic on U.S. aquaculture, aquaponics, and allied industry. Over the course of the first quarter of 2020, the U.S. government developed and implemented several emergency relief measures, in an effort to assist small businesses and individuals. The Q2 survey asked specifically about these relief and assistance programs, as well as questions on adaptations and changes being implemented by farms and businesses in response to the ongoing challenges. This fact sheet summarizes the Q2 results of this study, covering the period from April 10th to June 29th, 2020.

In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), Virginia Tech and the Ohio State University collected information about how catfish farms have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was conducted at the conclusion of the first quarter of 2020 to capture and quantify these impacts and effects. This publication summarizes the first set of results for the 1st quarter of 2020.

In response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, a project was initiated through a partnership between the Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center (VSAREC), the Virginia Institute of Marine Science Marine Advisory Program (VIMS MAP), the Virginia Coastal Policy Center (VCPC), and Old Dominion University (ODU) to address a variety of topics related to seafood marketing and new marketing channels. From this project several resources pertaining to direct-to-consumer marketing, online sales, COVID-19 at the workplace, and general requirements within the industry were created and made available to Virginia seafood producers and allied businesses.

Consumers enjoy eating a variety of seafood and can find many choices of fresh as well as frozen seafood in the refrigerated and freezer cases of grocery stores.Abigail Villalba, Extension Specialist, Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center Michael Jahncke, Professor, Food Science and Technology, and Director, Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center Michael Schwarz, Extension Specialist, Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center David Kuhn, Assistant Professor, Food Science and Technology, Virginia Tech Alisha Farris, Extension Specialist, Human Nutrition, Foods, and Exercise, Virginia Tech

Seafood processors must practice strict sanitary procedures to reduce contamination sources, thus providing consumers with high quality, wholesome foods. A routine sanitation monitoring program in place demonstrates that processors are actively maintaining a sanitary environment during processing.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as many as 11 million Americans have food allergies. A food allergy can trigger symptoms ranging from a tingling mouth, swelling of the tongue and throat, hives, and abdominal cramps to anaphylaxis and — in severe cases — death (CDC 2012). Consumers with known allergies must read labels to identify allergenic foods or ingredients on packaged products so they can more easily avoid them.

The purpose of this extension publication is to provide food processors with basic guidelines to follow and to use when discussing Coronavirus (COVID-19) controls during shared transportation and housing.

This publication is part of a series of publications titled "Strategies to control the spread of COVID at seafood processing plants". The information in this publication provides seafood processors with strategies that can be implemented to minimize exposure of the workforce to the COVID virus by using cleaning and disinfection practices.

This publication provides seafood processors with strategies to control and minimize the spread of COVID at seafood processing plants. The publication discusses steps that employers and employees must take to ensure the continuity of operations of essential functions when employees are returning to work after exposure to COVID.