Basa, Tra, Catfish or Vietnamese River Cobbler
Pangasius bocourti & Pangasius hypophthalmus
Method of production — Farmed
Production country — Vietnam
Production method — Ponds
Certification — GLOBALG.A.P.
Sustainability rating
info
Sustainability overview
Pangasius farmed to GlobalGap certified production standards is a better choice to make for this farmed species. The GlobalGap certification addresses a number of issues of environmental concern, the auditing of which requires farm inspections and standard criteria enforcement. There are a number of issues of environmental concern associated with pangasiusproduction, these include: habitat alteration; freshwater impacts; nutrient and organic pollution; escapes; interactions with local wildlife and enforcement of regulations. Pangasius is a an omnivore and as such is not heavily reliant on marine proteins and oils to form part of its diet, however the fish used to produce the feed is currently not certified as being responsibly managed or sustainable. It is only by sourcing certified pangasius that you can be assured that the issues of critical environmental concern are being addressed.
Feed Resources
Criterion Score: 1
Pangasius are a fed species, requiring a commercial diet containing fish and vegetable proteins and oils. Feed for GlobalGap certified Pangasius is traceable but it is not required to be certified as sustainable or responsibly sourced. Pangasius require a low amount of fishmeal and fish oil in their diet making them a net protein producers rather than consumers, which in turn can contribute to future food security.
info
Environmental Impacts
Criterion Score: -4
Pangasius have a number of environmental issues associated with their production, many of which are mitigated by the GlobalGap certification standards. These include: freshwater impacts and use; habitat impacts; chemical use, escape risk and disease transfer risk. However there are still issues that need to improve within GlobalGap certified pangasius, which include limits on discharges to the surrounding environment and the allowance of the use of lethal predator control.
info
Fish Health and Welfare
Criterion Score: 1
GlobalGap standards include requirements for fish welfare and humane slaughter.
info
Management
Criterion Score: 2
Overall the management of pangasius production is evaluated to be only partially effective. There is no Strategic Environmental Planning in place in the area that incorporates pangasius farming, there are regulations and/or certification criteria in place to cover the environmental impacts of production although these are assessed to be only partially effective as farm discharges have no limits and lethal predator control is permissible.
info
Production method
Ponds
Farming in open net pens in river systems allows for interaction with the surrounding environment and, as such, has to be managed in such a way as to minimise negative environmental and ecological impacts.
Alternatives
Based on method of production, fish type, and consumer rating:
only fish rated 2 and below are included as an alternative in
the list below. Click on a name to show the sustainable options
available.
Basa, Tra, Catfish or Vietnamese River Cobbler
Bass, seabass (Farmed)
Bream, Gilthead (Farmed)
Cod, Atlantic Cod
Coley, Saithe
Haddock
Hake, Cape
Hake, European
Monkfish, Anglerfish
Pollock, Alaska, Walleye
Sturgeon (Farmed)
Tilapia
Biology
The group of freshwater fish known as catfish are captured from the wild or farmed for food and displayed in public aquaria dependant on the species. This farmed species natural habitat is medium to large rivers in Asian countries such as Vietnam, where they can grow up to 44kg.There are omnivores, feeding on a diet of other fish, vegetable matter and crustacea. Pangasius bocourti is one of the most important farmed species in Vietnam.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation Society to help businesses and consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish. For full details, please see the full farmed seafood methodology available
here.
Feed Resources
| Score |
Descriptor |
| 6 |
No feed inputs required. |
| -5 to 5 |
Feed inputs required. Scored according to traceability, sourcing and ingredients. |
| -6 |
Unsustainable, untraceable feed with a high fish feed dependency. |
Environmental Impact
| Score |
Descriptor |
| 7 |
All environmental impacts are mitigated by technology, production method and/or management practices. |
| -14 to 6 |
Environmental impacts are only partially mitigated for. |
| -15 |
High environmental impacts across all criteria. |
Fish Welfare
| Score |
Descriptor |
| 2 |
High welfare and slaughter standards. |
| 0-1 |
Either welfare or slaughter standards applied, not both. |
| -2 |
No standards for welfare or slaughter. |
Management
| Score |
Descriptor |
| 6 |
Good regulations and management practices, certified product to independent audited standards. |
| -6 to 5 |
Regulation and management is only partially effective and/or not comprehensive. |
| -7 |
Poor regulation, enforcement, management practices and uncertified product. |
For farmed seafood assessments, a 'critical fail' may be triggered and produce a default red rating where juveniles or broodstock are
sourced from wild capture fisheries that are rated 5, red rated, on the Good Fish Guide. For full details, please see the full farmed
seafood methodology available here.
References
GGAP V5.0 (2016) Global Gap Farm Assurance, All Farm Base- Aquaculture Module, Control Points and Compliance Criteria, English Version 5.0, Edition 5.0- 02 July 2016, Obligatory From 01 July 2016.Available online at https://www.globalgap.org/.content/.galleries/documents/171110_GG_IFA_CPCC_AQ_V5_1-1_en.pdf. Accessed 05/09/2018
Tacon, A. G. J., Metian, M., 2015. Feed Matters: Satisfying the Feed Demand of Aquaculture. Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture, 23:1-10
Tacon, A. G. J., Metian, M., 2008. Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in industrially compounded aquafeeds: Trends and future prospects. Aquaculture, 285:146-158
Poulsen, A., Griffiths, D., Nam, S., Tung, N. T., 2008. Capture-based aquaculture of Pangasiid catfishes and snakeheads in the Mekong River Basin. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations Consultancy
The sustainability of fish can vary significantly depending on how and where it has been caught or farmed. Many single species are caught or farmed in a variety of ways and this range shows that, within a species, some sources may be more sustainable than others.
To find out specific ratings, click on the 'Show options for this fish' button under the image of the fish.
'Best choices' are rated 1 and 2 (green), 'Fish to Avoid' are rated 5 (red). Ratings 3 and 4 mean 'Think' (yellow and amber), as there are better rated alternatives.
Fish that are under review are shown with a question mark icon and no rating.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation Society to help consumers and businesses choose the most environmentally sustainable fish.
Seafood sources indicated as, 'To be assessed', are those that have not yet been assessed and assigned a rating or are undergoing a period
of review. These include sources previously rated by MCS for which the rating has lapsed, due to changes in the market or MCS priorities and
resources. Given that these sources are not fully assessed, the profile should not be used to infer the current sustainability of the
fishery or farmed species.
If you are interested in the sustainability of this seafood source, please let us know by emailing
ratings@mcsuk.org
Rating 1 (light green) is associated with the most
sustainably produced seafood.
Fish to Eat are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
Rating 2 (pale green) is still a good choice, although some
aspects of its production or management could be improved
Fish to Eat are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
Rating 3 (yellow) based on available information; these
species should probably not be considered sustainable at
this time. Areas requiring improvement in the current
production may be significant. Eat only occasionally and
check www.goodfishguide.org for specific details.
Fish to Eat are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
Rating 4 (orange) should not be considered sustainable, and
the fish is likely to have significant environmental issues
associated with its production. While it may be from a
deteriorating fishery, it may be one which has improved from
a 5 rating, and positive steps are being taken. However, MCS
would not usually recommend choosing this fish.
Fish to Eat are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
'Red improver' ratings are assigned to seafood sources which have been assessed and rated 5 (red) due to significant environmental concerns
with one or more aspects of their management, capture or production, yet credible efforts to improve these issues have been agreed through a
Fisheries or Aquaculture Improvement Project – a FIP or an AIP - and work is underway. Such projects are normally publicly listed at
www.fisheryprogress.org. MCS wants to encourage environmental improvements in fisheries and fish farms, and so does not recommend avoiding
these sources, as we normally do for seafood rated 5 (red rated).
'Best choice' fish are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation Society to help businesses and consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
Rating 5 (red) is associated with fish to be avoided on the
basis that all or most of the criteria for sustainablilty
have not been met.
Fish to Eat are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers choose the most environmentally
sustainable fish.
