Bream, Gilthead (Farmed)
Sparus auratus
Method of production — Farmed
Production country — Europe
Production method — Open net pen, GlobalGap certified
Sustainability rating
info
Sustainability overview
Turkey is a key producer of farmed bream. Bream farmed in open net pens causes some environmental concerns. These concerns include: pollution from both nutrients and organic matters that lead to environmental changes; escaped farmed fish; disease transfer between farmed and wild species; widespread use of chemicals and, some remaining concerns surrounding enforcement and regulatory controls. Bream are carnivorous fish that require more fish in their diet than they actually produce, leading to a net loss of marine proteins and oils. The fish used to make their feed cannot be assured to be sourced from a sustainable supply. GlobalGap certification addresses many of these issues.
Feed Resources
Criterion Score: -3
Sea Bream are a fed species, requiring a commercial diet containing fish and vegetable proteins and oils. Sea bream produced to GlobalGap production standards cannot be assured to use responsible or sustainable feed however the main feed suppliers do have internal sourcing policies in place but their effectiveness cannot be verified. Sea bream require a large percentage fishmeal and fish oil in their diet making them a net consumer of fish protein rather than producers
info
Environmental Impacts
Criterion Score: 0
Sea bream have a number of environmental impacts associated with their production, many of which are addressed by the Global Gap production standards in place. What is not known however is the risk of disease transfer to wild species in the vicinity of the cages. Also of concern is the effect on local predatory species.
info
Fish Health and Welfare
Criterion Score: 1
Fish welfare and humane slaughter requirements are in place within the GlobalGap standards for sea bream.
info
Management
Criterion Score: 2
Overall the management of sea bass production is evaluated to be only partially effective. There is a lack of Spatial Management that adequately incorporates aquaculture production and although there are regulations and/or criteria in place for many of the environmental impacts of production there is insufficient data to assess the overall effectiveness in areas of disease prevention and escapes.
info
Production method
Open net pen, GlobalGap certified
Farming in open net pens 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
Cod, Pacific Cod
Coley, Saithe
Haddock
Hake, Cape
Hake, European
Pollock, Alaska, Walleye
Sturgeon (Farmed)
Tilapia
Whiting
Biology
Gilthead bream can grow to a length of 70cm and live for as long as 11 years. It is a sedentary species found in depths of up to 150m. Spawning occurs between November and December.
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
FAO 2005-2018.Cultured Aquatic Species Information Programme. Sparus aurata. Cultured Aquatic Species Information Programme. Text by Colloca, F.; Cerasi, S. In: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department [online]. Rome. Updated 8 February 2005.Accessed 05/06/2018
Health status of wild and cultured Seabream in the northern Adriatic Sea: Vet. Med. - Czech, 47, 2002 (8): 222-226
CIESM Workshop Monographs Impacts of Mariculture on Coastal Ecosystems. 2007. Available online: http://www.ciesm.org/online/monographs/lisboa07.pdf. Accessed 05/09/2018 .
The Impact of a Fish Farm on a Bottlenose Dolphin Population in the Mediterreanean Sea: Halassas., 2005, 21 (2): 65-70 An International Journal of Marine Sciences. Avaialble online at: http://www.ciesm.org/online/monographs/lisboa07.pdf. Accessed 05/06/2018
Health status of wild and cultured Seabream in the northern Adriatic Sea: Vet. Med. - Czech, 47, 2002 (8): 222-226
Many of the fish listed are caught in different ways and from
different areas of the sea. Some species are caught in a variety
of ways and this range shows that, within a species, some may be
fished sustainably whilst others unsustainably.
To find out the individual ratings for each fish click on the
ratings button next to the image.
'Best choices' are rated 1 and 2, Fish to Avoid are rated 5.
Ratings 3 and 4 mean don’t eat too often.
Fish that are being assessed are shown with a question mark icon and "No Rating".
This system has been developed by the Marine Conservation
Society to help consumers 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.
