An interdisciplinary verification committee consisting of researchers, extension specialists, economists, local county extension agents and cooperating producers was formed in 1997. Together, the verification committee developed a set of best management practices for commercial catfish culture based on current research, practical experience and previous yield verification trials. These management practices formed the basis for the specific management protocol that would be utilized in the catfish yield verification trials as part of the Southern Regional Aquaculture Center grant entitled "Verification of Recommended Management Practices for Major Aquatic Species".

Catfish Yield Verification Committee:

David Heikes, Coordinator

Dr. Carole Engle, Economist

Dr. Nathan Stone, Extension Aquaculture Specialist

Dr. Andrew Goodwin, Fish Health Specialist

County Agent Participation

Carl Hayden, Chicot

Rick Thompson, Mike Hamilton, Poinsett

Rebecca Watson, Blair Griffin, Desha

Keith Perkins, St Francis

Yield Verification Assistants

Chris Davidson

Bob Starkey

Cooperating Producers

Bill Teague

Rusty Moss, Johnny Conrad

Jeff Baxter, Bill McCullum,

Peyton Upton, Joe McLemore

Cooperating producers agree to manage 2 ponds each according to recommendations from the Catfish Yield Verification Committee for a period of 3 years. The local county extension agent will visit each farm weekly during the production season and will verify all stocking and harvesting procedures. The catfish yield verification coordinator will meet with the county agent on a weekly or bi-weekly basis as needed and will make recommendations for action the following week. If unexpected situations arise, it is the responsibility of the cooperator to contact the county agent or the coordinator for guidance. The county agent will collect production and water quality data each week and will maintain regular contact with the coordinator and the producer.

Remaining inventory at the end of the three-year production study will be verified in order to calculate survival, feed conversion, and yields. Feed, aeration and other production expense data will be collected and utilized to estimate operating costs, net returns, and breakeven prices.

Site Selection

Ponds must be levee style, properly designed and built, and supplied with an adequate quantity and quality of groundwater. Preferred pond size is 10 -15 acres (minimum 8 ac and maximum 20 ac). Ponds must have all-weather levies and year-round access. Ponds must be equipped with electric paddle-wheel aerators at 1hp/ac or greater. Preference will be given to ponds that have recently been reworked or drained.

Pond should be drained and dried to the extent possible prior to stocking. Any remaining puddles should be treated to remove any trash fish. Pond should be pumped up within 2-3 weeks of initial stocking, and should be fertilized immediately with a liquid fertilizer (18-34-0, 1 gal/ac) to establish an adequate bloom for weed control. Pond may also be stocked with grass carp if a weed problem starts to develop before feeding rates provide for an adequate bloom.

Under certain circumstances, it may not be possible, or practical, to start the verification with a clean dry pond. However, it is essential that the "beginning inventory" be verified and minimized to the extent possible prior to starting the verification process. In order to verify the "beginning inventory" it is essential that the cooperator agree to seine the pond three times with a small mesh fingerling seine. Fish caught in each of the three seine pulls must be weighed and removed from the pond. Data from these three seine pulls will be used in a Depletion Estimation Program (Engle et al. 1998) that will give us a scientifically derived estimation of the remaining fish in the pond that will be considered our "beginning inventory".

Stocking rate will be within the range of 6,000-6,500 head/ac, annually.
Fingerlings will be stocked in the early spring of each year. Minimum fingerling size will be 60-70 lb/1,000 (approximately 6 in). Every attempt will be made to locate tightly graded fingerlings for stocking.

Prior to loading the fingerling truck, two 10-lb samples will be weighed and counted to accurately determine the number of pounds to be loaded onto the hauling tanks to achieve our target stocking density. Accurate records of actual pounds loaded will be maintained.

Feeding

The cooperating farmer, whenever possible, will feed the fish according to the feeding guidelines published in "A Practical Guide to Nutrition, feeds, and feeding of Catfish-1996 Revision" (Robinson et al.1996). Because proper feeding is critical to the profitability of catfish production, and because it is an important part of the verification process, it may be necessary to spend a few extra minutes when feeding the verification ponds.
General Feeding Recommendations:

• Feed Type: 28% or 32% protein floating 3/16" pellets
• Satiation Feeding: Fish will be fed as much as they will consume at each feeding without wasting feed, within the maximum feed limit outlined below.
• Winter Feeding: At temperatures below 12 C (55 F), fish should be fed at least once per week, weather and levee conditions permitting.
• Spring/Fall Feeding: At temperatures between 12 and 21C (55-70F), fish should be fed every other day.
• Summer Feeding: At temperatures between 22 and 30C (70-86F), fish should be fed every day. It is preferable to feed two times per day, late morning and early afternoon whenever possible. When water temperatures are above 30C (86F), ponds should be fed only once per day.
• Max. Feed Limit: Our goal is to limit our maximum feed input to an average of 100-120 lb/ac/day over any seven day period, with an absolute daily maximum of 150lb/ac/day. Rather than limit the amount of feed at each feeding, it is preferable to skip a day whenever necessary so that fish can be fed to satiation on the remaining feeding days.

The cooperating farmer will monitor daily oxygen fluctuations and initiate aeration when the dissolved oxygen concentration is expected to drop below 4ppm. The cooperating farmer will provide a minimum of 1 hp/ac aeration for ponds in the program. A morning oxygen reading (7-9am) will be taken daily throughout the winter to monitor oxygen conditions.

Harvesting

Harvesting should commence when our records (Fishy 3.2) indicate that approximately 1,000lb/ac of fish have reached 1.5 lb, with a minimum of 10,000lb ready for market. Every reasonable effort should be made to get these fish on a processor's schedule immediately. If, after a period of three weeks, the fish cannot be scheduled for any reason, the cooperator must agree to harvest the fish and move them to another pond. This procedure will be repeated as often as necessary.

At harvest, we will sample 2 short basket loads (approximately 200 lb each) of fish per truckload to obtain the average weight of the harvested fish. The basket will be weighed and then set down on top of the truck and the fish will be counted into the hauling tank. This typically takes between 2 and 4 minutes per sample.

Water Quality Management

A Cooperative Extension Agent will take weekly water samples from the ponds to be analyzed for parameters that may affect fish health and pond performance. These parameters include temperature, pH, TAN, Nitrite, and Unionized ammonia. Chloride readings will be taken whenever nitrite readings are above 1 ppm or total ammonia readings are above 5 ppm. Alkalinity, hardness, and chlorides readings will be taken every 6 months or as necessary for pond treatments. A minimum of 60 ppm chlorides will be maintained throughout the trial period.

Water Quantity Management

A water column depth meter (WCDM) or staff gauge will be installed by the Cooperative Extension Service (CES) and will be used to aid the cooperating farmer in using the 3/6 water management system (Pote et al. 1988). Ponds will be filled to 3 inches below the top of the overflow pipe. This allows for 3 inches of rainwater storage. If the water level falls in 6 inches below the overflow level the pond will be pumped up to the 3 inch level.

Fish Health Management

Weekly observations of pond health will be completed weekly by CES personnel. In addition, periodic health checks may be performed on fish during certain disease seasons or whenever fish health may have been compromised. The cooperating farmers will immediately report and transport suspect fish to the diagnostic laboratory and follow the recommendations of the fish health specialist.

Record Keeping

The cooperator must agree to maintain adequate records on the verification ponds on a daily basis.  These records should include:

• Stocking Records
• Harvest Records
• Daily Feeding
• Mortality Estimates
• Oxygen High/Low
• Hours of Aeration
• Flavor Checks
• Weekly Water Quality
• Medications or Treatments
• Pond Specific Operating Expenses
• Water Pumping Information

The designated county Extension agents and program coordinator will collect all data on a weekly basis and will use the Fishy computer program as a management tool for predicting harvest dates and feed inputs.

Reporting

Verbal quarterly reports will be available and an annual comprehensive report will be produced by the program coordinator. The cooperating farmers will be kept abreast of important trends in the data and notified of any observed potential problems. It is important that the cooperators realize that this information will be published and become public. However, no proprietary information other than that relating to the program ponds will be released without permission.

Currently, there are many different sizes of catfish fingerlings being marketed across the industry. Specific management protocols would necessarily be slightly different for the production of each of these sizes. The fingerling verification program will focus only on the production of the optimal size fingerling for direct stocking into food-fish production ponds. The existing research base indicates that fingerlings should attain a minimum length of 6 inches prior to being stocked into mixed-batch production ponds.

This verification program encompasses fry through fingerling stages and does not include brood-stock, egg or hatchery phases. The protocol begins with healthy swim-up fry in the hatchery trough and proper pond preparation.

Criteria for the selection of fingerling ponds are similar to the criteria mentioned for foodfish ponds with the exception that fingerling ponds should be smaller (from 5 to 7 ac) and supplied with a well capable of pumping up pond in 7 days. Beside, feeder should be equipped with scales if possible.

Fingerling Pond Preparation
Proper pond preparation is critical to ensure survival of newly stocked fry. Certain aquatic insects and trash fish can have a devastating effect if precautions are not taken. In order to completely eliminate the threat of trash fish such as green sunfish, the pond should be completely drained for several weeks prior to starting a new grow-out cycle. At the very least, the pond should be completely drained and any remaining puddles should be treated with rotenone.

Careful coordination is necessary to properly time the filling of the pond and the stocking of fry. The pond should be filled with well water no more than seven days prior to the introduction of fry. Otherwise, gill-breathing insects may become established and prey on the fry. It is preferable to stock fry into a partially filled pond than to stock fry into water that has been standing more than seven days.

Within the first several days of filling, the pond should be supplied with a source of inorganic and organic fertilizers to establish blooms of phytoplankton and zooplankton. A good bloom results in the production of necessary rotifers and cladocerans and helps to control unwanted aquatic vegetation. Initially, as much as 4 gallons of liquid 10-30-0 per acre mixed 8:1 with water along with 250 lb cottonseed meal or rice bran per acre (or an approximate equivalent) may be required to attain an adequate bloom, depending on the amount of organic material present and the production history of the pond.

Pond Stocking
Fry should be stocked by the seventh day of pumping new water into the fingerling production pond. All fry stocked into a single pond should be stocked the same day and should be of similar age (hatched within a day or two) and size. Accurate weights shall be determined from each holding vat from which fry are to be stocked. Weights will be determined from random samples containing at least 300 fry. Fry will be weighed in tared buckets containing water. The target stocking density will be 100,000 fry per acre.

Fry should be transported to the fingerling production pond during the cool morning hours. The hauling tank should be properly aerated and the hauling density should be no more than ½ lb fry per gallon of transport water. Prior to off-loading, the fry should be slowly conditioned to the pond water by pumping pond water into the transport tank. It is preferable to have a transport tank mounted on a trailer that can be backed into or close to the pond to reduce the stress of off-loading.

Feeding

Fry and small fingerlings should be fed at least twice daily for the first 2-3 weeks. From the time fry are stocked and the time small fingerlings "swim up" to feed on the surface, they should be fed a finely ground, 40-45% protein diet at a rate of 15 to 20 lbs per water acre daily. After fish start feeding on the surface they should be fed to satiation with small-size floating crumbles and then after five to six weeks they should be fed 3/16 inch floating pellets containing 36% protein. Care should be taken, especially toward the end of the growing season not to exceed an average of 125 lb/ac/day feed input over a four to five day period and no more than 150 lb/ac on any given day.

Oxygen Management

The oxygen management protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds.

Water Quality Management

The water quality management protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds.

Water Quantity Management

The water quantity management protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds.

Fish Health Management

The fish health management protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds.

Record Keeping

The record keeping protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds, with the exception that no flavor check are done on fingerlings and that Fishy is not used to predict harvest dates.

Harvesting

Fingerlings will be harvested at the discretion of the cooperating producer, but preferably not until the end of the first full growing season. Accurate weights and average weight of fingerlings harvested will be determined for each harvest event and total number will be calculated. Ponds may be cropped (with grading socks or in-pond horizontal platform grader) multiple times through the winter and following spring. All fish must be harvested and ponds completely cleaned out (scrapped) within a year of the initial stocking.

The reporting protocol for fingerling ponds is the same as the one presented for foodfish ponds.

In the spring of 1998, six foodfish verification trials were initiated. Two ponds (POND B and POND C) were located in Chicot county in the southeast corner of the Arkansas delta. The other four ponds were located in the northern Arkansas delta, one located in Poinsette county (POND A), and the other three (UF6, UF7, and UF8) on the same farm in St. Francis county. Four fingerling verification trials were also initiated in the spring of 1998. Two of these ponds (BLC15a and BLC16a) were located in Desha county and two (UF45 and UF46) were located in St. Francis county. Over the course of the three year program, personnel turnover, farm structure changes, as well as turnover in extension staff resulted in inconsistent data collection at the verification site in St. Francis county. As a result, all of the trials in St. Francis county had to be terminated prior to the conclusion of the study. Fingerling verification was repeated in Desha county (BLC15b and BLC16b) in 1999. At the conclusion of the three-year verification process, production from seven ponds (three food-fish ponds and four fingerling ponds) had been successfully verified. Verification data from the foodfish ponds is summarized in Table 1 and data from the fingerling ponds is summarized in Table 2..

Pond POND A was a freshly re-worked 8.75-acre levee style pond that was part of an integrated catfish and row-crop farming operation located in Poinsett county. This pond had one graveled levee and was equipped with one 10-hp paddlewheel aerator resulting in an aeration level of 1.14 hp/acre. Pond POND A was initially stocked in April of 1998 and production inputs were verified through two full growing seasons and two full winters before final inventory numbers were obtained in May 2000. Fingerlings stocked in POND A were grown in a separate pond on the same farm from fry stocked in the previous year and were transferred to the verification pond via hauling truck. The initial 1998 stocking occurred in two stages. The first stage consisted of approximately 4,392 head/ac of fish averaging 0.158 lb. The second phase of the initial stocking occurred two months later and consisted of an additional 4,029 head/ac of fingerlings averaging 0.033 lb. The second stocking occurred in May 1999, and consisted of 4,609 head/ac of fish averaging 0.082 lb. Overall, POND A was stocked with 6,515 head/acre/year with fish averaging 0.092 lb. Fish were fed once daily (weather permitting) to satiation with 32% floating catfish feed. Overall feed input was 11,156 lb/ac/year. Electric paddlewheel aeration was typically utilized for 8-12 hours per night during the growing season resulting in an average of 1,670 hp-hr/ac/year. Emergency tractor aeration averaged 12.6 hours/ac/year.

The first harvest in POND A occurred in April of 1999 with 4,372 lb/acre being sold at an average weight of approximately 1.99 lb. The second harvest event occurred in May 2000 with an additional 6,399 lb/ac reaching a market weight of 2.12 lb. Overall, the annual marketed yield obtained from POND A was 5,714 lb/acre/year at an average weight of 2.10 lb. Overall net production (including the ending inventory) averaged 6,498 lb/acre/year at an average weight of 1.52 lb. Overall survival was 71%. Gross feed conversion ratio (gross FCR = total feed/lb fish marketed) was 1.95 and the net feed conversion ratio (net FCR = total feed/overall net production) was 1.72.

Ponds POND B and POND C were newly constructed levee style ponds on the same catfish farm in Chicot county and were 13.5 and 13.6 acres, respectively. These ponds shared a common gravel levee and were each equipped with two 10-hp paddlewheel aerators resulting in an aeration level of 1.48 and 1.49 hp/acre for POND B and POND C, respectively. Each of these ponds were initially stocked in April 1998 and production inputs were verified through three full growing seasons and three full winters before final inventory numbers were obtained in April 2001. Fingerlings initially stocked into these ponds were purchased from a commercial fingerling producer. The initial stocking density was approximately 6,622 head/ac of fingerlings averaging 0.049 lb. Heavy post stocking mortalities due to mixed bacterial infections were evident in both ponds. An additional 1,115 head/ac of fish averaging 0.043 lb were stocked into each pond one month later in an attempt to compensate for fish lost. Unfortunately, fish available for the second stocking event in the spring of 1999 were smaller than desired. In April 1999, 5,790 head/ac and 5,969 head/ac of fish averaging 0.029 lb were stocked into POND B and POND C, respectively. The third stocking event occurred in the fall of 1999, where 7,003 fingerling/ac averaging 0.032 lb were stocked into POND B and 7,363 fingerling/ac averaging 0.044 lb were stocked into POND C. Overall, POND B was stocked with 6,861 head/acre/year of fish averaging 0.038 lb and POND C was stocked with 7,020 head/ac/year of fish averaging 0.041 lb. Fish were fed once daily (weather permitting) to satiation with 32% floating catfish feed, but feeding response was sporadic and highly variable from day to day in both ponds throughout the study. Data on paddlewheel aeration was not recorded on this farm.

The first major harvest event in pond POND B occurred in the fall of 1999 with 2,723 lb/ac sold at an average weight of 1.87 lb. This pond was also harvested in February, June, August and October of 2000 resulting in 6,249 lb/ac marketed at an average weight of 1.7 lb. Overall, the annual marketed yield obtained from POND B was 2,991 lb/ac/year at an average weight of 1.74 lb. Overall net production in POND B was 3,518 lb/ac/year at an average weight of 1.32 lb. Overall survival was 42%. Gross FCR was 3.08 and Net FCR was 2.62.

Pond POND C was harvested in April and October of 1999 with a total of 4,242 lb/ac marketed at 1.48 lb. Subsequent harvests occurred in February, June, July, August and October of 2000 with 6,812 lb/ac marketed at an average weight of 1.77 lb. Overall, the annual marketed yield obtained from POND C was 3,685 lb/ac/year at an average weight of 1.65 lb. Overall net production in POND C was 4,166 lb/ac/year at an average weight of 0.88lb. Overall survival was 72%. Gross FCR was 2.72 and net FCR was 2.41.

On average across all foodfish ponds, an average of 6,799 head/ac/year averaging 0.057 lb were stocked. Average total feed input was 10,136 lb/ac/year. No fish were marketed during the first full year of production in any pond because not a sufficient number of fingerling stocked that year reached market size within the first year. During the second year of production, an average of 3,779 lb/ac were marketed. During the third year of production, an average of 6,487 lb/ac were marketed. When expressed as an average of the first three years of production, the average annual marketed yield was 4,130 lb/ac/year at an average harvest weight of 1.83 lb. The yield verification average overall net production was 4,728 lb/ac/year at an average weight of 1.24lb. Survival across all ponds averaged 62%. The overall average gross FCR was 2.59 and the overall average net FCR was 2.25.

An enterprise budget was developed for each foodfish verification pond to estimate average annual costs and returns per acre (Table 3). Incomes were the product of a catfish market price of $0.74/lb and the average yield across the whole duration of the program (lb/ac/yr), including the ending inventory. The catfish market price of $0.74/lb was the national average price paid to producers by processors during the period of the yield verification program (USDA 2002). Costs for fingerlings, feed, and aeration were based on the average quantity used annually per acre in each verification pond. Other variable costs (including repairs and maintenance, pond renovation, chemicals, telephone, water quality, labor, management, accounting, legal, and bird scaring ammunition) and fixed costs (including depreciation on production facilities and equipment, interest on investments, and insurance) were prorated on a per-acre basis from Engle and Kouka (1996) based on a 320 land-ac farm. The breakeven price/lb of fish to cover operating costs was the quotient of the operating costs/ac divided by the average yield (lb/ac/yr). The breakeven price/lb of fish to cover total costs was the quotient of the total costs/ac (the sum of operating costs and fixed costs) divided by the average yield (lb/ac/yr).

Breakeven prices when compared to market prices provide information on profit margins per pound of product sold. For the three foodfish verification ponds, the estimated breakeven prices were lower than the national average catfish market price of $0.74/lb over the period of the program, which resulted in a positive profit margin per pound of fish sold. The estimated breakeven prices per pound to cover total expenses (excluding land) ranged from $0.48 to $0.72/lb and averaged $0.61/lb (Table 3). The lowest breakeven price of $0.48/lb was obtained in pond POND A. Lower breakeven price does not necessarily result in higher profit because net returns are also influenced by yields. However, among the three foodfish verification ponds studied here, pond POND A also had the highest yield and consequently the highest net returns. Estimated net returns varied greatly among ponds, ranging from $80 to $1,847/ac and averaged $669/ac. Those differences in breakeven prices and net returns were in part the result of different fingerling sizes, FCR, and survival rate between ponds. Fingerlings stocked in ponds POND B and POND C averaged only 38 and 41 lb/1,000 respectively, compared to 92 lb/1,000 for the fingerlings stocked in pond POND A. Fingerlings stocked in POND B and POND C did not respect the minimum fingerling size of 60-70 lb/1,000 specified in the program's management protocol. Moreover, FCR in ponds POND B and POND C were higher than in pond POND A (Table 1), which resulted in higher feed costs. Besides, pond POND B had the lowest survival rate. Consequently, pond POND A, which was stocked with the largest fingerlings, had the highest yields, the lowest FCR, and one of the best survival rates resulted in the highest net returns.

Two levee-style fingerling production ponds located on a large fingerling production facility in Desha county were utilized for two consecutive years, resulting in four independent fingerling verification trials (Table 2). Pond 15a and 16a represent data collected from fry stocked in 1998 and harvested through May 1999. Pond 15b and 16b represent data collected from fry stocked in June 1999 and harvested through May 2000. Each pond was six acres in size and equipped with a 10-hp paddlewheel aerator, resulting in 1.67 hp/acre. All ponds were completely drained prior to stocking and remaining puddles were treated with rotenone to ensure elimination of any remaining catfish fingerlings or other trash fish. Water preparation was similar for all ponds. Within the first few days of pumping, the ponds were treated with 100 lb (16.67 lb/acre) of inorganic fertilizer (50/50 mixture of DAP and Urea) and 1500 lb (250 lb/acre) of cottonseed meal. Fry were stocked within 7 to 10 days of initial fill. No further fertilizer treatments were required for any pond.

Pond 15a was stocked with 42.32 lb of fry on 6/15/98 resulting in an estimated 100,211 fry/acre. The first harvest of fingerlings occurred on 3/12/99, when 2,863 lb/acre (44,623 head/ac) of fingerling averaging 0.064 lb and 6.2 inch were harvested. The remaining fingerlings were fed through 5/22/99 when an additional 1,828 lb/acre (24,425 head/acre) of fingerling averaging 0.077 lb (6.6 inch) were harvested. By the end of the 1-year production cycle, 4,692 lb/acre of fingerling averaging 0.068 lb (6.3 inch) had been harvested. Overall survival in Pond 15a was 69% with 69,048 head/acre harvested at a FCR of 1.71.

Pond 16a was stocked with 40.06 lb of fry on 6/9/98 resulting in an estimated 101,142 fry/ac. The first harvest of fingerlings occurred on 9/3/98, when 515 lb/ac (13,214 head/ac) of fingerling averaging 0.039 lb (5.2 inch), were harvested. A second harvest occurred on 3/12/99 when 3,247 lb/acre (43,521 head/ac) of fingerling averaging 0.075 lb (6.5 inch) were removed. The remaining fingerlings were fed through 5/22/99 when an additional 1,770 lb/acre (20,726 head/acre) averaging 0.085 lb (6.85 inch), were harvested. By the end of the 1-year production cycle, 5,532 lb/acre of fingerling averaging 0.071 lb (6.4 inch) had been harvested. Overall survival in Pond 16a was 77% with 77,461head/acre harvested at a FCR of 1.51.

Pond 15b was stocked with 50.62 lb of fry on 6/24/99 resulting in an estimated 101,114 fry/acre. The first harvest of fingerlings occurred on 3/14/00, when 2,531 lb/acre (31,530 head/acre) of fingerling averaging 0.080 lb (6.7 inch), were harvested. The remaining fingerlings were fed through 6/28/00 when an additional 1,668 lb/acre (27,725 head/acre) of fingerling averaging 0.060 lb (6.05 inch), were harvested. By the end of the 1-year production cycle, 4,200 lb/acre of fingerling averaging 0.071 lb (6.4 inch) had been harvested. Overall survival in Pond 15a was 59% with 59,255 head/acre harvested at a FCR of 2.02.

Pond 16b was stocked with 52.47 lb of fry on 6/22/99 resulting in an estimated 101,023 fry/acre. The first harvest of fingerlings occurred on 1/20/00, when 1221 lb/acre (14,363 head/acre) of fingerling averaging 0.085 lb (6.85 inch), were harvested. A second harvest occurred on 3/7/00 when 3876 lb/acre (39,957 head/ac) of fingerling averaging 0.097 lb (7.15 inch) were removed. The remaining fingerlings were fed through 5/8/00 when an additional 1,700 lb/acre (40,476 head/ac) of fingerling averaging 0.042 lb (5.3 inch), were harvested. By the end of the 1-year production cycle, 6,797 lb/acre of fingerling averaging 0.072 lb (6.45 inch) had been harvested. Overall survival in Pond 16b was 94% with 94,796 head/ac harvested at a FCR of 1.55.

On average across all fingerling verification ponds, 7.7 lb of fry were stocked per acre resulting in 100,873 fry/ac. Ponds were topped either once or twice prior to the final harvest to selectively remove fish greater than 5 inches. Overall total feed input averaged 8,842 lb/ac/year. Overall net production for the fingerling ponds was 5,305 lb/ac/year. Overall fingerling survival was 74% with 75,140 head/acre/year harvested at a FCR of 1.70.

An enterprise budget was developed for each fingerling verification pond to estimate average annual costs and returns per acre (Table 4). Incomes were the product of the total yield (head/ac/yr), average fingerling length (in), and a fingerling price of $0.01/in. Costs for fry, feed, and aeration were based on the average quantity used annually per acre in each verification pond. Other variable costs (including repairs and maintenance, pond renovation, chemicals, telephone, water quality, labor, management, accounting, legal, and bird scaring ammunition) and fixed costs (including depreciation on production facilities and equipment, interest on investments, and insurance) were prorated on a per-acre basis from Engle and Kouka (1996) based on a 320 land-ac farm. Total costs per acre were divided by the number of fingerlings produced per acre to obtain the cost per fingerling for each pond. Similarly, the total cost per acre divided by the yield (lb/ac) estimated the cost per pound of fingerling, and the cost per inch of fingerling was estimated by dividing the total cost per acre by the total number of inch of fingerling produced per acre in each pond..

Breakeven prices when compared to market prices provide information on profit margins per pound of product sold. For the four fingerling verification ponds, the estimated breakeven prices per inch were lower than the standard fingerling market price of $0.01/in, which resulted in a positive profit margin. The estimated breakeven prices per inch to cover total expenses (excluding land) ranged from $0.0046 to $0.0065/in and averaged $0.0053/in (Table 4). Estimated net returns to land and risk ranged from $1,343 to $3,287/ac and averaged $2,236/ac.

The CYVT program has been an excellent demonstration of the best management practices recommended for the production of food-sized channel catfish and provides a necessary intermediate step between small-pond research and the development of Extension's recommendations to farmers. It has also served as an excellent training tool for county Extension agents to learn more about catfish production. The process of developing the specific management protocols for the verification ponds has been especially beneficial to research and extension personnel and has encouraged an open dialogue and provided systematic structure for on-farm interaction with producers.

Inconsistent data collection at the verification sites was one of the most important problems. The length of the program (3 years), personnel turnover, farm structure changes, as well as turnover in extension staff made cooperation and data collection difficult. Towards the end of the program period, cooperators were less likely to inform extension staff about all stocking and harvesting events and to keep accurate records. A system should be developed to facilitate communication, the data collection and data transfer between cooperators and extension staff. Besides, more financial data from cooperators should be collected in order to generate better cost of production estimates. A financial management protocol could be integrated to the production management protocol. Cooperators would benefit from such financial management protocol. By keeping better financial records, cooperators would have better tools to analyses the financial performance of their enterprise and to better plan for the future.

Engle, CR, D. Heikes, D. Brown, N. Stone, and H.S. Killian. 1998. Depletion as a technique to estimate commercial pond inventories of channel catfish. Progressive Fish-Culturist 60: 301-306.

Engle, C. R., and P. J. Kouka. 1996. Effects of inflation on the cost of producing catfish. The Catfish Bargaining Association. Belzoni, Mississippi, USA.

Pote, J.W., C.L. Wax, and C.S. Tucker. 1988. Water in catfish production: sources, uses, and conservation. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Special Bulletin 88-3, November 1988.

Robinson, E.H., M.H. Li, and B.B. Manning. 1996. A practical guide to nutrition, feeds, and feeding of catfish. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station.

USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2002. Catfish production. National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, D.C.

USDE (United States Department of Energy). 2002. Weekly On-Highway Diesel Prices. Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C.

 

Updated 06/24/04