Consumer Demand for Tilapia Products in the US



Consumer Demand for Tilapia Products in the US

and the Effects on Local Markets in Exporting Countries

Kevin Fitzsimmons

University of Arizona

Tucson, Arizona

and

Benedict C. Posadas

Mississippi State University

Coastal Research and Extension Center

Biloxi, Mississippi

ABSTRACT

Tilapia are the second most common farm raised food fish around the world. The fish has recently become popular in U.S. markets and imports have increased from 7.5 million lb. over the last six months of 1992 (when records were first kept) to 41.9 million lb. in 1996. Over the same period, domestic production has increased from five million to approximately 19 million lb. The majority of U.S. production has been marketed live to ethnic markets in metropolitan areas, with smaller amounts going to local seafood markets and restaurants. In 1992 the majority of imports (89%) were whole frozen fish. By 1996, fresh and frozen fillets represented 20% of the imported tilapia, representing an increase from 0.8 million lb. to 8.4 million lb. These increasing supplies are substituting for decreasing supplies of wild caught fish in restaurants and supermarket seafood counters.

Most of the large-scale commercial production of tilapia from the tropics was developed for export to the U.S., Europe and Japan. However, a significant portion has remained in the producing countries where it has been introduced into domestic markets. In general, the countries that have developed large scale production have seen two tiered domestic tilapia prices. A low price for tilapia produced in small scale ponds that is usually consumed by the producer or locally traded and a high price for product from the large farms which goes into the restaurant and grocery store markets.

INTRODUCTION

Tilapia are freshwater fish native to Africa and the Middle East. There have been capture fisheries for tilapia since biblical times. After centuries of being captured in their native waters, tilapia were distributed by missionaries and biologists throughout the tropics in the 1940's and 50's. The concept was that the fish could be grown in virtually any small pond to supplement the diet of the poorest small farmers. In the 1960's and 70's the US-Agency for International Development, US Peace Corps, IDRC, UN-FAO, France’s CIRAD and several European development agencies helped disseminate tilapia and tilapia culture methods to the rest of the world.

World wide production of tilapia has increased from 855,000 metric tons (m.t.) (1.8 billion lb.) in 1990 to 1,100,000 m.t. (2.2 billion lb.) in 1994 (FAO 1994). All of the increase in yield is attributable to aquaculture production. Domestication of tilapia began in the 60's with selective breeding programs in Israel and the United States. There are now advanced breeding programs in dozens of countries. Domesticated tilapia are actually a group of four closely related species within the genus Oreochromis. Breeders have dozens of strains of tilapia including: strains of the fish from various locations around Africa and the Middle East, hybrids of many types among the four species, numerous color variations, and most recently transgenic populations.

The most basic production methods are simple pond or cage fisheries with addition of fertilizer or agriculture wastes as supplemental feeds. Much of the tilapia eaten in the poorest countries is this kind of subsistence aquaculture. This is the kind of aquaculture that was and is promoted by development agencies to improve the nutrition of smallholders and their families (Haight 1991). Small scale aquaculture is common across Africa, in South and Southeast Asia, and most of Latin America. Most of this type of production is for autoconsumption or local trading. Little if any of these fish end up in international trade. Because these fish are reared on a diet of algae grown in the pond, the fish frequently have a strong taste which is not well received in some markets.

In the 1980's several methods of large scale production were developed in both the industrialized and developing countries. The facilities in the industrialized countries are very intensive and sophisticated, using tanks, raceways, greenhouses, geothermal or industrial waste heat and advanced water treatment methods. The cost of production is high, with figures of $1.00/lb. ($2.20/kg) being common. The major inputs are feed, energy, labor, land and water treatment costs. In the tropical countries the typical production methods are more extensive with production typically conducted in ponds with large amounts of water flowing through from adjacent streams or rivers, or in large cages anchored in natural or man-made lakes. Production costs are typically between $0.40 and $0.60/lb. ($0.88 - 1.32/kg). Feed costs tend to be comparable in the developed and developing countries for the high quality feeds required for rapid growth. However, the tropical countries have few energy costs. There are no water heating requirements and the farms are usually designed to avoid water pumping. Labor costs are lower and water treatment is not necessary as most are flow through systems with no treatment of waste water. Land costs in the tropical countries are often lower than the developed countries and lease payments for space in lakes for cage culture do not represent a high percentage of production costs.

Prices for tilapia are generally tied to the size of the harvested fish. Large fish, greater than 600 g, typically will bring a premium price. Fish between 350 and 600 g will bring an intermediate price and fish less than 350 g bring the lowest price. This is true in most countries and applies to fish grown in large scale facilities and in smallholder ponds. Presumably this is due to the larger amount of edible product and fillet that can be recovered per fish. Fillets typically represent 33% of the whole fish. Fillet prices reflect the input cost of the whole fish plus the cost of processing. Import figures are frequently converted to Live Equivalent Weight (LWE) for comparison purposes. Fillet weights are multiplied by 3 and whole frozen fish are multiplied by 1.1 (to reflect drying or occasionally gutted product) to get the LWE.

Many biologists who became familiar with the fish during international work brought back the culture methods to the U.S., Canada and Europe and began to produce small quantities in their home countries. Production slowly increased during the 1980's and tilapia began to appear in local markets and gain some recognition in the seafood industry. The U.S. Department of Agriculture began keeping tilapia aquaculture statistics in 1991 (Table 1).

Table 1. US Tilapia Production 1991-96.

|Year |1991 |1992 |1993 |1994 |1995 |1996 (est.) |

|Live Weight (lb.) |5,000,000 |9,500,000 |12,500,000 |12,980,000 |15,075,000 |19,000,000 |

(USDA, 1996)

Also, in the 1970's and 80's, the U.S., Canada and European countries began accepting more immigrants from developing countries. These immigrants brought with them an appreciation for tilapia. As the first tilapia farms started up in the developed countries, it was the immigrant communities who provided the niche markets. These ethnic markets are still the most lucrative. As the immigrants have improved their economic status and buying power, the producers have developed live haul markets and begun value added processing. The Chinese markets in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Vancouver, and Asian and African markets in Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris were the biggest early buyers. Toronto, with its mix of immigrant communities has now become the largest market in North America. Tilapia are live hauled from as far away as Idaho and Texas. These ethnic markets are now fairly saturated and the food service and retail markets are being developed. Kohler (1996) examines how markets for aquaculture products, including tilapia, can be expanded from ethnic niches into wider ethnic and socioeconomic groups. Consumers buying fish at restaurants and seafood counters are the more traditional outlets and entry to these markets will present tilapia to a much larger consumer base.

In 1992 the Department of Commerce began tracking imports of tilapia. Before that point tilapia had been included in the "other" category of finfish imports. The quarterly and yearly reports have been useful to track the rapid introduction of imported fish into the U.S. market (Table 2). The 1996 and 1997 reports also include declared values of the imports which can be useful for comparison of imports to product in the home country (Appendix 1).

US MARKET

In the United States, the apparent total consumption of tilapia products, based on estimated domestic production and imports of tilapia products consistently increased from 19.2 million LWE lb. in 1992 to 81.1 million LWE lb. in 1996 (Figure 1). This trend in domestic consumption is attributable to the increasing availability of more varied tilapia products including live, fresh and frozen whole and fillets which cater to both household and institutional consumers. In addition, competitively priced tilapia products are being imported from a variety of countries in the products forms preferred by consumers (Table 2). Results of

a survey conducted by Homziak and Posadas (1992) revealed that tilapia products were handled by larger seafood marketing companies in order to expand and diversify their product lines. In a survey of New York and New Jersey fish and seafood retailers (O=Dierno, 1995), tilapia was reported to be the leading aquaculture species used by both chain and independent retail stores.

The wholesale market reports published by the Maryland Aquaculture Office showed consistent increase in the volumes of tilapia products handled by wholesalers surveyed in some selected domestic markets. The live wholesale markets surveyed in the Northeastern states reported handling 319,220 lb. in 1995 and 335,300 lb. in 1996 (Table 3). The monthly wholesale prices of live tilapia dropped from $2.10 per pound during the early months in 1995 to $1.75 per pound during the later months of 1995 (Figure 2). In 1996, prices of live tilapia remained relatively stable at $1.90 per pound in 1996 (Figure 3). All of the live tilapia traded in these wholesale markets were cultured in farms located in the U.S.

Table 3. Weighted Average Price and Volume of Live Tilapia in Selected U.S. Wholesale Markets, 1995-96

| | | |

|Year |Item |Northeast |

| | | |

|1995 |Price ($/lb) |1.86 |

|Jan-Dec | | |

| | | |

| |Volume |319,200 |

| | | |

|1996 |Price ($/lb) |1.90 |

|Jan-Dec | | |

| | | |

| |Volume |335,300 |

Source: Maryland Aquaculture Office (1995, 1996).

Market reports on the APennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts” and AMaryland, Washington, D.C. and Virginia” wholesale markets showed rising volumes of filleted tilapia products traded. The APA-NJ-NY-MA@ wholesale markets handled 2,066 and 2,926 lb./week of tilapia fillets in 1995 and 1996, respectively (Table 4). Monthly wholesale prices in these markets fluctuated between $3.50 and $3.64 per lb. in 1995 (Figure 4) and from $3.55 to $3.64 per lb. in 1996 (Figure 5). In the AMD-DC-VA@ wholesale markets, the total volume of tilapia fillets traded were 2,359 and 3,391 lb./week in 1995 and 1996, respectively. Monthly wholesale prices rose from $3.45 to $3.53 per lb. in 1995 (Figure 6) and declined from $3.54 to $3.49 in 1996 (Figure 7).

Most of the filleted tilapia products traded in the above-mentioned wholesale markets were imported from other producing countries (Appendix 1) while some were raised in different producing regions of the U.S. Whole tilapia products (fresh and frozen) constituted about 80% of all U.S. tilapia imports in 1996. From January 1995 to May 1997, about 27% of all the whole tilapia products traded in the APA-NJ-NY-MA@ and AMD-DC-VA@ wholesale markets were raised in southern regions of the U.S. and delivered fresh or frozen. The majority of the whole tilapia products traded in these markets (73%) were imported from other tilapia producing countries (Appendix 1). The mix of whole tilapia products were sold at $1.67 and $1.70 per lb. in the APA-NJ-NY-MA@ wholesale markets in 1995 and 1996, respectively (Table 5). Lower wholesale prices were reported in the AMD-DC-VA@ wholesale markets.

Table 4. Weighted Average Price and Volume of Tilapia Fillets in Selected U.S. Wholesale Markets, 1995-96

| | | | |

|Year |Item |Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York & |Maryland, Washington, D.C. & Virginia |

| | |Massachusetts | |

| | | | |

|1995 |Price ($/lb) |3.58 |3.48 |

|Jan-Dec | | | |

| | | | |

| |Volume (lb/week) |2,066 |2,359 |

| | | | |

|1996 |Price ($/lb) |3.59 |3.52 |

|Jan-Dec | | | |

| | | | |

| |Volume (lb/week) |2,926 |3,391 |

Source: Maryland Aquaculture Office (1995, 1996).

Table 5. Weighted Average Price and Volume of Whole Tilapia in Selected U.S. Wholesale Markets, 1995-96

| | | | |

|Year |Item |Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York & |Maryland, Washington, D.C. & Virginia |

| | |Massachusetts | |

| | | | |

|1995 |Price ($/lb) |1.67 |1.52 |

|Jan-Dec | | | |

| | | | |

| |Volume (lb/week) |8,500 |170 |

| | | | |

|1996 |Price ($/lb) |1.70 |1.46 |

|Jan-Dec | | | |

| | | | |

| |Volume (lb/week) |11,000 |3,700 |

Source: Maryland Aquaculture Office (1995, 1996).

As additional supplies of tilapia are developed, it appears to be substituting for wild caught fisheries which are static or decreasing in volume. Cod, haddock, sole and flounder fisheries are all in decline with a resulting decrease in market share. At the same time, tilapia, catfish, and Atlantic salmon, all farm raised fish, are rapidly increasing their market share. The supply of tilapia in particular, has grown with the increased domestication and farming of the fish.

From the import data we can see the trend to add more value to the product by conducting more processing in the producing countries. This trend is likely to continue as many of the producing countries will have the competitive advantage of low labor costs. Processed product is reduced in volume and weight and thus less expensive to transport.

PRODUCER COUNTRY MARKETS

China is the world's largest producer of tilapia with estimated production of 167,000 metric tons (m.t.) (368 million lb.) per year (Chun, personal communication). Quite amazing considering that O. mossambicus, O. niloticus and O. aureus were introduced to the country in 1957, 1978 and 1981 respectively (Pullin et al. 1997). Virtually all of China's production is consumed domestically. Exports to the US in 1996 were only 121 m.t. (270,000 lb.). There is very little hard data available regarding tilapia production and markets in China. We have not been able to find information on domestic tilapia prices within China but we suspect international markets have little impact at this point.

Taiwan is also a major producer of tilapia and the major supplier to the U.S. In 1992, Taiwan accounted for 87% of U.S. tilapia imports. By 1996 the percentage had dropped to 79%, even though volume had increased by 26 million pounds. However, Taiwan sends most of it's tilapia as whole frozen fish, Taiwanese tilapia account for only 16% of the imported fillet supply. Tilapia is a commonly eaten fish in Taiwan and the farm production goes into both local and international markets. The largest and highest quality fish are marketed to Japan for prices of up to $10.00/kg. Lower grade fish are marketed to the U.S. with prices of $0.66 to $0.75/lb.

The Philippines is the world's second largest producer with 1996 annual production estimated to be 100,726 m.t. (222 million lb.). The wholesale price is reported to be $0.65/lb (Molnar 1996) with value adding and upscale marketing just beginning in the Philippines. Again exports to the U.S. are a negligible 4.7 m.t. (10,500 lb.). However, high grade tilapia termed "sashimi grade” are bringing $3.37/lb. when sold live into the markets in Japan. Demand for tilapia in the Philippines is very strong and it is widely accepted throughout the country. Because of the strong infrastructure and high quality breeding programs in the Philippines, production is expected to continue to increase and exports are likely to increase rapidly as large scale commercial farms are developed.

Indonesia is another significant exporter to the U.S. with 1.3 million lb. of fillets in 1996. The Indonesian exports primarily come from one large cage farm that supplies international markets. There are many smallholder farms producing tilapia for local markets where it is a popular food. Indonesia was one of the first countries to receive introduced O. mossambicus, in 1939. In fact, one of the common names for O. mossambicus was Java tilapia until the past history was better understood. Additional information is needed regarding domestic production and prices.

Thailand is another of the world’s largest producers of tilapia. Local prices in Thailand were lower than in markets in the Philippines or Central America, $0.25/lb. compared to $0.65/lb. in the Philippines and $0.57 in Honduras (Molnar 1996). It is suggested that these prices are low because of the abundant supply of tilapia in Thailand. Tilapia culture is widespread in the country and it has become one of the most common fish seen in markets and restaurants since the first introduction in 1949.

Mexico's 1994 tilapia production was 81,490 m.t. (World Bank 1997), 30 years after their introduction (Pullin et al. 1997). Mexico’s 1996 exports to the U.S. were only 20.5 m.t. (45,144 lb.) The vast majority of Mexican tilapia is consumed by the fisherman/growers and their communities. Prices vary from 4 pesos ($0.50) for 500 gram whole fish in the local markets to 8 pesos ($1.00) for 500 gram whole fish in Mexico City markets. Fillets are available in some grocery stores for 30 pesos ($3.75) for 500 gram of tilapia fillets. By 1996, exports to the U.S. had dropped to 6.6 metric tons (14,588 lb.) even though production continued to rise. Additional up-scale markets for value added products have been developed. It appears that the domestic demand will continue to grow. There is considerable interest in exporting more to US markets and the proximity to the U.S. would seem to be an attractive incentive. Several Mexican and U.S. firms are considering joint projects, but at this time there are no major production for export operations.

Costa Rica has been producing tilapia for export since the early 1980's when a small tilapia canning operation was started. It was not until the 90's when exports of fresh fillets were started that it became a major exporter to the U.S. (2.4 million lb. of fillets in 1996). Most of the production for export is from one facility. There is small farm production for local markets as in the other Central American countries. Molnar (1996) reported that prices were $0.57/lb. in Honduras. Costa Rican prices are probably similar. All of the Central American countries are now exporting tilapia to the U.S. and it is anticipated that their production will increase rapidly.

Colombia is another country that has seen production rise rapidly. Tilapia aquaculture was introduced in 1960 (Pullin et al. 1997) and was further encouraged by the U.S. Peace Corps in the 1970's. Subsistence production slowly grew through the country and tilapia was recognized in most rural areas. Again, the local price was low and markets were all local. During the late 80's several large commercial farms were established that grew fish for export. Exports to the U.S. grew rapidly from 193,000 lb. of mixed whole and fillet products in 1992 to 839,900 lb. of fillets in 1995. During this time, some of the products were sold locally and a new market in the urban areas developed with products in restaurants and grocery stores. These fillets sold locally in Colombia for the same FOB Miami price of $2.57 lb. In 1996, exports to the U.S. actually dropped to 495,000 lb. because of the high demand within Colombia.

Ecuador is new to the international tilapia markets. Tilapia production has grown rapidly as shrimp farmers in Ecuador have learned that tilapia grown in a crop rotation in shrimp ponds reduces viral and parasitic infections in shrimp. Since much of the processing, transportation and marketing infrastructure was available, Ecuador has gone from 0 exports to the US in 1993 to 2.1 million lb. in 1996. As more shrimp producers adopt the crop rotation method or abandon shrimp altogether, tilapia exports are expected to increase. No information regarding the local markets was found.

Jamaica is another significant exporter of tilapia to the U.S. Exports have increased from 30,000 lb. in 1992, 91% of which were whole fish, to 542,668 lb. in 1996, 96% of which were fillets. O. mossambicus was introduced in Jamaica in 1950. The US-AID and Peace Corps introduced advanced aquaculture techniques and additional stocks of tilapia. Later, production was supported by government run hatcheries providing fingerlings. There is still small pond production by farmers, but the international markets are supplied by large corporate farms. National production is over 3,000 m.t. (6.6 million lb.). Local inland markets have low price tilapia as do markets in the low income neighborhoods in the large coastal cities. The tourist trade resorts, restaurants and groceries focus on marine species and do not appear to serve tilapia at this point.

Egypt's production is 22,000 m.t. (48.5 million lb.) in 1995 (El Gamal 1997). All of the production is consumed locally although there is interest in developing markets in Europe. Most of the production is in conjunction with rice fields, although there are some cage farms in irrigation return waters that market in Alexandria. There are also intensive tilapia farms that are operated by the Fisheries Department and the military. The products from the military farms are consumed by military personnel, while the Fisheries Department tilapia are sold through associated markets at the same price as the nearby cage farms of $0.60 per pound for whole fish.

Israel is also a significant producer of farm raised tilapia with a large domestic market and does not export significant quantities to the US. Israel and Egypt are the only producers in this list where tilapia are native. Stocks from the wild in these countries are valuable to breeders for genetic diversity.

Brazil is a major producer of tilapia that also consumes all of its production domestically. With the tremendous resources in the country for aquaculture one would expect that Brazil will be producing significant quantities for export in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumer demand for tilapia in the U.S. is expected to increase more rapidly than domestic production for the foreseeable future. Developing countries in the tropics are increasing their production to supply this U.S. demand. With their lower costs of production, it is anticipated that tropical producers will maintain control of the frozen whole and frozen fillet markets. They will also provide competition in the fresh fillet markets.

One concern has been whether tilapia might be marketed by low income producers into the international trade. If the producers then substitute less nutritious foodstuffs into their diets, the household nutrition may suffer. This does not appear to be the case in the countries reviewed. The subsistence producers do not appear to be growing fish that are of the size or quality that will be acceptable in the international trade. The prices in local markets do not seem to be impacted much by the large commercial farms. In most of the locations reviewed, the commercial producers who are marketing locally are developing upscale markets for value added products. However, as trade in any commodity grows it is common for prices to be leveled across markets. This can already be seen with tilapia when one examines the values of the tilapia imported to the US from the various producing countries. When the declared values for the tilapia imports are converted to a live weight equivalent they are consistently in the $0.60 to $0.90 range. We can expect those values to cluster even more tightly in the future.

In reviewing tilapia prices in the U.S. and several of the producing countries it seems that prices have remained relatively stable for most of the past 5 years. In fact, when factoring in inflation, most of the tilapia prices have decreased in constant terms. This phenomenon has also been seen in catfish, trout, shrimp and salmon as these crops have increased in production around the world. We predict this situation will be common in markets around the world for both low value tilapia in local markets and high value tilapia in international trade and up-scale domestic markets.

REFERENCES

El Gamal, A.R. Egyptian aquaculture: Status and development requirements with special emphasis on tilapias and their potential in aquaculture. In: Fitzsimmons, K. (ed.) Tilapia Aquaculture: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture IV. NRAES-106. Ithaca, NY.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 1994. Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics Vol. 79. Rome.

Haight, B.A. 1991. A participatory research-extension approach to rural aquaculture development in southern Africa. pp. 48-56 In: Aquaculture in Africa, Proceedings of a Workshop held in Harare, Zimbabwe. Ed. K. Koop International Foundation for Science, Stockholm, Sweden.

Homziak, J., and B. C. Posadas. 1992. A Preliminary Survey of Tilapia Markets in North America. Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute.

Kohler, S. 1996. Using census data and geographic information systems to identify target markets for aquaculture products in the USA. World Aquaculture 27(4):23-35.

Maryland Aquaculture Office. Wholesale Market Report. Department of Agriculture, Annapolis, Maryland. Various issues.

Maryland Aquaculture Office. 1995 . Wholesale Market Summary Report. Department of Agriculture, Annapolis, Maryland.

Maryland Aquaculture Office. 1996 . Wholesale Market Summary Report. Department of Agriculture, Annapolis, Maryland.

Molnar, J.J., Hanson, T.R., and Lovshin, L.L. 1996. Social, economic and institutional impacts of aquaculture research on tilapia: the PD/A CRSP in Rwanda, Honduras, the Philippines and Thailand. Research and Development Series No. 40. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.

O=Dierno, L.J. Understanding the retail market for farm raised fish and seafood products. Aquaculture Magazine 21(4): 7-13.

Pullin, R.S.V., Palomares M.L., Casal, C.V., Dey, M.M. and Pauly, D. 1997. Environmental impacts of Tilapias. In: Fitzsimmons, K. (ed.) Tilapia Aquaculture: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture IV. NRAES-106. Ithaca, NY.

U.S. Department of Agriculture/CSREES 1996. Aquaculture situation and outlook report. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Commerce/Bureau of Census. 1993. 1992 U.S. tilapia imports by country and product form.

U.S. Department of Commerce/Bureau of Census. 1995. 1994 U.S. tilapia imports by country and product form.

U.S. Department of Commerce/Bureau of Census. 1996. 1995 U.S. tilapia imports by country and product form.

U.S. Department of Commerce/Bureau of Census. 1997. U.S. imports of tilapia by product form and country of origin.

World Bank. 1997. Mexico Aquaculture Development Project. Report 16476-ME. Washington D.C.

APPENDIX 1. U.S. IMPORTS OF TILAPIA BY PRODUCT

FORM AND COUNTRY OF ORIGIN

JANUARY-DECEMBER, 1996

COUNTRY PRODUCT KILOS DOLLARS

BELIZE FILLET FROZEN 19,685 29,668

FROZEN 133,338 196,334

SUM 153,023 226,002

CHILE FILLET FRESH 5,737 32,086

SUM 5,737 32,086

CHINA FILLET FROZEN 16,103 82,760

FROZEN 105,455 183,774

SUM 121,558 266,534

COLOMBIA FILLET FRESH 224,645 1,275,894

SUM 224,645 1,275,894

COSTA RICA FILLET FRESH 1,080,954 5,887,587

SUM 1,080,954 5,887,587

ECUADOR FILLET FRESH 450,700 2,536,686

FILLET FROZEN 114,160 519,692

FROZEN 395,245 604,997

SUM 960,105 3,661,375

EL SALVADOR FILLET FROZEN 226 1,375

SUM 226 1,375

HONDURAS FILLET FRESH 127,932 839,513

FILLET FROZEN 8,818 7,365

FROZEN 73,310 66,643

SUM 210,060 913,521

INDONESIA FILLET FROZEN 578,683 2,684,248

SUM 578,683 2,684,248

JAMAICA FILLET FRESH 162,202 1,032,453

FILLET FROZEN 74,296 312,291

FROZEN 9,655 54,083

SUM 246,153 1,398,827

KENYA FILLET FROZEN 13,254 60,306

SUM 13,254 60,306

MALAYSIA FROZEN 10,200 16,743

SUM 10,200 16,743

MEXICO FILLET FRESH 6,617 30,631

SUM 6,617 30,631

NICARAGUA FILLET FRESH 3,245 14,097

FILLET FROZEN 24,572 53,949

FROZEN 1,422 5,726

SUM 29,239 73,772

PANAMA FILLET FRESH 1,200 4,902

SUM 1,200 4,902

PHILIPPINES FILLET FROZEN 4,763 20,970

SUM 4,763 20,970

TAIWAN FILLET FROZEN 606,810 2,250,119

FROZEN 14,411,351 22,571,779

SUM 15,018,161 24,821,898

THAILAND FILLET FROZEN 222,201 1,385,391

FROZEN 61,823 103,109

SUM 284,024 1,488,500

VIET NAM FROZEN 46,368 66,687

SUM 46,368 66,687

ZIMBABWE FILLET FROZEN 14,000 60,228

FROZEN 19,278 25,411

SUM 33,278 85,639

TOTAL IMPORTS TO US 19,028,248 43,017,497

FIGURES

Figure 1. Estimated U.S. Tilapia Supply, 1992-96

Figure 2. Wholesale Live Tilapia Markets, 1995, Northeast

Figure 5. Wholesale Live Tilapia Markets, 1996, Northeast

Figure 4. Wholesale Tilapia Fillet Markets, 1995, PA, NJ, NY & MA

Figure 5. Wholesale Tilapia Fillet Markets, 1996, PA, NJ, NY & MA

Figure 6. Wholesale Tilapia Fillet Markets, 1995, MD, DC & VA

Figure 7. Wholesale Tilapia Fillet Markets, 1996, MD & DC

APPENDIX

Appendix 1. U.S. Imports of Tilapia By Product Form and Country of Origin, January-December 1996.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download