1. 1 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
An Investigation into the Use of Seafood Processing By-products in Nova Scotia
Alison Chappell, 3rd
year BScAHN Dietetics student, Mount Saint Vincent University
Introduction
As issues such as food insecurity and fish stock collapses have become increasingly prominent, the
issue of food waste has also become an important and pressing issue on a global and regional scale.
Gustavsson et al. reported in 2011 that 6% of all seafood losses in North America and Oceania occur
through the processing aspect of the food supply chain. Seafood losses as processing byproducts
disposed of as waste from commercial processing could be reduced, or processing byproducts could
be put to alternative use instead of waste to create value-added revenue streams within the industry
(Gustavsson, 2011).
It is possible that there is room for improvement throughout the seafood processing industry in Nova
Scotia. These improvements may optimize the value of the fish waste stream, therein increasing
economic activity for seafood processors. This project provides a province-wide analysis of groundfish
and shellfish processing by-products, and how they are used within the seafood processing industry in
Nova Scotia.
Methods
A series of brief discussions were conducted over the phone to assess the efficiency of Nova Scotian
seafood processing. 50 seafood processors were contacted and questioned in total, based on 120
seafood processors found on two lists from the Nova Scotia Fisheries Sector Council and the Nova
Scotia Fish Packers Association. The principal questions asked during the conversations were:
 What type of seafood have you processed this past year?
 What does the processing entail?
 Is any waste being produced from processing?
 Is the waste from processing being put to use elsewhere?
 Does the waste generate any profit?
The responses to these questions were recorded and then sorted into categories of common replies
per Nova Scotian county. Common themes and best practices were then determined from the
compiled results.

2. 2 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
Results
Table 1: Summary of contacted categories
*This data includes in the “Actively Processing Seafood” category (three seafood processors that were
contacted who claimed not to process, however further discussions indicated there was seafood waste).
Number Percentage (%)
Actively Processing Seafood 21 19.1
Whole or live sales 32 29.1
Unable to contact manager 26 23.6
Out of business (number not in service) 31 28.2
Total questioned 50 45.5
Total attempted 110 100

3. 3 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
Table 2: Number of processing facilities per processing byproduct use, per Nova Scotian
County
Sold (to mink
farmers, lobster
fishermen, as
bait, or to other
processors)
Disposed of
as compost
or garbage,
or given
away
No
byproducts
generated*
No longer
processing
seafood
No longer
in business
or number
not in
service
Unable
to
contact
Halifax 1 0 0 7 3 3
Lunenburg 0 0 1 3 1 1
Queens 1 0 0 1 1 2
Shelburne 6 1 0 5 3 1
Yarmouth 2** 1** 0 3 3 2
Digby 2** 1** 0 3 4 1
Annapolis 0 1 0 0 2 2
Kings 0 1 0 1 0 1
Hants 0 0 0 0 0 0
Colchester 1 0 0 1 2 2
Cumberland 0 0 0 0 0 2
Pictou 0 0 0 0 1 2
Antigonish 0 1 0 2 1 0
Guysbourough 0 0 0 0 5 2
Richmond 0 0 0 0 2 1
Victoria 0 0 0 0 1 2
Inverness 0 1 0 3 1 0
Cape Breton 1** 2** 0 3 1 2
Total 14 6 1 32 31 26
Percentage (%) 12.7 5.5 0.9 29.1 28.2 23.6
* Note that it is possible that processing facilities that deal with only whole or live product who do not
process per se, may still suffer losses such as deaths in holding tanks, damaged whole product, etc. This
may have been underreported.
**Some companies have more than one use of byproduct.

4. 4 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
Table 3: Groundfish processing facilities per byproduct use, per Nova Scotian County
Sold to mink farms /
fishermen / other
processors
Mixed in with final
product
Disposed of as
compost or garbage
Halifax 1* 1* 0
Lunenburg 0 0 0
Queens 0 0 0
Shelburne 6 0 1
Yarmouth 2* 0 0
Digby 1 0 0
Annapolis 0 0 0
Kings 0 0 0
Hants 0 0 0
Colchester 0 0 0
Cumberland 0 0 0
Pictou 0 0 0
Antigonish 0 0 0
Guysbourough 0 0 0
Richmond 0 0 0
Victoria 0 0 0
Inverness 0 0 0
Cape Breton 1* 0 0
Total 11 1 1
Percentage of
byproduct use by all
groundfish processors
(%)
84.6 7.7 7.7
*Some companies have more than one use of byproduct.

5. 5 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
Table 4: Shellfish processing facilities per byproduct use, per Nova Scotian County
Sold at lesser value/
sold to fishermen as
bait
Given away Disposed of at
sea (on vessel)
Disposed of as
compost or
garbage
Halifax 0 0 0 0
Lunenburg 0 0 1 1
Queens 1 0 0 0
Shelburne 1* 0 0 0
Yarmouth 0 0 0 1*
Digby 0 1 0 0
Annapolis 0 0 0 1
Kings 0 0 0 1
Hants 0 0 0 0
Colchester 1 0 0 0
Cumberland 0 0 0 0
Pictou 0 0 0 0
Antigonish 0 0 0 1
Guysbourough 0 0 0 0
Richmond 0 0 0 0
Victoria 0 0 0 0
Inverness 0 0 0 1
Cape Breton 0 0 0 2*
Total 3 1 1 8
Percentage of
byproduct use
by all shellfish
processors
23.1 7.7 7.7 61.5
*Processors with an asterisk are the same process both groundfish and shellfish.

6. 6 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
Discussion
Detailed conversations revealed that the primary source of seafood processing byproducts in Nova
Scotia that are currently generating additional revenues for processors is from groundfish (species
such as cod, haddock, and pollock) processing. The primary source of seafood processing byproducts
that are disposed of as waste is from shellfish processing.
Of the 21 active processors contacted, 14 profit from their processing byproducts. 66.7% of all
processors sell their seafood byproducts to mink farmers or fishermen as bait, while 28.6% of
processors dispose of their byproducts as fish waste, yielding no profits. 4.8% of active processors do
not dispose of or profit from their byproducts, however give them to community members for purposes
such as fertilizer. The number of processors profiting from their waste is good, but is particularly
exceptional among those processing groundfish. Among groundfish processors, all but one facility
(92.3%) was making use of their waste, profiting in some way or another.
The portion of the active processors that sell their byproduct to mink farmers do have the potential to
further optimize the value of their waste by finding an alternate market. Mink farms have been found to
be linked to fresh water contamination and lake eutrophication (Suzuki, 2011). Further environmentally
friendly markets such as compost, production of fish bait, the use of lobster shells to create
biodegradable golf balls and even wood chips all exist and would be alternatives to selling byproduct
to mink farms.
The primary source of seafood byproducts that are disposed of as waste is from shellfish such as
lobster, crab, and shrimp. It should be noted that the losses in these scenarios are chiefly a cause of
issues in the handling and storage phase of the food supply chain (FSC), not discards from
processing. Stoner (2013) holds that processing phase of the FSC entails handing and storage, and
when degradation of product occurs at any point in this period it must be disposed of. This includes
lobster deaths in holding tanks at processing facilities. For the sake of this document, any activity
undertaken by a seafood processor (including processing, handling whole or live species, or long term
storage) was included as processing. As a result it is possible that those processors processing
shellfish that were contacted who didn’t consider this the case might have underrepresented seafood
losses.
If this study were to be repeated it would be essential to inquire if all facilities had holding tank deaths.
There seemed to be confusion over the general concept of what processing waste was and with the
recurrent answer of “no processing waste” it is apparent the concept should be defined. Stoner (2013)
notes this in her report, stating that “Further confusion with respect to defining food loss results from
the significant variation in the terminology used in relation to the concept of food loss”. To clarify
responses, terms such as food loss or discards may be more applicable to the processing and
distribution phases of the food supply chain. The term food waste “…refers to food that is fit for human
consumption but does not get consumed because it is discarded,” whereas food loss is defined as
“…food that is lost before it reaches the consumer due to spillage or spoilage through the supply
chain” (Gustavsson et al., 2011).
Of all businesses contacted from the Nova Scotia Fisheries Sector Council and Nova Scotia Fish
Packers Association lists of seafood processors, 57.3% were no longer involved in the processing

7. 7 | E c o l o g y A c t i o n C e n t r e - S e p t e m b e r 1 8 , 2 0 1 4
industry or were inactive. This was the most common response to the questions asked and may
exhibit a decrease in economic activity in the industry. This appears to be mainly a regional issue;
most active businesses are located in the South West Nova region of Nova Scotia (Digby, Yarmouth,
and Shelburne counties) and Halifax County.
Conclusion
Through the conversations conducted with various seafood processors in Nova Scotia, it was
determined that approximately 38% of businesses are profiting from their seafood processing
byproducts. These profits were found to be generated by sales to mink farms and other fishermen for
bait.
Many of the businesses contacted that deal in wholesale and live products stated that they do not
process seafood and consequently do not produce waste. Although these businesses do not process
as per the definition in the food supply chain (trimmings) (Stoner, 2013), the exclusive dealings of
whole or live product seafood still account for seafood processors and still produce waste. This waste
would result from distribution as mentioned in the discussion. Future studies of seafood processing
efficiency could include further analysis of those processors dealing with whole and live products, to
quantify losses (and where those losses go) of whole or live species disposed of as culls, damaged
product, or deaths in holding tanks.
There is certainly room for improvement to optimize the seafood processing waste stream as 1/3 of
processors contacted are solely disposing of their waste. Through educating processors of new,
profitable methods to utilize seafood waste (such as production of fish bait or compost) it may be
possible to decrease the incidences of primary disposal.
References
1. Food and Agricultural Organization. (2011). Global food losses and food waste: Extent, causes and
prevention. Rome, Italy: Gustavsson, J., Cederberg, C., & Sonesson, U.
2. Stoner, J. (2013). Applying the concept of sustainable consumption to seafood: How product los
through post-harvest seafood supply chains undermines seafood sustainability (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). Dalhousie University, Halifax.
3. David Suzuki Foundation. (2011). The impacts of the mink industry on freshwater lakes in Nova
Scotia: An overview of concerns. Retrieved from:
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/media/news/Mink%20Industry%20and%20Lakes%20in%20Nova%20S
cotia%201.pdf