Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

We are talking millions of hectares/acres, and not just a few thousand square feet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-develo ... fish-farms

What's not clear from the article is that they are combining freshwater prawns and rice in the same paddy.

Hmmm... AP?
I don't know... seems just a 'multi-task symbiotic relationship. There was a great TED talk about maintaining a healthy ecosystem, if you wanted great tasting food... A place in Spain, with an estuary that had been dammed, returned the water to the estuary... happy estuary, well supplied flamingos, lead to great feasting for geese and fish... terrific tasting fish at a high rate of production, and clean water... not really 'AP'... no pumps.

Indeed.... seems to be more a (worthwhile) aquaculture related proposal.. than aquaponics...

Perhaps they later use the fish waste fertilised ponds.. to grow rice...

One man's meat is another man's poison.

The word poison comes from the French word for fish.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?ter ... in_frame=0






french word for fish is un poisson, le poisson spelt differently to puison (old french, no longer used).

Oh well, French was my first language, and I got it wrong. As a kid it was British sailors that told me the story about French pickled fish on board sailing ships that would go rancid and poisonous - hence poisonous = fish. I guess it was just the English pulling my leg and having yet another shot at the French.

Rupes, the fresh water shrimp/prawns are farmed and fed in the same paddies as the rice, so I think that equates to aquaponics rather than aquaculture. Pretty simple system really; no fert, but feed prawns in the paddies and they do it for you and you get another product to sell - works for them.

But the article is confusing as it talks about estuarine prawn farming, which is definitely aquaculture, and the freshwater prawns in rice paddies which is AP in the same breath.

Just a loads of talk .....purely a vision not reality.(I hope)

Fact= At present the world food production exceed demand.

Fact= Food distribuition and managment needs to be reorganised.(most food goes wasted)(the average US person eat 10 times more than the average person in a third world country)

Fact=Most less developed country are more likely not to comply with the UN regulation because of the burocratical mess and the ease of corruption of governamet or regulatory agency.(shrimp feed is fuelling ocean depletion of juvenile fish)

Fact=Shrimping at that level can lead to higher impact if not manged correctly (high ammonia level in shrimp farm)


All in the name of "economic growth"=capitalism

Growth for the sake of growth is like a cencer cell behave!

probably is CPFOODS umbrella corporation ideas!

Bio... I think you are correct... it smacks of aquaculture. However... if it is well managed, it could be a boon for rice production. I wonder what and how much they are feeding the shrimp...?

Why would they need to? Shouldn't the shrimp eat the detritus of a rice production, anyway... decayed rice straw... bugs & such... And unless someone is monitoring the water quality, I wonder how they will be able to tell how much to feed...?

Your 'fact' that the U.S. is eating 10X what everyone else is... is more like more calories- not just food-- add fat and sugar, and somehow that makes it better...

Preaching to the converted bioaquafarm here's my organisations take on the issue

http://www.australianfoodsovereigntyall ... b-2013.pdf

Sorry it is a big document, but then the problem is systemic and silver bullets are in short supply. Currently working on an exec summary for the time challenged.

But in essence this thread was to stimulate discussion around what constitutes commercial aquaponics. For Rupes nothing less than an industrial version with fully funded pension plans will do, for others a one person operation, enough to make a decent living is OK - and both and everything else in between are right.

I'm fully in support of a sustainable and strategic commercial approach to AP, as that's the sector I'm striving to improve/develope, I might be going down too, but at least I've tried hard to do what I can for a bright future.....I'd rather cope with a delusion than regret!
While anybody can indeed do BYAP, that alone won't be enough to tackle the real environmetal/social/economical issue that spin around food production/distribuition. (it's like saying permaculture can meet the world food demand!)
If the business model is correct and given the right environmental/political scenario, there is a huge potential for Integrated farming (or AP).
We have enough evidence and collected data to prove the efficay of the applied concept of Integrated farming, ask yourself why it's never been taken seriously to the next level (commercial)
Probably the same reason why we are still ensalved to depend from corporation when it comes to mass mobility and transportation (petrol, industrial manifacture, law and legislation that makes you fall victim of the enslave game)
what appen to nobel ideas like free energy for everybody(tesla coil) or hydrogen car etc....
The collective knowledge and technologies have been out there for a while....we have transformed into zombies.
At least not all of us....

MCFARM: thank you for the document, It is now in my collection of resources and valuable info.

Commercial could be interpreted to anything.
As long as pay the bill for the one-man-band in a hobby-farm or employ thousand of people to distribute to millions!

probably the effort of the one-man-band one day will be enough to inspire people or to just prove the concept to multymillion corporation and maybe things are set to change....after all, changes are the only sure thing so far happening in life!

DANCINLADY; unfortunately where there is a profit driven mentality figure and number is what count the most and to put it down in in tree letter what they are after in commercial production is: FCR (food conversion rate) and given this analysis I doubt the bugs in a puddy will support an high output production! Specially with a shrimp appetite.
So externa food source will be a must!

I always feel the need to answer this when people ask.
Most of these are "scientific mumbo jumbo". They are not energy sources. they use more energy than they produce. . Also, for others, there is not enough extra energy produced, for them to be of value.

People who do not study physics, sciences , think that these are hidden suppressed technologies. . Please do feel the need to argue these, because the ones that do work are being used and developed by backyard scientist that understand physics. The ones that do not work, are being hyped by those who have no interest in spending time studying physics. . My background is engineering and science.

I find that many of those who do not have a good background in sciences, have a difficult time understanding who is telling the truth and who is selling fantasies. . I have spent too much time investigating some technologies that turned out to be complete frauds, but people are still being taken in by them.

yea right, that is why we still believe eart is flat, or that human would have never been able to fly or reach the moon, or that galxy has and end etc..... we have seen a giant leap in thecnology/sience/engineering in the last 100 years and and compared to the time we have been here since it is a of inimaginable evolution, we are only limited by our imagination.

And I'm pleased to hear that people are still taking on this study and triyng to develop a safe future, but in the end it's still those who fund research and developemnt that are controlling the game.(corporations!)

I'll apreciate you sharing your personal experience and I feel sad when someone discount the INFINITE POSSIBILITIES.
We shall keep trying....

[quote="bioaquafarm"] model is correct and given the right environmental/political scenario, there is a huge potential for Integrated farming (or AP).
We have enough evidence and collected data to prove the efficay of the applied concept of Integrated farming, ask yourself why it's never been taken seriously to the next level (commercial)

/quote]
I'm convinced that it has less to do with corporations, specifically... and more to do with labor hours req'd.

If the labor cannot be replaced with a kind of machine, that it is too intensive for a big operation. They cut costs by cutting out the actual labor... or perhaps I should say 'thoughtful labor'. If they can program a machine to do highly complex tasks... they'dd do it. But it requires constant monitoring, and some savvy response... those are expensive to program.

And... bio, you are not wrong... if we keep testing the system; expanding technique and application- I mean, the hanging or mounted tube seems to be really cool... the floats are terrific... for planting and for harvesting easily- and every step we can automate frees up our hours to do other stuff...

Speaking of which, I need to get back to my back yard clean up. I'm whacking through a mesquite tree, cutting back long neglected roses... and trimming back my trumpet vines. All to access my back wall for future strawberry tubes!!

"But in essence this thread was to stimulate discussion around what constitutes commercial aquaponics."

Look this is quite straightforward. Commercial means engaging in commerce; commerce means sexual intercourse. So if you are having sex and have an AP system you are commercial, if you are not you are not commercial.

I will preface my following comments by stating that my food acquisition habits are gauged in this order of importance to me

1. Grow my own
2. Buy local organic
3. Buy local
4. Buy regionally produced crops
5. And last in the order of purchasing are occasional treats that are not indigenous to/produced in my region.

Mcfarm, on page 11 under core principals the paper cites

"key decisions about food and farming are matters of democratic discussion and debate, rather than being left to unaccountable global corporations and markets"

I am sorry but I don't want the food choices and farming methods left up to a democratic decision. I want restrictions/regulations in place that are based on sound science not on emotion or an idealized promulgation of a principle that is "fair to everyone". I definitely don't want the democratic debate of it to the point where decisions are being based on public referendums where the end result of the debate will be decided by which side managed to portray the other as a evil empire/crazy nutjob better.

That does not imply I support global agribusiness modeling it merely states that I feel the change needs to occur willingly on community levels rather than radical policy changes on governmental levels. Each community and region is going to have its own circumstances to dictate what the model should be rather than instituting broad policies on national levels. For some products the energy expended to move something from one area to another may be less than the energy required to produce that product locally. It would be counter intuitive at that point to expend the resources to produce that product when less could be spent producing a more appropriate one for the region. Let's be honest, society as a whole is not going to make the radical shift to eating bioregionally any time soon.
"access to the global commons – water, seeds, land, knowledge – as the collective inheritance of humanity, is enhanced rather than curtailed"

This one I can really get behind as a policy push. Right now if Agribusiness products cross pollinate your crops and you save seed you can be sued for patent infringement and basically shut down. The onerous should be on the part of the agribusiness to prove intentional cross pollination before they can get relief for infringement. I can put in all the corn or soy I want out of a catalog but if I clean beans to save for seed I can assure you that pollen from one of my neighbors will have contaminated enough to get me in trouble legally.

"recognising that people want to be connected with their food, local and regional food economies are prioritised and supported"

I'm sorry but I think this is a good example of promoting an idealized version of reality. I really don't think most of society wants to be "connected" with their food. People in developed countries want what they believe to be safe food cheap and readily available at the market when they want it. Not necessarily "in season" or bioregionally. The majority don't care where it is grown so long as it is relatively cheap and on the store shelf at the time they want it.

People in underdeveloped countries who are truly poverty stricken and hungry could care less where the food is from and exactly how it was farmed so long as it staves off starvation.

Silver bullets as a rule are best left in fiction where they can slay vampires, werewolves, or just gleam in the sun on a masked cowboys belt. Silver bullets are what brought DDT, chemical fertilizers, and GMO crops in the first place.

Dancinhrbldy-

Combining aquaculture and hydroponics in a backyard scale is relatively easy. Combining them on a truly commercial scale above hobby farm size not so much. Either discipline on it's own poses many challenges. Not just the challenge of keeping the "nuts and bolts" of the system running. You also have the challenge of producing consistent product. If your a hobby scale and growing out 400 fish a year plus farmer marketing your veggies your going to be able to have more variation in your product than an operation with a tank culture that supports moving 1000 net pots of product per week. Their buyers are not going to be consumers goin to the local farm market who generally realize not every tomato or head of lettuce is the same size or without blemish. Their customer is either a store chain or wholesaler who's end consumer has been trained like one of Pavlov's dog to go for the shiny piece without blemish. Consistency in size also discourages customers digging through product on the store shelf too much which in turn blemishes/damages the product making it less likely to sell. If you have 400 tilapia at end run, target weight is 500 grams and 10 percent of them are under weight to far to vendor you can inexpensively toss them in a seperate tank and dumping then off to family or friends when they finally hit the target weight is not a big deal. If your growing on an aquaculture scale that ten percent occurs it is product is either going to be considered a loss and disposed of or product that is going to require more input to be able to vendor and that additional feed is going to cut your margin on that fish. If multiple ponds are used to segregate fish runs it may or may not be advisable to add the undersized ones to the pond with a comparable sized run. That did not even factor that your accounts are not only going to want consistency in product, but consistency in availability of it with the ability to add to an order if needed. Now take the balancing act for each of those disciplines and put them together. Weigh the extra headaches and resources needed to deal with them against a minimal inputs cost reduction and a very minor niche of the overall market that is goin to care your product is a premium one compared to a cheap head of lettuce grown anywhere or an imported fish on ice.