Skip to content
The Outlaw Ocean ProjectFood for Feed
IndiaThe Dirty Business of FishmealSenegalContinuous Fishing and Its CostsPeruThe Fishmeal Capital of the WorldWestern SaharaFish Laundering And An Illegal OccupationChina IThe Blue MiracleChina IIThe Tianyun ReportChina IIISelling The Story of Desert Fish FarmingChina IVWhere Tibet’s Sacred Waters Became a FactoryRussiaCaptivity in The Business of Fishmeal ProductionArgentinaThe Stench and Sustainability of FishmealCanadaThe Hidden Costs of Feeding Farmed FishChileIllegal and Unsustainable Fish FarmingEcuadorThe Fishmeal ProblemThe GambiaOverfished and Under ThreatIndonesiaA Playground for Illegal FishingMauritaniaAn Emergent Giant in A Messy BusinessMoroccoIllegal Fishing in Western Saharan WatersNorwayThe Secrets of a Salmon SuperpowerThailandA Fishmeal Industry Rife with ProblemsTurkeyA Farm-Fishing ColossusUnited StatesThe Dangers of the Fishmeal IndustryVietnamChronic and Widespread OverfishingGreece ISeafood Problems at Home Start ElsewhereGreece IIThe National Park Choked by Fish FarmsCould the World Stop Using Fish as Livestock Feed?The Cost of Stench And Who Pays It?The Fire Retardant in Your FishThe Problem of Stench: To Counter It You Must Count It

The Fire Retardant in Your Fish

On January 8, 1966, a South African ship caught fire at sea. When it was in port in Bristol, England, firefighters pried open the smoking container, and the conflagration spread and burned for five days.1 A little over a month later, on February 11, a Liberian steamship caught fire near Rotterdam. The blaze spread and ignited a storage area with barrels of petrol, raging for several days, before melting the deck and mast and eventually sinking the vessel.2 Then, on March 19, 1966, a Danish ship caught fire off Long Beach, California, injuring three firefighters and killing a longshoreman, and causing over a million dollars in estimated damages.3

Fires rage on the SS South America and the MV Alva Cape, two of the at least 90 fires that broke out on ships carrying fishmeal between the 1950s and 1970s. In an effort to prevent more fishmeal fires on cargo ships, the feed industry began treating fishmeal with ethoxyquin, a fire retarding chemical originally used to prevent rubber tires from drying out. By 1969, however, evidence of ethoxyquin’s carcinogenic nature and toxic effects on humans and animals began accumulating.Sepia Times, NY Daily News, Evers, Joost/Anefo
A storage shed in Southport, North Carolina, holding 17-18 tons of fishmeal, was destroyed by fire on November 11, 1978. The cause was not determined, but news reports highlighted the highly flammable nature of fishmeal, which can ignite easily and fuel intense fires.
A storage shed in Southport, North Carolina, holding 17-18 tons of fishmeal, was destroyed by fire on November 11, 1978. The cause was not determined, but news reports highlighted the highly flammable nature of fishmeal, which can ignite easily and fuel intense fires.The Sunday Star-News

The culprit in each fire was fishmeal, a highly flammable cargo. This dark-yellow powder—made by drying and pulverizing fish for use as animal feed in chicken, pig, and especially aquaculture farms—is known for spontaneously combusting as it decays and oxidizes. From the 1950s through the 1970s, fishmeal cargo ignited at least 90 fires on ships and in plants around the world, according to a sweep of historical news coverage by The Outlaw Ocean Project.4M

For seafarers, insurers, dock workers, and port firefighters throughout the 1950s and 1960s, fishmeal’s combustibility was a serious worry. One feed manufacturer called it “practically as flammable as gunpowder,” causing fires that are “notoriously hard to control” and that can burn for multiple days, even in a flooded ship’s hold, according to a 1962 article in a Californian newspaper, the Independent.5 The chairman of the Liverpool Underwriters’ Association, an insurance group, cited fishmeal as a primary reason the 1960s were the “worst in living history” for ship losses in their 1963 annual report of casualty statistics.6M

Fishmeal fires

87 fires in fishmeal cargoes, plants, and warehouses, 1950–1978

ShipPlantStorageUnknownEvery dot is one fire

  1. Plant  USA (OR)

    Del Mar Canning Company

    A fire broke out in the Del Mar Canning Company’s fishmeal plant, causing $250,000 in losses and injuring three people. Source

  2. Ship  Netherlands

    Anastasia

    Firefighters battled a blaze in the cargo of fishmeal and beans aboard the Panamanian ship Anastasia Source

  3. Ship  Netherlands

    Harpon

    A cargo of fishmeal caught fire on the Argentine tanker Harpon while at harbor. Onlookers noticed that the “hull of the ship was glowing.” Source

  4. Plant  Netherlands

    J. Verheggen farm

    A fire raged in a shipment of meat and fishmeal stored at a barn. The meat and fishmeal, imported from South America, was destined for cattle feed. Damage was estimated at 3 tons. Source

  5. Ship  USA (CA)

    Luise Bornhofen

    A fire broke out among 400 tons of sacked fishmeal on the German freighter Luise Bornhofen, as firemen tried for 22 hours to put out the flames. Source

  6. Plant  USA (VA)

    McNeal Company

    A fire likely caused by spontaneous combustion swept through the fish processing plant of McNeal Company Inc. in Virginia, causing $750,000 in damage. Source

  7. Ship  USA (CA)

    Tritone

    Fire broke out in a cargo of fishmeal on the Italian freighter Tritone. The fire caused “the paint to sear off” and “the hull was so hot it sizzled along the waterline.” Source

  8. Plant  USA (NY)

    Dold Feed

    After a fishmeal plant owned by Dold Feed Co. was destroyed by fire, “300 tons of soggy fish meal” emanated foul odors as far as ten miles inland. Source

  9. Plant  USA (NC)

    Menhaden

    The Menhaden Fish Factory at Melt Lee Island, which makes fishmeal and oil, was almost completely destroyed by fire. Source

  10. Plant  Netherlands

    De Toekomst

    A fire raged among several hundred bags of fishmeal stored at the De Toekomst fishmeal factory. As firefighters extinguished the flames, the water-soaked fishmeal “spread a foul smell.” Source

  11. Ship  Italy

    V.N.S. Ouwerkerk

    A cargo of fishmeal broke out in flames on the V.N.S. Ouwerkerk at the port of Naples, en route to the Netherlands. Source

  12. Ship  Netherlands

    Leuvekerk

    Fishmeal caught fire on the Dutch ship Leuvekerk, sailing from Dakar to Genoa. An investigation by the Shipping Council found that, due to stormy weather in the Indian Ocean, the ship’s hatches had to be closed and the fishmeal was unable to be ventilated. Source

  13. Ship  Netherlands

    M.S. Messina

    Fire was raging in the fishmeal cargo of the German M.S. Messina, which had arrived in Rotterdam from West Africa. Source

  14. Ship  Ecuador

    Ciudad de Quito

    A fire broke out on the ship Ciudad de Quito carrying fishmeal from Peru to New Orleans. An officer said the heat in the hold may have ignited the fishmeal cargo. Some “suffered early asphyxiation” and were hospitalized. Source

  15. Ship  Netherlands

    Barenstein

    The German freighter Barenstein became the seventh ship in recent weeks to arrive in Rotterdam from South America with its fishmeal cargo on fire. The fire started at sea and burned for six days. Firefighters flooded the holds with 300,000 liters of water. “The Rotterdam brigade now knows what fire in a cargo of fishmeal means,” reported the Dutch newspaper De Gooi-en Eemlander. Source

  16. Ship  Netherlands

    Axelfels

    Starting at 2:30 in the morning, Rotterdam firefighters pumped water into the hold of the German freighter Axelfels, whose smoldering fishmeal cargo “spread a suffocating smoke.” Source

  17. Ship  USA (MS)

    Ship Island

    The vessel Ship Island, owned by the Fish Meal Co. of Pascagoula, became engulfed in flames. Several aboard jumped into the water to avoid the flames. Source

  18. Plant  Netherlands

    Fishmeal factory in Beverwijk

    A “sea of flames” burned at a fishmeal factory in Beverwijk, destroying the factory and a thousand tons of fishmeal. “Suffocating columns of smoke and the penetrating stench of fishmeal hampered the progress” of firefighters, newspapers reported. Barrels of acetylene and oxygen at the factory’s lab exploded. Damage was estimated at 1.5 million guilders ($830,000). Source

  19. Storage  Netherlands

    N.V. Bon-Da’s Cattle Feed Factory

    A storage of fishmeal ignited at a warehouse owned by N.V. Bon-Da’s Cattle Feed Factory. The fire was caught by residents who spotted smoke in the middle of the night. Source

  20. Ship  Netherlands

    M.S. Winipah

    Fire broke out in the holds of the M.S. Winipah at the quay near Rotterdam, with the likely cause being the vessel’s cargo of fishmeal. Source

  21. Ship  Netherlands

    S.S. Atlantic Guardian

    The Panamanian S.S. Atlantic Guardian entered into port carrying over five tons of smouldering fishmeal from Peru. “Flames were shooting out of the cargo” as firefighters tried to control the flames. Source

  22. Ship  Netherlands

    Portalon cargo

    A brigade spent hours battling a fire in a cargo of fishmeal aboard the Liberian cargo ship Portalon, hailing from Peru to Europe. Fire had broken out once already on the ship and extinguished in Spain, before igniting again during unloading in Rotterdam. Source

  23. Ship  USA (HI)

    Marua

    The Norwegian freighter Marua moored with a burning cargo of fishmeal in its hold. Source

  24. Storage  USA (ME)

    Maine Sea Products

    13,000 tons of bagged fishmeal owned by Maine Sea Products Inc. went up in flames at a warehouse. The blaze lasted for three days. Source

  25. Ship  Netherlands

    White Star

    Four-meter flames shot up from the holds of the Liberian ship White Star, whose fishmeal cargo from Peru ignited en route to Rotterdam. The fire lasted several days. Source

  26. Ship  Netherlands

    Wiesbaden

    The Rotterdam fire brigade tried for hours to put out a fire in a cargo of fishmeal aboard the German ship Wiesbaden. Source

  27. Storage  Puerto Rico

    Dock #5 at the San Juan Pier

    Sacks of fishmeal unloaded from a ship burst into flames, destroying the pier and causing damages of $1 million. The fire was discovered at 1am. Tourists coming home from restaurants and nightclubs said it was “the first time they had seen a fire of such magnitude.” For weeks, the pier emitted “stench of rotting fish” before it was later dismantled. Source

  28. Ship  Bermuda

    Cape York

    Fire broke out in the fishmeal cargo carried by the British freighter Cape York from Peru to Liverpool, threatening to capsize the ship. Source

  29. Ship  Netherlands

    Portalon

    “Rarely has a cargo of fishmeal in the port of Rotterdam burned as fiercely,” reporters wrote about a midnight blaze aboard the Liberian ship Portalon. When workers opened the hatch to unload the 1,800 tonnes of fishmeal cargo, flames several meters high “suddenly burst” from the hold. Firefighters flooded the hold with tens of thousands of liters of water. Source

  30. Ship  UK

    Madeleine

    1,000 tons of fishmeal went up in flames aboard the Swedish ship Madeleine. The vessel, coming from Peru, had been sailing in the Atlantic for five days with the blaze in its hold. The ship was 700 miles from the nearest port and its radio was broken, so it routed to Penryn, UK. It was headed to Rotterdam. Source

  31. Ship  UK

    M.S. Brandaris

    A fire broke out in the Dutch M.S. Brandaris, carrying a cargo of fishmeal, in the port of Manchester. Source

  32. UK

    Firemen were called to put out 750 tons of fishmeal burning on a ship at Surrey Docks. Source

  33. Ship  Spain

    North Viscountes

    Fishmeal caught fire at sea aboard the Greek vessel North Viscountes, which was traveling to Spain from Peru. Source

  34. Plant  Canada

    B.C. Packers

    Fire broke out at a warehouse next to a fish processing plant, where “columns of smoke from tons of smouldering fish meal” were “swirling high above the blackened ruins.” Source

  35. Ship  Puerto Rico

    Machalakis

    The vessel Machalakis sent out distress calls after a fire started in one of its fishmeal holds 40 miles out from the coast, causing the ship to tilt in the water. Source

  36. Ship  Netherlands

    Tobon

    A fire blazed for four days in the fishmeal cargo of the Norwegian freighter Tobon. To limit the damage, firefighters at the port of Rotterdam flooded the vessel’s hold. Several hundred tons of fishmeal were destroyed. Source

  37. Ship  USA (CA)

    Santa Malta

    At a Los Angeles harbor, four fire companies tried to fight a blaze that broke out among bagged fishmeal on the freighter Santa Malta when it was sailing to San Francisco from Mexico. Source

  38. Ship  Netherlands

    MS Patmos

    Fire broke out in two holds of fishmeal on the Greek vessel MS Patmos, likely while it was en route from Peru to Rotterdam. “Fishmeal, which is a regular cause of ship fires, smolders very stubbornly,” reporters wrote. “Often the holds have to be flooded to avert the danger once and for all.” Firefighters worked overnight to control the flames. Source

  39. Ship  Netherlands

    Santa Elena

    Three fire engines fought a blaze on the German ship Santa Elena at the port of Amsterdam. The vessel, which operates services to South America, was carrying 250 tons of fishmeal. As soon as the cargo came into contact with the air, the flames broke out. Source

  40. Ship  Netherlands

    Theomana

    Firefighters in gas masks flooded the hold of Panamanian vessel Theomana, where burning fishmeal was emitting “greasy clouds of smoke” and “a penetrating stench.” The vessel was carrying 5,700 tonnes of fishmeal from Peru. Source

  41. Ship  Netherlands

    Ivan Bacon

    The English freighter Ivan Bacon, carrying a burning cargo of fishmeal, was turned away from the Vlissingen port. Source

  42. Ship  UK

    Kenuta

    A cargo of fishmeal went up in flames aboard the freighter Kenuta during its voyage from South America. About 100 bags of fishmeal were tossed overboard. Source

  43. Plant  Netherlands

    N.V. Gekro

    Smouldering fishmeal burst into flames in an exhaust duct at the company of N.V. Gekro in Rotterdam. Source

  44. Ship  UK

    Pizarro

    Fire broke out among bags of fishmeal aboard the British ship Pizarro, which was coming to unload at a port in England from the west coast of South America. Source

  45. Storage  Netherlands

    Shed #3 at Spoorweghaven Port

    Sparks from welding work ignited a storage shed of two hundred tons of fishmeal. Source

  46. Ship  USA (PA)

    Sygna

    Fire broke out among 4,348 bags of fishmeal and anchovy fertilizer aboard the Norwegian freighter Sygna. The unloading of the shipment, coming from Chimbote, Peru, had been delayed due to a longshoremen’s strike. Source

  47. Ship  UK

    S.S. Flamenco

    More than 60 firemen “battled in choking smoke” for seven hours to put out a fire deep in a hold of 800 tons of fishmeal aboard the S.S. Flamenco, sailing in from Valparaiso, Chile. Source

  48. Ship  USA (HI)

    Ioanna

    A cargo of fishmeal broke out in flames on the Greek freighter Ioanna en route from Peru to Japan. The skipper radioed the Coast Guard, saying that “temperatures were rising and smoke emerging from his number four hold.” Source

  49. Ship  Netherlands

    Travestein

    A fire broke out in a cargo of fishmeal on the German ship Travestein, causing an estimated damage of 10,000 guilders ($5,500 dollars). Source

  50. Ship  UK

    Santander

    The freighter Santander docked at Liverpool with its cargo of fishmeal on fire and its bows damaged. Firemen believed the fishmeal had overheated in the mid-Atlantic. Source

  51. Ship  Portugal

    Potosi

    Fire broke out among the fishmeal cargo of the British vessel Potosi near Lisbon, headed to the UK from the west coast of South America. The smoke had made the crew’s quarters “untenable.” Source

  52. Ship  Spain

    Atlantic

    A fire started aboard the Greek ship Atlantic, where there was a cargo of fishmeal. Source

  53. Ship  USA (MS)

    Santa Maria

    Firemen fought a blaze aboard the Peruvian freighter Santa Maria, which arrived carrying 1,300 tons of fishmeal. “Dense columns of black smoke poured out” as firefighters battled the conflagration. Source

  54. Ship  Netherlands

    Perene

    Firefighters battled a fire burning overnight in 1,300 tons of fishmeal aboard the Peruvian ship Perene, moored in Rotterdam. Source

  55. Ship  UK

    Aren

    he Dutch ship Aren with a burning cargo of fishmeal moved into Plymouth Sound in order for firemen to control the blaze. Source

  56. Ship  UK

    Styliano Restis

    Fire broke out in the fishmeal cargo of the Greek ship Styliano Restis, which had to use an emergency anchor to pull into Falmouth Bay. Source

  57. Ship  UK

    Hornbelt ship

    A fire broke out on the German cargo vessel Hornbelt, destroying 600 tons of fishmeal. Source

  58. Ship  UK

    Eden freighter

    The Royal Mail Lines freighter Eden radioed as she approached Liverpool that the ship’s cargo of fishmeal was overheated. Firefighters put out a fire in one of the ship’s holds.

  59. Ship  UK

    S.S. Kenuta

    The Liverpool Fire Brigade rushed to the S.S. Kenuta to put out a fire that broke out among its bagged fishmeal. Source

  60. Ship  UK

    Cototaxi freighter

    Liverpool firemen stood by as dockers unloaded a smouldering cargo of 200 tons of fishmeal from the freighter Cototaxi. Source

  61. Ship  Portugal

    Salaverry ship

    On Christmas Eve, the captain of UK vessel Salaverry radioed that fire had broken out in the ship’s fishmeal cargo. The fire blazed for two days. A news agency messenger from Lisbon described the fire as “very violent.” Source

  62. Ship  USA (GA)

    Perene freighter

    The Peruvian freighter Perene pulled into a dock in Savanna after unsuccessful attempts to put out a fire that broke out in its fishmeal cargo at sea. Source

  63. Ship  Peru

    S.S. Maranon ship

    In April and May 1965, the S.S. Maranon picked up about 132,000 sacks of anchovy fishmeal from Peru and headed to Maryland. A few days after leaving port in Chancay, fire broke out in the cargo. Source

  64. Ship  Colombia

    Aris ship

    A fire broke out onboard the Greek vessel Aris. The vessel had arrived at the docks to unload 200 tons of fishmeal imported from Peru by Purina Colombia S.A. Source

  65. Ship  Netherlands

    Liberian M.S. Sokorri ship

    For five hours, firefighters battled a blaze in the fishmeal cargo aboard the Liberian M.S. Sokorri, moored in Rotterdam. Source

  66. Ship  UK

    Kolbjorg ship

    A fire broke out in the hold of the Norwegian vessel Kolbjorg, loaded with fishmeal, at a dock in London. Source

  67. Plant  Netherlands

    De Toekomst

    At 5am on Sunday morning, a passerby saw smoke coming from the storage shed of the De Toekomst fishmeal factory. A fire brigade managed to control the “raging fire.” Source

  68. Ship  Netherlands

    Atki freighter

    Dutch firefighters poured water into the Greek freighter Atki, trying to reach the flames that broke out in its cargo of corn and fishmeal bound from Ethiopia to the Netherlands. The crew abandoned the ship and the vessel capsized. There were no injuries. Source

  69. Ship  UK

    Stirlingshire freighter

    Fire crews stood by at a dock overnight as the fishmeal cargo of the freighter Stirlingshire smouldered. Source

  70. Ship  UK

    Statesman ship

    Smoke billowed from the hold of the South African Statesman vessel, where fire had broken out due to spontaneous combustion of the fishmeal cargo. Dockers unloaded smouldering cargo as firefighters poured thousands of gallons of water onto the ship to fight the blaze, which went on for five days. Source

  71. Ship  USA (CA)

    Oriana freighter

    Six Los Angeles fire companies battled a fire that broke out in a cargo of fishmeal aboard the Panamanian freighter Oriana. Source

  72. Ship  Netherlands

    South America ship

    The Liberian steamship South America was “blazing from bow to stern” after a fire broke out in a cargo of fishmeal it was carrying from Valparaiso, Chile to Hamburg. The heat was so great that it was melting the ship’s deck and causing it to lean sideways. Barrels of gasoline onboard exploded. In March 1966, the Liberian ship South America was “finally destroyed by fishmeal,” reported the Dutch paper Algemeen Dagblad. The ship was “swallowed by the sea” as storms raged off the coast of Rotterdam, unable to be brought to shore due to fishmeal cargo that had ignited in the middle of the North Sea. Source

  73. Ship  UK

    Salaverry ship

    Fire broke out in the Liverpool vessel Salaverry among its cargo of nitrate, cotton, and fishmeal. Source

  74. Ship  Netherlands

    Eleni 5 ship

    The fishmeal cargo aboard the Greek freighter Eleni 5 broke out in flames at Rotterdam, emitting “greasy smoke and a penetrating stench.” Source

  75. Ship  USA (CA)

    Gundhild Torm freighter

    A large fire broke out on the Danish freighter Gundhild Torm in its fishmeal cargo, loaded from Corinto, Nicaragua and headed to Japan. The fire lasted for nine days and the carbon dioxide hospitalized three firemen. During the firefighting at a port in Long Beach, a longshoreman was killed when a cable snapped, causing a crane boom to fall on him. Damage was estimated to be over $1 million. Source

  76. Plant  UK

    Grimsby Fish Meal Company

    Fire broke out at the Grimsby Fish Meal Company. Source

  77. Storage  Peru

    Port of Chancay

    A fire destroyed 600 tons of fishmeal at a warehouse in the port of Chancay, 60 kilometers north of Lima, causing losses of $64,000. Source

  78. Ship  UK

    Padma freighter

    The Pakistan freighter Padma reported fire in its hold of bagged fishmeal. Source

  79. Ship  Spain

    Puente Ceso ship

    The crew of the Puente Ceso leapt into the sea and fled on an auxiliary boat after seeing that the ship was on fire, apparently due to a spark that ignited its cargo of dried fishmeal. The ship was crossing from Valencia to Palma de Mallorca, Spain. Source

  80. Canada

    A $500,000 fishmeal plant was destroyed by fire “of unknown origin.” Source

  81. Ship  USA (CA)

    S.S. Yavari freighter

    Firemen wearing air tanks and respirators battled a multi-day fire that broke out in the 30,000 bags of fishmeal aboard the Peruvian freighter S.S. Yavari in Los Angeles Harbor. If the fire worsened, the warden of the port warned that it could damage the port. Source

  82. Storage  Spain

    Muelle de Levante

    A fire of “alarming proportions” broke out in a storage shed at a dock in Valencia containing fishmeal for animal feed. Source

  83. Ship  UK

    Pizarro

    The British vessel Pizarro sent out a call for assistance when fire broke out in its cargo of fishmeal. The ship was escorted into King George Dock. Source

  84. Storage  USA (VA)

    Standards Products

    Fire due to spontaneous combustion destroyed a large warehouse of fishmeal produced by Standards Products Co., causing $100,000 in damages. Source

  85. Storage  Puerto Rico

    Puerto Rican

    Fire swept through a Puerto Rican warehouse storing 400 tons of bagged tuna meal. Two electrical transformers exploded in the fire, spraying 2,000 pounds of coolant made with PCBs over the fishmeal. The FDA later had to recall the contaminated feed. Source

  86. Ship  Ireland

    Stella K

    The British-owned Stella K, carrying fishmeal from Canada, was drifting in the Atlantic after a blaze forced the 15-man crew to abandon it. Source

  87. Storage  USA (NC)

    Standards Products

    A storage shed containing 17 to 18 tons of fishmeal produced by Standard Products Co. of Virginia was destroyed by fire. Firemen predicted the blaze would continue for as long as a week. Firefighters “were almost hit by pieces of hot metal as they tried to pull chunks of the building off of the burning fishmeal to soak it with water.” The fire caused $500,000 in damages, and only a portion of the 800 tons of fishmeal stored in total at the plant could be salvaged. Source

July 24, 1950: Del Mar Canning Company

Storage covers warehouses, sheds, docks, and ports.Drawn from newspaper reports, a Dutch government gazette, and a U.S. court record.

But in 1967, American feed producer Cargill announced a solution: a fire retardant called ethoxyquin.7 A Cargill official told the Los Angeles Evening Citizen News in 1970 that the company had finally found a way to “remove the fire hazard,” solving fishmeal’s primary drawback: “oxidation and resulting heating.”8

Ethoxyquin, previously used as a way to keep rubber tires from drying out and as a preservative on fruits and alfalfa, was soon ramped up for production.9 After a trial shipment of 400 tons of ethoxyquin-treated fishmeal from Peru arrived safely in Florida, Cargill announced plans to ship 100,000 tons of Peruvian fishmeal to the US annually. Their new “AO (for Antioxidant) fishmeal” could now be shipped in bulk and transported “to more distant users in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, and Southern California,” the newspaper reported.10M (In a statement, Cargill said that since 2005, it has “evaluated alternative antioxidants for use in fishmeal to support transport stability and respond to evolving customer and regulatory expectations” and it does not use ethoxyquin in its global salmon feed business or in any market where ethoxyquin is no longer authorized for use in aquafeed. It also said “antioxidants are applied by fishmeal production facilities before storage and transport; Cargill does not add ethoxyquin to fishmeal after receiving it for aquafeed production.”)11

Red Rose Poultry Feeds advertised ethoxyquin-treated fishmeal in a 1969 issue of the Circleville Herald, claiming it was a superior feed choice. Subsequent research and international reviews have raised serious concerns over ethoxyquin’s potential toxicity and health risks, ultimately leading to its suspension in 2017 in animal feeds across the European Union.
Red Rose Poultry Feeds advertised ethoxyquin-treated fishmeal in a 1969 issue of the Circleville Herald, claiming it was a superior feed choice. Subsequent research and international reviews have raised serious concerns over ethoxyquin’s potential toxicity and health risks, ultimately leading to its suspension in 2017 in animal feeds across the European Union.Circleville Herald/Newspaper archive

Soon, feed companies marketed ethoxyquin-treated fishmeal as not just safer but also more nutritious. “It’s a fact!” a 1969 Red Rose Poultry Feeds advertisement claimed, “ethoxyquin protects vitamins A and E and pigments in the feed.”12 A Hubbard Milling Company advertisement added that with their ethoxyquin-containing feed, “the right feed at the right time means more profit for you!”13

Watch VideoThe Fire Retardant in Your Fish

Most experts agreed that the chemical was highly effective. By the 1970s, press-reported fires dropped sharply—from a typical 16 ship fires a year, according to the Liverpool Underwriters’ Association, to five in 1967.14 A Florida newspaper wrote that ethoxyquin could “eliminate serious hazards of combustion” and make fishmeal “safe for transportation.”15 “Antioxidant treatment has made bulk handling an easy matter,” the director of the Canadian Department of Fisheries told an industry publication in 1966, arguing it should be required for fishmeal shipments as it “is the more effective antioxidant,” despite being more expensive.16 By 1976, the US Coast Guard imposed mandatory ethoxyquin treatment on fishmeal shipments, and three years later, the UN body that oversees maritime activity recommended fishmeal be treated with ethoxyquin “to prevent spontaneous combustion.”17

But there was a problem with ethoxyquin: It is carcinogenic.18

As early as 1969, a group of UN food and agriculture authorities released a paper noting that “toxic effects had been observed in laboratory animals fed high concentrations of ethoxyquin” and that “occurrence of dermatitis among fruit packers suggests that sensitization could be a problem among those who are handling ethoxyquin.”19 As its use in animal feeds grew, a 1987 study by British researchers found the chemical “caused severe damage” and had a potentially “carcinogenic effect” in rats.20 In 2015, the European Food Safety Authority said an impurity within ethoxyquin, known as p-phenetidine, was a possible mutagen, capable of causing mutations in genetic material.21 Two years later, the European Commission suspended authorization for its use in animal feed across the European Union.22

Ethoxyquin tanks are installed inside a fishmeal processing plant, where this antioxidant is used as a feed additive. Use of this synthetic antioxidant in animal feed was suspended in 2017 across much of Europe over safety concerns. Yet, it remains permitted—subject to regulatory limits—in many other countries worldwide, including the United States.SRF

Ethoxyquin has also been banned in the UK and by members of the European Economic Area, including Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.23 Australia, Japan, South Korea, and the US still permit its use in feed but limit the maximum permissible level.24 While some countries, such as Peru and Vietnam, have not banned the chemical, their fishmeal industries have responded to the requirements of their major export markets by taking steps to ensure that aquafeed destined for certain parts of the world does not contain ethoxyquin.25

Fishmeal production at an Exalmar plant in Peru spans from unloading fresh catch through processing and bagging the final powdered product. Antioxidants are added during production to control temperature and reduce fire risk. But growing health concerns over substances like ethoxyquin are fueling debate about the future of additive use in the global fishmeal industry.Pesquera Exalmar

While ethoxyquin is not banned in the US, it has been at the center of a half-dozen lawsuits in American courts, typically involving claims of false advertising. In 2019, the NGO Toxin Free USA sued the J.M. Smucker Company and Ainsworth Pet Nutrition in Washington, DC, alleging consumer protection violations for labeling pet food as “natural” and free of “artificial preservatives” despite containing ethoxyquin.26 In a similar case in 2021, two national nonprofits, GMO Free USA and Clean Label Project Foundation, sued Nestle Purina Petcare Company for marketing cat food as containing “no artificial…preservatives” when it also contained ethoxyquin. Both pet food cases were settled out of court.27 Also in 2021, a California resident brought a class-action suit against Champion Petfoods USA, alleging false marketing of its pet food as made with “wild-caught fish,” since ethoxyquin is only found in farmed fish.28 The court dismissed this claim.M

Other lawsuits have targeted seafood companies for marketing their products as “sustainable” even though they were found to contain ethoxyquin.M Specifically, these cases have highlighted the potential risks that the additive poses to the environment. In 2022, a New York resident brought a class-action lawsuit against Aldi, Inc., a German supermarket chain, alleging its Atlantic salmon products were falsely labeled as “sustainable” due to “environmentally destructive” practices.29 The complaint cited the EU’s ban on the chemical and a study linking ethoxyquin to mortality and deformations in fish and crustaceans, noting it “poses a risk for aquatic life.”30 The case was settled out of court. Also in 2022, a New York and a California resident jointly sued seafood company Gorton’s Inc. for labeling its frozen tilapia as “sustainably sourced” despite containing ethoxyquin.31 This lawsuit also cited the “risk for aquatic life” and the European Union’s ban, and was settled out of court.M

An environmental activist captured footage in 2017 that allegedly shows workers pouring a neurotoxic pesticide into a fish farm in western Norway. The widespread use of chemicals to control parasites in fish farming continues to generate concerns about food safety, worker health, and the environmental risks associated with aquaculture practices.Nicolas Daniel
At a Chimbote fishmeal plant, an engineer describes how company machinery creates fishmeal efficiently, a process that was traditionally accompanied by the use of ethoxyquin for preserving product quality during shipment and long-term storage. Since 2015, however, growing concerns about ethoxyquin’s safety, including questions about consumer health and environmental impact, have led many regulators and buyers to scrutinize its use in the global fishmeal supply chain.Explora Peru

Roughly 80 percent of seafood consumed in the US is imported, with China being the biggest supplier.32 In 2024, the US imported 768 million pounds of seafood from China, more than from any other country, according to trade data by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.33 China is also among the biggest global users of ethoxyquin, as Asia is the largest market for feed antioxidants and China is the top regional consumer, according to a 2025 industry report.34 The chemical’s prevalence is a concern for Beijing as the government works to clean up contamination on fish farms and in the nearshore ocean along China’s eastern coast. In 2018, Chinese researchers studying water pollution found ethoxyquin to be one of the most abundant contaminants in a Yangtze River reservoir that supplies over half the drinking water in Shanghai.35M

Ethoxyquin is making its way into US-consumed seafood. A review of more than 350,000 weekly FDA inspection reports from 2018-2022 showed trace amounts of the chemical in three seafood types: shrimp, especially from Indonesia and India; salmon, most often from Chile; and tilapia, frequently from China.36M While the detected levels were always below the amount the FDA deems safe, critics claim this safe level is weak compared to the one in the EU, which bans any amount appearing in food.37 Though ethoxyquin is also used on fruits and vegetables to slow skin drying, FDA data indicates that seafood is over 10 times more likely to arrive in the US containing the chemical compared to other tested foods, including asparagus, cucumbers, and tomatoes.38

Vietnamese aquaculture workers grab fish from a pen and toss them into the adjacent pond. Seafood producers have faced major challenges since the EU banned the use of ethoxyquin in aquaculture feed starting in 2022, forcing exporters to rapidly adapt production methods and documentation in order to maintain access to one of their largest markets.DongThapTV

Since the EU ban, other antioxidants have been substituted for ethoxyquin, including synthetic chemicals like butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and natural additives such as rosemary extract and vitamin E compounds.39 “More and more destinations are not accepting ethoxyquin, starting with our local Peruvian market,” said James Frank, Managing Director of the Peruvian fishmeal company MSI Ceres, during a 2022 webinar. He added that 100 percent of Peru’s fishmeal exports to Europe, Canada, the US, and Australia are now ethoxyquin-free, a shift also seen among companies in the UK and Norway.40

Historic black-and-white footage traces fishmeal production in Peru, from purse seine fishing vessels landing fish to factory processing, bagging, and delivery to farms where fishmeal is fed to livestock. What began as small-scale processing in the 1950s quickly made Peru a world leader in fishmeal production by the early 1960s.Standard Oil Company/Periscope Film

BHA is the most popular alternative to ethoxyquin, favored for its lower costs and strong antioxidant properties over fully natural additives.41 But, in yet another unfortunate cycle of unintended consequences, this replacement has raised serious concerns. Like the chemical it aims to supplant, BHA has its own significant health risks, according to researchers. The US National Toxicology Program identified BHA as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen” in 1991, and Japanese researchers found it caused malignant tumors in laboratory rats in 2008.42

For the time being, European regulators have deemed BHA safe enough to use. In 2018, a panel from the European Food Safety Authority concluded there was “no concern for consumer safety” when BHA is used as a feed additive below the EU’s established limit of 150 milligrams per kilogram of feed.43 The US is reassessing the matter; the Food and Drug Administration took a more cautious approach, announcing in 2025 that it would reassess the safety of the substance as a food additive.44