Economic Assessment of the Production of Native Shrimp Species as an Alternative
to Supply Demand of the Live Bait Industry in the Southeast USA
by
Patricio Enrique Paz
A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
Auburn University
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Auburn, Alabama
August 9, 2010
Keywords: live bait, shrimp, ponds, recirculating, economics
Copyright 2010 by Patricio Enrique Paz
Approved by
D. Allen Davis, Chair, Professor of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures
Terrill R. Hanson, Associate Professor of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures
Joseph J. Molnar, Professor of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology
James Stoeckel, Assistant Professor of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures
Abstract
The recreational fishing industry of the Gulf of Mexico is a multi million dollar
industry that positively impacts coastal communities through the creation of new jobs and
revenue. Native shrimp are a popular live bait that are in high demand and are key
components of a good fishing experience. The market value of bait is considered substantial
but as monitoring is minimal in most states the exact value and demand for bait is not well
established. Computer simulations were developed for the production of live bait shrimp in
ponds and a recirculating system. The information used for the computer simulations were
obtained from previous research conducted in the Claude Peteet Mariculture Center in Gulf
Shores, Alabama and available literature. 
This study demonstrates that the production of 2 cycles of 4 to 6 gram animals with
stocking densities between 50 to 70 shrimp/m? in ponds have positive net returns to land,
labor and management, and show positive returns in the cash flows and income statements
in a simulated 7 year period. Likewise, the production of 2 cycles of 4 to 6 gram animals with
stocking densities between 30 and 50 shrimp/m? in a recirculating system has positive net
returns to land, labor and management, and show positive returns in the cash flows and
income statements in a simulated 7 year period. A survey conducted in 2008 and included
in this study, shows that the current supply of wild caught native live bait shrimp does not
meet the customer demand, especially during the summer months of June, July and August.
These gaps in the supply can be satisfied with aquaculture produced live bait shrimp.
ii
Acknowledgments
The author would like to express his gratitude to Dr. Allen Davis for the opportunities
he has offered and the assistance throughout his studies. To my loving wife and children for
their continuous support, patience and love. To my parents for their continuous support and
motivation. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Jim Stoeckel, Dr. Terry Hanson and Dr. Joe
Molnar for their help throughout my stay in Auburn. I would like to thank all my friends: Dr.
Antonio Garza de Yta, Fabio Soller Dias da Silva, Waldemar Rossi Junior, Daranee
Sookying, Dr. Oscar Olivares-Fuster, Dr. Nathan Burkett-Cadena, Justin Markey, Evan
Durland and Dr. Herbert Quintero. 
iii
Table of Contents
Abstract  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
List of Tables  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
List of Figures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
Chapter 1: Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter 2: Economic Analysis of Closed Recirculating Systems for the 
Production of Native Live Bait Shrimp  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Materials and Methods  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Results  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Chapter 3: Economic Analysis of Pond Production of Native Live Bait 
Shrimp .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Materials and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
iv
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Chapter 4: Native Live Bait Shrimp Markets  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Materials and Methods  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Results  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Discussion and Conclusions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Literature Cited  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Appendix 1: Assumptions and components used in the development of 
the STELLA? simulation model  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Appendix 2: Detailed economic information collected for the production 
of live bait shrimp in a six tank-150m  recirculating system  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033
Appendix 3: Detailed economic information collected for the production 
of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Appendix 4: Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States Live Bait Shrimp 
Market Survey  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
v
List of Tables
Chapter 2
Table 1. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp
in a six tank-150 m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 1,200 3
shrimp/m in one year with two crops  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 
Table 2. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp 
in a 6 tank-150 m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 1,600 3
shrimp/m in one year with two crops  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 
Table 3. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp 
in a 6 tank-150 m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 2,000 3
shrimp/m in one year with two crops  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 
Table 4. Summary of enterprise budgets for live bait shrimp production in a 
6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system with two crops per year and densities 
of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? (40,000 shrimp/tank)
and 2,000 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/tank)  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Table 5. Summary of average annual income statement (7 years) for live bait 
shrimp production in a 6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system with two crops 
per year and densities of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? 
(40,000 shrimp/tank) and 2,000 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/tank)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Table 6. Summary of average annual cash flow (7 years) for live bait shrimp 
production in a 6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system with two crops per year 
and densities of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? 
(40,000 shrimp/tank) and 2,000 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/tank)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Chapter 3
Table 1. Simulated average production information for the production of native
live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 50 PL/m? in 
one year with two crops  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
vi
Table 2. Simulated average production information for the production of native 
live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 60 PL/m? in 
one year with two crops  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Table 3. Simulated average production information for the production of native 
live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 70 PL/m? in 
one year with two crops  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Table 4. Summary of enterprise budgets for live bait shrimp production in 
five 0.1 ha ponds with two crops per year and densities of 50 shrimp/m? 
(50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) and 70 shrimp/m? 
(70,000 shrimp/pond)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Table 5. Summary of average annual income statement (7 years) for live bait 
shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with two crops per year and densities 
of 50 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) 
and 70 shrimp/m? (70,000 shrimp/pond)  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Table 6. Summary of average annual cash flow (7 years) for live bait shrimp 
production in five 0.1 ha ponds with two cycles per year and densities of 
50 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) 
and 70 shrimp/m? (70,000 shrimp/pond)  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Chapter 4
Table 1. Bait dealer characteristics in the Southeast United States among 
respondents to a Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait 
shrimp market survey of 2008  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Table 2. Regional distribution of surveyed retailers, wholesalers and suppliers 
of live bait shrimp responding to a Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 
States live bait shrimp market survey of 2008  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Table 3. Live count (number of shrimp per pound) preference for the purchase
of live bait shrimp originating from a Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 
States live bait shrimp market survey of 2008  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Table 4. Type of wholesale purchasing unit, cost per unit, and amount of units 
purchased from live bait suppliers among respondents to a 2008 Gulf of 
Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp market survey  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
vii
List of Figures
Chapter 4
Figure 1. Percentage of gross sales accounted for by the sale of live bait 
shrimp among survey respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South 
Atlantic States live bait shrimp market survey (N=60)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Figure 2. Factors having the greatest impacts on live bait shrimp sales
according to respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic 
States live bait shrimp market survey (N=60)  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Figure 3. Annual demand of live bait shrimp compared to annual supply 
of wild live bait shrimp according to respondents to a 2008 Gulf of 
Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp market survey (N=60)  .. . . . . . 81
viii
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
Mariculture of shrimp is a well established industry around the world, with aquaculture
production and fisheries surpassing 5 million metric tons and exports exceeding $14 billion,
with $6 billion accounted for by aquaculture (FAO 2009). The international wild harvest of
shrimp revolves around the capture of approximately 100 species, yet the fishing industry
continues to decline (FAO 2009). According to the FAO, the United States ranks fifth in the
world in shrimp capture, behind China, India, Indonesia and Canada (FAO 2009). The
landings for all shrimp species captured in the United States exceeds 73,000 metric tons
(NOAA 2009). Annual shrimp exports from the United States are close to 15,000 metric tons
while annual shrimp imports exceed 500,000 metric tons, most of which comes from
aquaculture production (FAO 2009; USDA 2009). The recreational fishing industry of the
Gulf of Mexico (GOM) is a multi million dollar industry that positively impacts coastal
communities through the creation of new jobs and revenue. Native shrimp are a popular live
bait that are in high demand and are a key component of a good recreational fishing
experience. The market value of bait is considered substantial but as monitoring is minimal
in most GOM states the exact value and demand for bait shrimp is not well established.
Worldwide, the main species being commercially cultured in marine waters are in the
Penaeidae family, including the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei; the Tiger
prawn, Penaeus monodon; the Kuruma prawn, Penaeus japonicus, and other Penaeid
shrimps, Penaeus 
1
spp. North American species, especially those found in the GOM and Atlantic states include
the White shrimp, Litopenaeus setiferus; the Pink shrimp, Farfantepenaeus duorarum, and
the Brown shrimp, F. aztecus. The intensive fishery for shrimp in the Gulf of Mexico started
in the 1950s, with landings being recorded until 1956 (Muncy 1984). The Atlantic white
shrimp has a natural distribution along the Atlantic coast from New York to Florida and
along the Gulf of Mexico coast reaching Campeche, Mexico (Perez-Farfante 1969; Holthius
1980). Natural spawning of the Atlantic white shrimp occurs from late March until
November with its peak from June to July (Perez-Farfante 1969). This spawning period is
related to a relative abundance of Atlantic white shrimp during August to October (Muncy
1984). 
The natural distribution of the pink shrimp covers the Western Atlantic, the East Coast
from Maryland to the south, and the Gulf of Mexico including the East Coast of the Yucatan
Peninsula (Holthius 1980). Natural spawning of the pink shrimp has its highest activity from
April until July (Cummings 1961). The natural distribution of the brown shrimp covers the
East Coast from Massachusetts south, the Gulf of Mexico and the East Coast of Mexico
(Holthius 1980). Natural spawning for the brown shrimp can occur year round but its
characterized by having two peaks of highest intensity, one occurring from April to June and
the second from September to November (Rogers et al. 1993). The biology of these species
is assumed to be similar for the different species; the eggs are known to be demersal,
hatching a day after spawning, larvae and post larvae move toward brackish water areas and
later move toward open marine water to the spawning grounds (Chin 1960). 
Since 1990, landings from the Gulf of Mexico, in million pounds of tails have been
declining, and although demand for shrimp has increased in the United States, only 8% of
2
the shrimp being consumed comes from the Gulf of Mexico (Nance et al. 2006). The bulk
of the shrimp fishery in the Gulf of Mexico, targeting the native species of shrimp is for
human consumption, which is primarily constituted by the Atlantic white and brown shrimp
and to a lesser extent by pink shrimp (Baxter et al. 1988; Gracia 1996). According to Chin
(1960) in Galveston Bay, the capture of bait shrimp tends to increase during spring, reaching
a first peak in May as young of the year are recruited and then reaches another peak in
August. The first peak from May through July corresponds to the abundance of  brown
shrimp, while the August through April peak corresponds to the abundance of white shrimp
(Baxter et al., 1988). Opposite to the monthly trend observed at Galveston Bay in Texas, the
fishery at Biscayne Bay in Florida peaks during the winter and the bulk of the catch is
composed mostly by pink shrimp (Berkeley et al. 1985). According to historical data, bait
shrimp landings in Texas have averaged 1.5 million pounds from 1994 and 1997 (TPWD
2002). In 2007, the total bait shrimp landings for the state of Florida were 1.7 million
pounds, compared to 1.6 million pounds captured in 2006 (FWRI 2009).
Different equipment has been used for the capture of bait shrimp, including the otter
trawl which has been replaced in some fisheries by other trawls, including the roller frame
trawl, believed to be less destructive of the marine environment (Berkeley et al. 1985). In
Galveston Bay, several variations of the otter trawl have been used, including the box, flat
and semi balloon nets (Baxter et al. 1988). Other trawls being used have been designed to
reduce the capture of bycatch and include beam and skimmer trawls as well as butterfly nets
(Epperly et al. 2002). Not all of the States with a bait shrimp industry allow all the types of
trawls and nets to be used. Studies on the bait shrimp industry have existed since the late
1950s, following the start of the bait shrimp fishery industry (Berkeley et al. 1985; Chin
3
1960). The fishery in the Gulf of Mexico includes an offshore trawl operation and an
artisanal drift net fishery (Gracia 1996). Boats used in the bait shrimp fishery normally range
from 20 to 45 feet in length, towing two nets to improve the catch per unit effort, and most
have an area where bycatch can be separated from the shrimp and a cooled or recirculating
holding tank (Baxter et al. 1988; Berkeley et al. 1985).
Concern exists on the effects of the capture fishery on the environment, on its effect on
recruitment of shrimp species and the amount of shrimp that are captured, so the capture
fishery has a set of regulations and catch limits to prevent the overexploitation of natural
stocks (Berkeley et al.1985). Unfortunately, in the Gulf of Mexico region, only two states
keep records on bait shrimp catch, limiting the amount of information available to determine
or quantify the effects of possible over fishing. Variations of yearly catch can be explained
by environmental factors, that directly affect the recruitment of shrimp and the spatial
distribution of populations (Gracia 1996). Another concern involving year to year variation
is the effect that the bait shrimp fishery has had on the spawning stock of the shrimp species
of interest (Gracia 1996). According to a 2009 National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) report, the forecast for the production of brown shrimp in the Gulf
of Mexico is expected to be slightly lower than the average compiled from 1960 to 2007
(NOAA 2009). Several strategies have been enacted throughout the Gulf States to regulate
the possible impact of the bait shrimp fishery impact. State legislature in Texas during 2001
added a section to an existing chapter in order to have a study done on shrimp resources in
state water (TPWD 2002). Efforts have been made to avoid the expansion of the shrimp
fishing fleet, one example being the license buyback in Texas during the 1990s (TPWD
2002). In consideration of the problems faced, Texas also has passed law HB 750 to impose
4
new regulations on the wild bait shrimp fishery in order to control overexploitation of wild
stocks (Gandy 1997). Law HB 750 was designed to apply restrictions for the conservation
of shrimp stocks (Gandy et al. 2001). In Louisiana, restrictions have also been set in place
regulating the amount of bait shrimp per boat, restricting the amount of hours per day per
season that can be spent capturing bait shrimp, and controlling access to areas where bait
shrimp can be captured (USFWS 2008). Louisiana also regulates the dimensions of the
trawls and nets used (LDWF 2009). Restrictions set for the live bait shrimp capture fishery
in Texas include the use of one bait trawl per boat, a shrimp trawl tag (Type 334), a 20 feet
width restriction on the trawl and a larger mesh size for the trawl (TPWD 2008). The live
bait requirements for Alabama include the need to have a permanent shore facility with a
season extending year round for live bait dealers from 4 am to 10 pm (AMRD 2008). Gear
restrictions in Alabama include the use of 1 trawl per boat, with trawl drags not exceeding
20 minutes, a top line measure of 16 feet or less and no mesh restrictions (AMRD 2008). The
daily weight restrictions include no more than one standard basket per boat or truck and no
more than 3 standard baskets per business; license restrictions are also in place, including
two types of licenses for the capture and sale of live bait shrimp (AMRD 2008). 
In Alabama, the sites restricted for the capture of live bait include: Blakeley River,
Arlington Channel, Oyster Bay, Fowl River Channel, Point Clear bait area, Terry Cove,
Mullet Point bait area and Wolf Bay (AMRD 2008). The bays that are indicated for the
capture of live bait in Texas include: Chocolate Bay, West Bay South, Trinity Bay, Old
Brazos River, Upper Laguna Madre, Baffin Bay, Alazan Bay, Baroom Bay, Lower Laguna
Madre and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (TPWD 2008). In Louisiana, the territorial waters
of the Gulf of Mexico are divided in three zones, and the capture of bait shrimp is allowed
5
only when the state declares open season for shrimping, and several areas designated as
wildlife management areas allow some sort of bait capture but are very limited (LDWF
2009).
Impacts of the shrimp fishery industry in the Gulf of Mexico on other aquatic life are
also important. Meyer et al. (1999) quantified during a study in Florida the capture of 42
species of fish and variable survival of this bycatch, with most mortality occurring during the
first 8 to 12 hours. Possible negative effects on marine turtles, marine vegetation and
recreational fish species of the bait and food shrimp fishery have been documented
throughout the Gulf of Mexico (Epperly et al. 2002; Gutherz and Pellegrin 1988; Meyer et
al. 1999). One of the important recreational species in the Gulf of Mexico, the red snapper
(Lutjanus campechanus), is the most common snapper species caught by shrimp trawls
(Gutherz and Pellegrin 1988). 
Currently, the commercial capture fishery does not meet the demand of the bait shrimp
market, especially between March and September when the retail demand is greatest (Gandy
et al. 2001; Gandy 2007). A survey identified the greatest availability of wild Atlantic white
shrimp in Alabama water occurs during the months of August to November (Hanson et al.
2004). In Texas, as in the rest of the Gulf States, there is an expected shortage of supply
throughout the year and supply is not consistent during May, June and October (Gandy et al.
2001). Due to supply limitations from the commercial fishery, aquaculture production could
increase this window of opportunity for supplying the current demand of bait shrimp
retailers. The demand for bait shrimp could be supplied readily with aquaculture production
since native shrimp species can have high production rates, especially at high densities,
although the culture tends to have problems because of inadequate protein levels in the diets
6
used (Palomino et al. 2001). Aquaculture production of bait shrimp can replace the
shortcoming of the capture fisheries if supply is reliable. This study will help establish, with
the help of a computer simulation software, if the aquaculture production of bait shrimp is
economically feasible. It also presents information obtained from a bait dealer survey
describing how the supply of bait shrimp is perceived by bait wholesalers and retailers. The
main objective of this work is to provide an economic analysis of the production of live bait
shrimp in the southeast United States. This analysis will help to determine if the use of a
recirculating system and ponds is profitable under the conditions that are currently present
in the industry and will help determine if the intensification of production is cost-effective.
The information gathered in this work will also supplement the existing information and will
contribute to the development of the culture of native species in the area.
7
CHAPTER 2: Economic Analysis of Closed Recirculating Systems for the
Production of Native Live Bait Shrimp
Introduction
The majority of the shrimp produced in the world comes from outdoor ponds located
near coastal areas and exposed to disease outbreaks (Schuur 2003). As aquaculture practices
have developed through improvements in the available technology, culture intensity has
increased in order to supply the demand for aquaculture products. Some of the technologies
have been applied for the intensification of shrimp culture through the use of closed
recirculating systems that can incorporate higher input levels when compared to traditional
culture practices (Kazmierczak and Caffey 1995). Recirculating systems can be considered
as relatively new and their profitability depends on the control of feed conversion ratios,
survival, growth rates, operating costs, fixed costs and level of intensification (De Ionno et
al. 2006). 
Recirculating systems can also be considered as alternatives to pond culture in the
United States due to high coastal land prices and scarcity of land suitable for aquaculture but
in order to be successful, they need to be cost effective (Davis and Arnold 1998; Reid and
Arnold 1992). Water abundance and quality concerns can also be addressed with the use of
recirculating systems, in comparison to the amount of water used in pond culture for water
exchange in order to maintain water quality parameters at optimum levels so as not to affect
production (Reid and Arnold 1992). Higher water needs in a recirculating system, as with
8
semi-intensive ponds, occur as production is initiated, but the implementation of biological
and mechanical filtration allows for water conservation. Closed recirculating systems,
although not always a zero exchange practice, use less water per unit produced than semi-
intensive ponds (Schuur 2003). This reduction in the amount of water needed to produce a
live bait shrimp will become an important factor as there is a pressing need to conserve
natural resources.
Currently the most commonly produced penaeid species is the Pacific White shrimp,
Litopenaeus vannamei. In the United States, L. vannamei is successfully produced in ponds
and recirculating systems for human consumption, but this species cannot be produced for
the live bait shrimp industry because it is a non native species (Williams et al. 1996). Native
species, such as the Atlantic White shrimp, L. setiferus and the pink shrimp, Farfantepenaeus
duorarum, can be produced in recirculating systems, especially if they are not produced for
human consumption but destined to markets such as the live bait industry (Williams et al.
1996). Davis and Arnold (1998) were able to successfully produce bait shrimp in a closed
recirculating system with a 99% survival rate at low density (582 shrimp/m?) and a 76%
survival rate at high density (1739 shrimp/m?). Samocha et al. (2002) suggest that yields of
10 kg/m?/crop are possible with recirculating systems. The use of high densities in
recirculating system can be cost efficient due to the high biomass produced and being able
to supply the demand based on availability of wild shrimp (Davis and Arnold 1998). Higher
densities can also have an effect on reduced growth and survival because of more
competition in the limited space (Arnold et al. 2006).
The components of a recirculating system, outside of the growout area are normally
grouped into four critical areas: aeration, clarification, biofiltration and degasification. These
9
can have extra treatment components such as denitrification, ozonation, disinfection and
foam fractionation (Malone and DeLosReyes 1997). The initial investment and
implementation of these components influence the cost of the system and will influence the
productivity of the system (Malone and DeLosReyes 1997). The design and components of
a recirculating system can allow more control over water quality and the treatment of the
water involved in this type of system can also reduce the amount of pathogens present in the
culture (Schuur 2003). The investment costs necessary for the establishment of a
recirculating system, although high, can be covered because of the high productivity of these
systems (Schuur 2003). Some of the obstacles faced in the industry, including the food
shrimp industry, is to control capital, energy and labor costs associated with the
implementation of recirculating systems while increasing productivity and these costs will
depend on the design of the system (Samocha et al. 2002).
As the recreational fishing industry continues to grow without an increase of the supply
of wild bait shrimp, the culture of native species of shrimp will become more prevalent. In
a survey, 74% of bait distributors responded that they would buy cultured bait shrimp if the
supply was consistent and of good quality (Gandy et al. 2001). Recirculating systems can be
used for the production of live bait shrimp to offer the consistency in the supply by
increasing the availability of bait shrimp, through the ability to extend the culture of shrimp
even when climatic conditions are not suitable and by being able to produce a quality product
(Mays et al. 2006). Disease outbreaks in wild populations can also have an effect on bait
supply and the use of recirculating systems can provide a method of reducing the risk of
disease outbreaks and being able to maintain supply of the live bait industry (Samocha et al.
2002). 
10
Another important consideration for the use of recirculating systems is the necessity to
meet effluent water quality standards currently in place in the United States and which is a
factor in the growth of the industry (Samocha et al. 2002). Even though there are many
advantages to the use of recirculating systems in the industry, more economic analyses are
required based on commercial data, identifying the main operating cost variables, biological
variables and sale price (DeIonno et al. 2006). The main objective of this work is to provide
an economic analysis of the use of a recirculating system for the production of live bait
shrimp in the southeast United States. This analysis will help to determine if the use of a
recirculating system is economically viable under the conditions that are currently present
in the industry and will help determine if the intensification of production is cost-effective.
The information gathered in this work will also supplement the existing information and will
contribute to the development of the culture of native species in the area.
Materials and Methods
In order to obtain production data and develop a protocol for the intensive production
of bait shrimp, a recirculating system was built in Gulf Shores, Alabama at the Claude Peteet
Mariculture Center (CPMC). This system allows for the intensification of production of bait
shrimp. The recirculating system consists of two independent systems, each with three 30 m?
(total volume) tanks connected to a reinforced fiberglass tank used as a water reservoir or
sump (Figure 1). Aeration for each system is supplied through a 3.5 hp regenerative blower.
The blower also allows for water movement into each tank through airlifts. The structure of
each tank is conformed by an outer plastic covered wire mesh (122 cm x 6.1 m) and a heavy
flexible PVC liner (12 gauge). The wire mesh shell was formed into the desired diameter and
11
shape for the tank and the liner was placed inside the structure and connected through a bulk
head fitting to the drainage line to form each tank. 
Oyster bags were suspended inside the water reservoir to provide a media for partial
biological filtration and a vortex water clarifier was later added to help remove some of the
suspended solids and improve water quality. This water clarifier is supplied directly from the
water reservoir through a one-half horsepower pump and its water is returned to the water
reservoir near the outlet to the tanks. Water supply is done through a 12-inch PVC pipe and
airlifted through three 3-inch pipes into each tank. Each tank is drained through a 6-inch
PVC pipe connected to the main 12-inch PVC drain line running underground towards the
water reservoir. Equipment and material purchases records provided the cost of
establishment or start-up cost of the recirculating system and capital costs involved in order
to perform the economic analysis.
Due to problems with the supply of native shrimp post larvae, the initial production
experiment was done with L. vannamei. This allowed for the preliminary collection of
production information necessary for the economic analysis. It also confirmed that that the
system was properly working and assured that production is possible in this type of system.
The shrimp stocked in the intensive system were obtained from Shrimp Improvement
Systems in Islamorada, Florida. Three stocking densities (10,000 shrimp/tank, 20,000
shrimp/tank and 30,000 shrimp/tank) were used in the first growth trial run in the intensive
system and for the purpose of the first experimental run, production was carried out in 25 m?
of water. Commercial feed (35% protein) was provided to each tank while growth and
survival were monitored to allow for the adjustment of the weekly feeding rate. 
12
Simulation model
A computer simulation model was developed using STELLA  (Iseesystems, Lebanon,?
NH). This software allows for the generation of user created scenarios based on the
production system of interest and the production parameters of such system that help in the
decision process prior to starting production. The current simulation model uses the
parameters of the recirculating system built in CPMC as its basis. The simulation model for
the recirculating system was created so that modifications can be done to every production
parameter, according to different production protocols or methods that may be used by a
producer, based on literature or experience. This flexibility to change the production
parameters in the model allows evaluation of several production scenarios and help in
decision making.
The simulation model incorporates production information such as stocking density,
daily growth rate, temperature dependent growth, daily mortality rate, feed conversion ratio
(FCR), and target weight for harvest. It also incorporates environmental information that has
an effect over production such as monthly average ambient temperature. Growth rate data
were obtained from previous studies with raceway production of L. vannamei in Texas due
to lack of detailed growth information on L. setiferus (Davis and Arnold 1998). A
polynomial regression line was fitted to the growth data to obtain a daily growth rate curve
for use in the simulation model.
With the incorporation of monthly average temperatures for Gulf Shores, the model can
determine the length of the growth season and influence the temperature dependent growth
in the model which is designed as a proportion of the total growth possible. Through the use
of computer simulation, realistic production results can be obtained and used for the
13
development of enterprise budgets and other economic analyses such as cash flow, including
internal rate of return (IRR) and net present value (NPV). The detailed assumptions and
formulas used for the STELLA model are provided in Appendix 1.
Economic analysis
To determine the economic viability in the production of live bait shrimp in an intensive
recirculating system, enterprise budgets were developed for each scenario. The information
for the development of an enterprise budget is based on actual production in CPMC trials,
such as aeration hours, feed fed, quantity of post larvae required, and other inputs, and
information that has been gathered from other sources to complete the budgeting process.
Assumptions about production data based on different stocking densities and survival rates
allow to determine different production yields, thus influencing potential revenue and
expenses . Sale prices used in the enterprise budget are price ranges currently observed in the
live bait shrimp market of the Gulf of Mexico. Sales quantities and amount of post larvae
needed may be reported on an individual price basis, or on price per thousand units (shrimp),
which is the reporting method that will be used in the enterprise budget and throughout this
work. 
Variable costs include the production inputs for feed, post larvae, fuel, electricity
(aeration and pumping), maintenance and operating interest costs. Variable costs are based
on different production scenarios but reflect those observed in CPMC. Fixed costs reflect
actual data accumulated from the purchases made construct the recirculating system (see
Appendix 2). Net returns in the enterprise budgets are reported as net returns to land, labor, 
and management, allowing for the information to be used when considering the difference
14
in costs based on individual situations of how the operation is set up and for occasions when
a live bait shrimp production is being done as a complementary activity to existing
production. The developed enterprise budgets provide a break even analysis to cover variable
costs and total costs of the recirculating system. The breakeven costs are calculated as (Jolly
and Clonts 1993):
Breakeven cost to cover
variable costs:
Total variable costs
Total production or yield
Breakeven cost to cover all
costs:
Total costs
Total production or yield
Seven year cash flows were developed to complete the planning and budgeting process,
and show the cash inflows and outflows and projects any new loans that will be needed to
run the business (Kay 1981). The cash flow budgets also provide a window into the financial
situation of the production with a recirculating system over time. Seven year income
statements were also developed to determine future net income (Kay 1981). Using the
income statement, solvency and profitability ratios were obtained. Solvency measure
included the debt to asset ratio, equity to asset ratio and the debt to equity ratio. The
measures of profitability include: the rate of return on assets (ROA), the rate of return on
equity (ROE), and the operating profit margin ratio.
Results
In all the simulated production runs, when targeting an average size of 4 gram shrimp
in the first crop the second crop reached an average size of 3.4 grams. When targeting a 5
gram shrimp in the first crop, the second crop reached an average size of 2.6 grams. When
15
a 6 gram shrimp was targeted, the second crop reached an average size of 2.3 grams.
Assuming a stocking density of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), and an average
harvest weight of 4 grams, the simulated seven year production per tank averaged 25,317
shrimp with a survival in the low 80% range and feed averaged 187 kg (Table 1). The total
production for the six tanks in two crops for the first year was 303,756 shrimp of which the
first crop represents 49%. The annual average production per tank for the simulation run with
higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 1. Assuming
an average harvest weight of 5 grams, the simulated seven year production per tank averaged
25,212 shrimp with a survival in the low 80% range and feed use was 188 kg (Table 1).This
total production for the six tanks in two crops for the first year was 302,550 shrimp of which
the first crop represents 47%. The annual average production per tank for the simulation run
with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 1.
Assuming an average harvest weight of 6 grams, the simulated seven year production per
tank averaged 26,314 shrimp with a survival in the high 80% range due to a higher survival
rate in the second crop and feed averaged 192 kg (Table 1). The total production for the six
tanks in two crops for the first year was 315,816 shrimp of which the first crop represents
45%. The annual average production per tank for the simulation run with higher survivals,
as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 1.
Assuming a stocking density of 1,600 shrimp/m? (40,000 shrimp/tank), and an
average harvest weight of 4 grams, the simulated seven year production per tank averaged
32,811 shrimp with a survival rate in the lower 80% range and feed averaged 246 kg (Table
2). The total production for six tanks in two crops for the first year was 393,672 shrimp of
which the first crop represents 49%. The annual average production per tank for the
16
simulation run with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found
in Table 2. Assuming an average harvest weight of 5 grams, the simulated seven year
production per tank averaged 33,343 shrimp with a survival rate in the mid 80% range and
feed averaged 251 kg (Table 2). The total production for six tanks in two crops for the first
year was 405,432 shrimp of which the first crop represents 49%. The annual average
production per tank for the simulation run with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed
use and FCR can be found in Table 2. Assuming an average harvest weight of 6 grams, the
simulated seven year production per tank averaged 35,077 shrimp with a survival rate in the
high 80% range and feed averaged 251 kg (Table 2). The total production for six tanks in two
crops for the first year was 421,362 shrimp of which the first crop represents 45%. The
annual average production per tank for the simulation run with higher survivals, as well as
simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 2.
Assuming a stocking density of 2,000 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/tank), and an
average harvest weight of 4 grams, the simulated seven year production per tank averaged
41,003 shrimp with a survival rate in the lower 80% range and feed averaged 308 kg (Table
3). The total production for six tanks in two crops for the first year was 491,466 shrimp, of
which the first crop represents 49%. The annual average production per tank for the
simulations with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in
Table 3. Assuming an average harvest weight of 5 grams, the simulated seven year
production per tank averaged 42,279 shrimp with a survival rate in the lower 80% range and
feed averaged 314 kg (Table 3). The total production for six tanks in two crops for the first
year was 500,574 shrimp of which the first crop represents 47%. 
17
The annual average production per tank for the simulations with higher survivals, as
well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 3. Assuming the production of a
6 gram animal, the simulated seven year production per tank averaged 43,845 shrimp with
a survival in the upper 80% range due to a higher survival in the second crop and feed
averaged 319 kg (Table 3). The total production for six tanks in two crops for the first year
was 525,726 shrimp of which the first crop represents 45%. The annual average production
per tank for the simulations with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can
be found in Table 3. The average weekly growth rate obtained through the simulation for the
production of 4 grams animals was 0.30 g, for the production of 5 gram animals the average
weekly growth rate was 0.29 g and 0.32 g for the production of 6 gram animals. The average
prices used in the analysis include the discounted price used for the sale of the suboptimal
shrimp at $90 per 1,000 shrimp when targeting a 4 gram shrimp in the first crop; $70 per
1,000 shrimp when targeting a 5 gram shrimp, and $50 per 1,000 shrimp when targeting a
6 gram animal in the first crop. Assuming a stocking density of 30,000 PL/tank and a
production of 303,756 4g animals with an average sales price for the year of $95 per 1,000
shrimp, the breakeven price to cover all costs was $43.90 per 1,000 shrimp.
Variable costs represent 68% of total costs and the net return to land, labor and
management was $15,490 or $51 per 1,000 shrimp produced ($103/m?) (Table 4). Aeration
costs represent 15% of the total costs in this type of system. Feed costs and post larvae costs
represent 14% and 32% of all costs, while depreciation costs represent 25% of all costs. The
income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated
projected seven year period. Producing an animal with an average weight at harvest of 5
grams, production was 302,550 (Table 4). The average sales price for the year was $84 per
18
1,000 shrimp, the breakeven price to cover all costs was $44.10 per 1,000 shrimp. Net return
to land, labor and management was $12,122 or $40 per 1,000 shrimp produced ($81/m?)
(Table 4). If the target weight at harvest is increased to 6 g, production was 315,816 shrimp
with a sales price of $73 per 1,000 shrimp, the breakeven price to cover all costs was $42.40
per 1,000 shrimp. The net return to land, labor and management was $9,562 or $30.30 per
1,000 shrimp produced ($64/m?) (Table 4). For production of 30,000 shrimp/tank at 4, 5 and
6 grams, IRR was 57%, 42% and 51% respectively; NPV (5% discount rate) was $77,673,
$56,033 and $70515, respectively.
With a stocking density of 40,000 PL/tank and a production of 393,672 4g animals
and an average sales price for the year of $95 per 1,000 shrimp because animals of the
second crop were sold the breakeven price to cover all costs was $39.40 per 1,000 shrimp.
Variable costs represent 73% of total. The net return to land, labor and management was
$21,867 or $55.60 per 1,000 shrimp produced ($146/m?) (Table 4). Aeration costs represent
13% of the total costs, feed and post larvae costs represent 16% and 37% of the total costs,
while depreciation costs represent 22% of all costs. The income statement (Table 5) and cash
flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated projected seven year period
Producing an animal with an average weight at harvest of 5 grams, production was 405,432
shrimp. The average sales price for the year was $84 per 1,000, representing a net return to
land, labor and management of $18,580 or $45.80 per 1,000 shrimp ($124/m?). The
breakeven price to cover all costs was $38.30 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income
statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated
projected seven year period If the average weight at harvest is increased to 6 grams,
production was 421,362. The average sales price for the year was $78 per 1,000, representing
19
a net return to land, labor and management of $17,324 or $41.10 per 1,000 shrimp ($115/m?).
The breakeven price to cover all costs was $37 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). For production
of 40,000 shrimp/tank at 4, 5 and 6 grams, IRR was 76%, 62% and 51% respectively; NPV
(5% discount rate) was $119,119, $91,441 and $71,943, respectively
At a stocking density of 50,000 PL/tank production was 491,466 of 4g shrimp. The
average sales price for the year was $95 per 1,000, representing a net return to land, labor and
management of $28,977 or $64.10 per 1,000 shrimp ($210/m?). The breakeven price to cover
all costs was $35.90 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). Aeration costs represent 11% of all costs,
while feed, post larvae and depreciation represent 18%, 41% and 19% of the total costs. The
income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated
projected seven year period Producing of an animal with an average weight at harvest of 5
grams, production was 500,574 shrimp. The average sales price for the year was $84 per
1,000, representing a net return on land, labor and management of $24,978 or $49.20 per
1,000 shrimp ($167/m?). The breakeven price to cover all costs was $34.90 per 1,000 shrimp
(Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for
the simulated projected seven year period By increasing the average weight at harvest to 6
grams, production was 525,726 shrimp. The average sales price for the year was $73 per
1,000, representing a net return to land, labor and management of $20,424 or $38.80 per
1,000 shrimp ($136/m?). The breakeven price to cover all costs was $33.80 per 1,000 shrimp
(Table 4). A summary of income and cash flow statements for the production of live bait
shrimp in a recirculating system is presented in Table 5 and 6, respectively. For production
of 50,000 shrimp/tank at 4, 5 and 6 grams, IRR was 93%, 80% and 67% respectively; NPV
(5% discount rate) was $152,352, $126,221 and $101,929, respectively. Solvency and
20
profitability ratios are presented in Table 5. The cash flow budgets show the liquidity of the
operation, and all the scenarios show a positive cumulative cash balance. The income
statements show that the production of native live bait shrimp in recirculating systems can
provide a return on the investment (less land, labor and management costs). 
Discussion
The economical viability of the culture of live bait shrimp in a recirculating system
depends on the intensification of production that is allowable with this type of culture
system. The production in a recirculating system can only be successful if it allows
increasing stocking densities without having a negative effect over the number harvested,
which would affect revenue directly, and without increasing the operation costs to a point in
which the operation is not profitable. Davis and Arnold (1998) showed that within 100 to
120 days of culture survival rates above 76% are possible and that a final biomass of 10
kg/m? can be targeted at periods when the wholesale price ranges from $3 to $4 per pound.
The simulated growth and survival from the present study are comparable to those reported
by Davis and Arnold (1998) and consequently are biologically realistic. However, the
reported system did not include oxygen injection, which would be required to reach the
highest values reported in the literature. 
Williams et al. (1996) indicated increased mortality with an increase in stocking
density although there is contrasting evidence that increasing density within the capacity of
the system used, will not have an effect on growth and survival (Wyban et al. 1988; Sandifer
et al. 1988). Native shrimp have shown similar tolerances to high densities as those used in
P. vannamei production in recirculating systems (Williams et al. 1996). The ability to
21
produce native shrimp at high densities is important if the use of a recirculating system is to
be cost effective. Reid and Arnold (1992) reported growth rates of 0.57 and 0.61 grams per
week for L. vannamei. Assuming a 0.50 g growth rate per week from this study, a cohort of
live bait shrimp could be produced in 84 days. Previous studies comparing L. vannamei to
L. setiferus have determined that growth performance of the later is slower, so the growth in
this study is expected to be lower (Browdy et al. 1991; Sandifer et al. 1993; Williams et al.
1996). The importance of determining the length of the production crop is vital to schedule
the production in a recirculating system to be able to provide the live bait retailers with
product when the demand is at its peak. Profitability of a recirculating system will depend
on the availability of your product in order to supply the demand during months where there
is no supply of wild bait shrimp or when this supply is low in order to obtain a better price
per unit sold.
Although some experiments have been developed to determine the productivity and
profitability of recirculating systems, there is still the need for more investigation with the
native shrimp species. Field trials are still needed to determine if cultured bait shrimp can
supply the demand in peak seasons, willingness of retailers to buy cultured bait shrimp and
the price that can be reached in order to make recirculating system production a cost effective
enterprise. One of the weaknesses of this study is that the recirculating system being
developed is for research purposes and may not reflect the needs of a commercial producer
in term of scale and may not reflect other costs involved in the development of a recirculating
system. The computer simulations of production in a recirculating system show that at the
chosen densities and harvest weights, two production crops are possible, making the
production of native live bait shrimp may be economically viable in some cases.
22
Conclusion
The present simulations and economic analyses demonstrate that the production of
native live bait shrimp in recirculating systems is possible and can provide a return over the
investment less land, labor and management costs in the Southeast United States. With the
advances in shrimp production that have been achieved in the last few years it is possible to
sustain a native live bait shrimp industry. Nevertheless we do not know the size of the live
bait industry because the demand for bait is not well established. Live bait shrimp production
in recirculating systems would be an opportunity to develop local family enterprises. Existing
shrimp farmers and others involved in aquaculture production can adapt to establish native
shrimp recirculating systems. The main constraint that needs to be addressed is the supply
and availability of native shrimp post larvae. This aspect of the industry will need to grow
alongside the production. 
23
Figure 1. Schematic of the recirculating system designed for the production of native live bait shrimp in the Claude
Peteet Mariculture Center
24
Table 1. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp in a six tank-
150 m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 1,200 shrimp/m in one year3 3 
with two crops.
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
25,317 187 84 2.0 
26,461 192 88 2.0 
27,569 195 92 2.0 
5 g
25,212 188 84 2.0 
26,884 195 90 2.0 
27,883 199 93 1.9 
6 g
26,314 192 88 2.0 
27,237 197 91 1.9 
28,062 202 94 1.9 
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 3.4 g, 2.6
g and 2.3 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
25
Table 2. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp in a 6 tank-150
m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 1,600 shrimp/m in one year with3 3 
two crops.
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
32,811 246 82 2.1 
34,844 253 87 2.0 
36,647 260 92 2.0 
5 g
33,343 251 85 2.0 
33,850 260 90 2.0 
37,179 265 93 1.9 
6 g
35,077 255 88 2.0 
36,313 262 91 1.9 
37,406 268 94 1.9 
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 3.4 g, 2.6
g and 2.3 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
26
Table 3. Simulated average production information of native live bait shrimp in a 6 tank-150
m  recirculating system with a stocking density of 2,000 shrimp/m in one year with3 3 
two crops.
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
41,003 308 82 2.1 
43,509 318 87 2.0 
45,934 326 92 2.0 
5 g
42,279 314 85 2.0 
44,821 325 90 2.0 
46,474 331 93 1.9 
6 g
43,845 319 88 2.0 
45,389 326 91 1.9 
46,764 336 94 1.9 
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 3.4 g, 2.6
g and 2.3 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
27
Table 4. Summary of enterprise budgets for live bait shrimp production in a 6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system with two crops per year
and densities of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? (40,000 shrimp/tank) and 2,000 shrimp/m? (50,000
shrimp/tank).?
30,000 shrimp/tank 40,000 shrimp/tank 50,000 shrimp/tank
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Receipts $28,832 $25,459 $22,952 $37,362 $33,708 $30,616 $46,646 $42,105 $38,188
Variable Costs
(V.C.) $9,107 $9,075 $9,129 $11,233 $11,255 $11,334 $13,407 $13,467 $13,502
Income above 
V. C. $19,725 $16,384 $13,823 $26,129 $22,453 $19,282 $33,239 $28,638 $24,686
Fixed Costs $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251 $4,251
Total Expenses $13,359 $13,327 $13,380 $15,485 $15,506 $15,585 $17,658 $17,718 $17,753
Net Returns? $15,473 $12,132 $9,572 $21,877 $18,202 $15,031 $28,988 $24,387 $20,435
Breakeven cost to cover:
All expenses $44 $44 $42 $39 $39 $37 $36 $35 $34
Variable expenses $30 $30 $29 $29 $28 $27 $27 $27 $26
? For detailed information refer to Appendix 2.
? Net Returns are reported as Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management
28
Table 5. Summary of average annual income statement (7 years) for live bait shrimp production in a 6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system
with two crops per year and densities of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? (40,000 shrimp/tank) and 2,000
shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/tank).?
30,000 shrimp/tank 40,000 shrimp/tank 50,000 shrimp/tank
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Revenue $28,727 $25,456 $22,951 $39,087 $34,092 $30,590 $47,057 $42,611 $38,237
Expenses $13, 470 $13,477 $13,518 $15,497 $15,557 $15,603 $17,301 $17,641 $17,688
Net Farm
Income $15,257 $11,979 $9,433 $23,590 $18,594 $14,987 $29,756 $24,971 $20,549
Debt to Asset
ratio 39% 41% 43% 34% 36% 38% 30% 32% 34%
Equity to Asset
ratio 61% 59% 57% 67% 64% 62% 70% 68% 66%
Debt to Equity
ratio 67% 74% 80% 53% 59% 64% 45% 49% 54%
ROA 28% 23% 20% 36% 31% 27% 41% 37% 32%
ROE 48% 42% 36% 58% 51% 46% 63% 58% 52%
Operating Profit
Margin Ratio 57% 52% 46% 63% 58% 53% 66% 61% 57%
? For detailed information refer to Appendix 2.
29
Table 6. Summary of average annual cash flow (7 years) for live bait shrimp production in a 6 tank, 150 m? recirculating system with two
crops per year and densities of 1,200 shrimp/m? (30,000 shrimp/tank), 1,600 shrimp/m? (40,000 shrimp/tank) and 2,000 shrimp/m?
(50,000 shrimp/tank). ?
30,000 shrimp/tank 40,000 shrimp/tank 50,000 shrimp/tank
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Gross Receipts $28,727 $25,456 $22,951 $39,087 $34,092 $30,590 $47,057 $42,611 $38,237
Total Expenses $12,284 $12,859 $12,900 $14,981 $15,043 $15,089 $16,890 $17,230 $17,277
Net Income $16,443 $12,597 $15,227 $24,106 $19,049 $15,501 $30,167 $25,381 $20,960
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
Net Cash Flow $19,806 $15,959 $18,589 $27,468 $22,411 $18,863 $33,529 $28,743 $24,322
NPV 5% $77,673 $56,033 $70,515 $119,119 $91,441 $71,943 $152,352 $126,221 $101,929
NPV 10% $57,589 $39,844 $51,466 $90,233 $68,160 $52,544 $116,820 $95,998 $76,548
IRR 57% 42% 51% 76% 62% 51% 93% 80% 67%
? For the detailed information refer to Appendix 2.
30
References
AMRD (Alabama Marine Resources Division). 2008. Alabama saltwater commercial and
recreational licenses, and fees. 
Arnold, S.J., M.J. Sellars, P.J. Crocos and G.J. Coman. 2006. An evaluation of stocking
density on the intensive production of juvenile brown tiger shrimp (Penaeus
esculentus). Aquaculture 256, 174-179.
Baxter, K.N., C.H. Furr Jr. and E. Scott. 1988. The commercial bait shrimp fishery in
Galveston Bay, Texas, 1959-87. Marine Fisheries Review 50 (2), 20 - 28.
Berkeley, S.A., D.W. Pybas and W.L. Campos. 1985. Bait shrimp fishery of Biscayne Bay.
Florida Sea Grant Extension Program, Technical Paper No. 40. Gainesville, FL.
Chin, E. 1960. The bait shrimp fishery of Galveston Bay, Texas. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society 89 (2), 135- 141.
Cummings, W.C. 1961. Maturation and spawning of the pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum 
Burkenroad. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 90 (4), 462 - 468.
Davis, D.A. and C.R. Arnold. 1998. The design, management and production of a
recirculating raceway system for the production of marine shrimp. Aquaculture
Engineering 17, 193-211.
 DeIonno, P.N., G.L. Wines, P.L. Jones and R.O. Collins. 2006. A bioeconomic evaluation
of a commercial scale recirculating finfish growout system ? An Australian
perspective. Aquaculture 259, 315-327.
31
Epperly, S., L. Avens, L. Garrison, T. Henwood, W. Hoggard, J. Mitchell, J. Nance, J.
Poffenberger, C. Sasso, E. Scott-Denton and C. Yeung. 2002. Analysis of sea turtle
bycatch in the commercial shrimp fisheries of southeast U.S. waters and the Gulf of
Mexico. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-
SEFSC-490, 88 pp.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2009. The state of world fisheries and
aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. 176 pp.
FWRI (Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute). 2009. Marine fisheries information 
system: 2007 annual landings summary. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission.
Gandy, R.L., 1997. U.S. national live bait shrimp market survey. M.S. thesis. College of
Science and Technology, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi,
TX.
Gandy, R.L., T.M. Samocha, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 2001. The Texas live bait shrimp
market. Journal of Shellfish Research 20 (1), 365-367.
Gandy, R.L. 2007. Bait shrimp culture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (SRAC)
Publication No. 1201. 
Gracia, A. 1996. White shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) recruitment overfishing. Marine and
Freshwater Research 47, 59-65.
Gutherz, E.J. and G.J. Pellegrin. 1988. Estimate of the catch of red snapper, Lutjanus
campechanus, by shrimp trawlers in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Marine Fisheries
Review 50 (1),17-25.
32
Hanson, T.R., R.K. Wallace and L.U. Hatch. 2004. Coastal Alabama recreational live bait
study. Mississippi State University Department of Agricultural Economics Staff
Report 2004-001.
Holthius, L.B. 1980. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 1. Shrimps and Prawns of the World. An
Annotated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Synopsis 125
(1). 271 pp.
Jolly, C.M. and H.A. Clonts. 1993. Economics of aquaculture. The Haworth Press,
Binghamton, New York, (1993). 319 pp 
Kay, R.D. 1981. Farm management- planning, control and implementation. McGraw Hill,
Inc. United States of America.
Kazmierczak Jr., R.F. and R.H. Caffey. 1995. Management ability and the economics of
recirculating aquaculture production systems. Marine Resources Economy 10, 187-
209.
LDWF (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries). 2009. General regulations and
information digest. Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. Baton Rouge, LA
Malone, R.F. and A.A. DeLosReyes Jr. 1997. Categories of recirculating aquaculture
systems. In: Aquacultural Engineering Society Proceeding, ISTA IV, Orlando, FL,
pp. 197-208.
Mays, R., J.A. Venero, D.A. Davis, D.B. Rouse and I.P. Saoud. 2006. Nursery protocols for
the rearing of the brown shrimp, Farfantepenaeus aztecus: effects of stocking density
and salinity. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 18 (2), 47-59.
33
 Meyer, D.L., M.S. Fonseca, P.L. Murphey, R.H. McMichael Jr., M.M. Byerly, M.W.
LaCroix, P.E. Whitfield and G.W. Thayer. 1999. Effects of live bait shrimp trawling
on seagrass beds and fish bycatch in Tampa Bay, Florida. Fishery Bulletin 97 (1),
193-199.
Muncy, R.J. 1984. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal
fishes and invertebrates (Gulf of Mexico) - White shrimp. U.S. Fisheries and Wildlife
Services. FWS/OBS-82/11.20. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4. 19 pp.
Nance, J., W. Keithly Jr., C. Caillouet Jr., J. Cole, W. Gaidry, B. Gallaway, W. Griffing, R.
Hart and M. Travis. 2006. Estimation of effort, maximum sustainable yield, and 
maximum economic yield in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico. Report to the
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council by The Ad Hoc Shrimp Effort
Working Group.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2009. Shrimp statistics,
September. GOM Data Management, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Palomino, G., F. Contreras, A. Sanchez and C. Rosas. 2001. Density and water exchange-
dependent growth and survival of Litopenaeus setiferus postlarvae. Journal of the
World Aquaculture Society 32 (2), 167-176. 
Perez-Farfante, I. 1969. Western Atlantic shrimps of the genus Penaeus. Fishery Bulletin
67(3)
Reid, B., and C.R. Arnold. 1992. The intensive culture of the penaeid shrimp Penaeus
vannamei Boone in a recirculating raceway system. Journal of the World Aquaculture
Society 23 (2), 146-153.
34
Rogers, B.D., R.F. Shaw, W.H. Herke and R.H. Blanchet. 1993. Recruitment of postlarval
and juvenile brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus Ives) from offshore to estuarine waters
of the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 36, 377 -
394.
Samocha, T.M., L. Hamper, C.R. Emberson, D.A. Davis, D. McIntosh, A.L. Lawrence and
P.M. Van Wyk. 2002. Review of some recent developments in sustainable shrimp
farming practices in Texas, Arizona, and Florida. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 12,
1-30.
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins and A.D. Stokes. 1988. Intensification of shrimp culture in
earthen ponds in South Carolina: progress and prospects. Journal of the World
Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 218-226.
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins, A.D. Stokes and C.L. Browdy. 1993. Preliminary comparisons 
of the native Penaeus setiferus and Pacific P. vannamei white shrimp for pond
culture in South Carolina, USA. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 24 (3),
295-303
Schuur, A.M. 2003. Evaluation of biosecurity applications for intensive shrimp farming.
Aquaculture Engineering 28, 3-20. 
TPWD (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department). 2002. The Texas shrimp fishery. A report 
to the governor and the 77  legislature of Texas: Executive Summary. Austin, TXth
TPWD (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department). 2008. Recreational fishing: shrimp
regulations: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/annual/fish/shrimpreg.
35
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2009. Aquaculture data: U.S. shrimp
imports. Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Southwest Louisiana national wildlife refuge complex
fishing regulations: Cameron Prairie, Lacassine, and Sabine.
Williams, A.S., D.A. Davis and C.R. Arnold. 1996. Density dependent growth and survival
of Penaeus setiferus and Penaeus vannamei in a semi-closed recirculating system.
Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 27(1), 107-112.
Wyban, J.A., J.N. Sweeny and R.A. Kanna. 1988. Shrimp yields and economic potential of
intensive round pond systems. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 210-
217.
36
CHAPTER 3: Economic Analysis of Pond Production 
of Native Live Bait Shrimp
Introduction 
Pond growout is the most common method for the production of shrimp around the
world. The production of shrimp in ponds is normally categorized by the density used and
the size of the pond. According to the density and size of the pond, culture can be classified
into extensive, semi-intensive or intensive production. Extensive production is mostly done
in the tropics and involves little or no technology and is normally carried out as a polyculture,
with limited control over density and shrimp quality. Commercial production of shrimp
around the world, especially for the export market is done in semi-intensive and intensive
ponds. Semi-intensive ponds are normally located near an estuary or water inlet, stocking
densities used range between 10 and 30 PL/m? and the size of the pond normally ranges from
1 to 5 hectares with yields ranging from 500 to 5,000 kg/ha/crop (FAO 2009). 
Intensive ponds do not require the physical proximity to an estuary that is necessary
for the extensive and semi-intensive production and densities used range between 60 and 300
PL/m? and the size of the pond normally ranges from 0.1 to 1 hectare with yields ranging
from 7 to 20,000 kg/ha/crop (FAO 2009). The semi-intensive method of culture is widely
practiced in Latin America and in most shrimp exporting countries of Asia and Oceania,
while the intensive method of culture is most commonly practiced in North America, where 
37
land costs are high, and in some regions of Asia and Oceania. In the United States, eleven
states have businesses involved in shrimp production, although not all use pond production
(CSREES 2009).
Several pond culture studies have been conducted in the United States, including the
first studies done by Lunz during the 1950s in South Carolina, where he determined that
ponds located in coastal lowlands were suitable for the production of bait and food shrimp
(Parker and Holcomb 1973). Broom (1968) during research done in Grand Terre Island in
Louisiana determined that stocking densities as high as 50,000 per ha (5/m?) using wild-
caught shrimp was possible, achieving good survival and growth for the time. Latapie et al.
(1972) also conducted early shrimp production in ponds in Grand Terre Island trying to
determine the best combination of stocking rates, type of feeds and stocking times. Initial
attempts of shrimp production in ponds in the United States were done with wild seed and
fish feeds (catfish feeds) which were not necessarily appropriate. Neal and Latapie (1972)
determined that production could be increased with the addition of fish meal to supplement
the fish feeds and vegetables meals that were being used at the time, they determined that the
stocking densities used in previous experiments could be increased without affecting
productivity. 
Early pond results showed yields of 200 kg/ha for F. aztecus and as research efforts
continued, yield increased to 529 kg/ha and 907 kg/ha for F. aztecus and L. setiferus
respectively (Broom 1968; Wheeler 1967). In the early 1970s, supported by the findings of
earlier work, there was an improvement in pond production protocols and techniques
resulting in better yields. Neal and Latapie (1972) were able to obtain 104 kg/ha with F.
aztecus at a stocking density of 6 shrimp/m? in one cycle and up to 900 kg/ha with L.
38
setiferus at a stocking density of 7 shrimp/m? in one cycle. Similar results were obtained in
the same research facility with one cycle produced and stocking rates ranging from 4 to 8
shrimp/m?, with yields between 50 kg/ha and 430 kg/ha for F. aztecus and L. setiferus,
respectively (Latapie et al. 1972). Gould et al. (1973) produced yields between 300 kg/ha and
596 kg/ha for F. aztecus. Parker and Holcomb (1973), in a study that spanned several years
were able to increase yield of F. aztecus and L. setiferus, from 209 kg/ha and 330 kg/ha, to
288 kg/ha and 760 kg/ha, respectively. Parker et al. (1974) working with an intensive pond
system in Texas was able to obtain 1,300 kg/ha for L. setiferus. Hysmith and Colura (1976)
showed similar yield, from 78.4 kg to 185 kg/ha for F. aztecus and 121 kg/ha to 452 kg/ha
for L. setiferus. After several years of improving protocols and techniques used in pond
production, yields increased notably. Samocha et al. (1998) reported yields from 10,000
kg/ha to 30,000 kg/ha for L. setiferus in a high density pond system. Browdy et al. (1991)
reported yields between 5,000 kg/ha and 9,000 kg/ha under pond conditions for L. setiferus.
Similar to previous results from South Carolina, other yields obtained for L. setiferus range
from 5, 200 kg/ha to 7,900 kg/ha (Sandifer et al. 1993).
Early investigations helped determine that L. setiferus has better production in ponds
than F. aztecus and due to some difficulties with the supply of L. vannamei in the early
1990s, L. setiferus was considered as a good alternative for production in ponds in the
Southeast United States (Parker and Holcomb 1973; Hysmith and Colura 1976; Sandifer et
al. 1993). Native species, L. setiferus, F. aztecus and F. duorarum can be produced in ponds
in the Southeast United States without the need of a special license that is needed for the
production of L. vannamei, which is a non-native species to the area. For bait production in
the Southeast United States, the native species are also the only option due to possible
39
escapement of live bait and disease problems that may arise if a non-native species were to
be used as bait. A report by the U.S. Department of Commerce (1997) showed that wild
populations of shrimp in the United States are still not affected with the viruses that affect
wild populations in Asia, although they recognized that gaps existed in their information.
These results were supported by an investigation of native frozen live bait shrimp, although
some white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) outbreaks have been detected in the Gulf of
Mexico and the southeast Atlantic in native shrimp stocks of L. setiferus and F. aztecus 
(Hasson et al. 2006). 
Early investigation and production was carried out in earthen ponds, normally located
near or in the lowland of coastal areas due to easy access to seawater. As production has
intensified, producers search for pond locations that provide better control over the water
supply, that reduce any problems that may arise from natural disasters and allow them to
maintain greater control over general production. Semi intensive production is still carried
out in earthen ponds and in most shrimp producing countries still use tidal cycles to schedule
activities such as pond fill-up, water exchanges and harvests. Regulations in some countries
may require shrimp farms located in proximity of a natural body of water to have certain
control over the discharge of pond water to prevent high nutrient effluent from causing
pollution.
In some cases where soil conditions are not appropriate due to high sand
concentration with high seepage or where the producer wants better control of the overall
production and health, plastic liners can be used for pond production (Moss 1995). Shrimp
ponds that use plastic liners are smaller than the normal semi-intensive ponds and production
tends to be intensified in order to offset the high cost of using a plastic liner. More
40
intensification involves the production of shrimp in tanks or raceways, which was presented
in Chapter 2 and can be found in the literature (Arnold et al. 2006; Caillouet et al. 1976;
Samocha et al. 1998). Sandifer et al. (1988) concluded that earthen ponds can be used in the
United States when production is intensified through the use of smaller more manageable
ponds (0.1 ha to 0.5 ha), an increase in stocking density, use of mechanical aeration and an
increase in water exchange rates. In order for shrimp production in the United States to be
competitive with imported shrimp, pond production needs to be intensified, employing
mechanical aeration that will allow the increase of stocking densities and feeding rates
(Wyban et al. 1988). Two of the major inputs for the production of shrimp are postlarvae and
feed (Pardy et al. 1983). According to Sureshwaran et al. (1994), one of the greatest problems
faced by shrimp growers in the United States is the availability of post larvae at a reasonable
price, aggravated with concerns over possible environmental problems caused by shrimp
farming and the possibility of spreading diseases. The main objective of this work is to
provide an economic analysis of the use of ponds for the production of live bait shrimp in
the southeast United States using the conditions and data found in the Claude Peteet
Mariculture Center (CPMC). This economic analysis will determine if the use of ponds is
economically viable under the conditions that are currently present in the industry and
whether the intensification of production is cost effective. The information gathered in this
work will also supplement the existing information and will contribute to the development
of the culture of native species in the area. 
41
Materials and Methods
The production of live bait shrimp in ponds was based on previous and current
research being conducted in Gulf Shores, Alabama at the Claude Peteet Mariculture Center
(CPMC) with the native species Litopenaeus setiferus and Farfantepenaeus duorarum. In
order to complement the information on native shrimp, some information from the
production of the Pacific white shrimp L. vannamei is included due to the amount of research
that has been done with this species. Pond production in CPMC is carried out in 0.1 ha high
density plastic lined ponds. Each pond has approximately 25 cm of soil to simulate natural
conditions as much as possible. Each pond contains a concrete catch basin for harvest and
has its own saltwater supply line. Mechanical aeration is supplied to each pond with a
combination of paddlewheel aerators (10 hp/ha) and aspirator aerators. Sampling of the
shrimp is done through cast netting and group weighing to calculate population numbers,
calculate weight gain, observe shrimp condition (fullness of gut, smoothness of antennae,
spots) and adjust feeding. 
Prior to stocking, ponds are fertilized with liquid inorganic fertilizer to obtain a good
phytoplankton bloom. The stocking density used for the production of live bait shrimp is 50
shrimp/m? or 50,000 shrimp per pond. Stocking size ranges from post larvae (PL) 10 to PL
15 (approximately 0.001 g per PL). Harvest weight per shrimp depends on the live bait
shrimp market and normally ranges between 3 and 7 grams, or shrimp above 3 inches in
length. Harvest is done through cast netting the amounts required by the customer and later
with a complete drawdown of the pond. Live bait shrimp are sold at $100 per thousand.
Other common ways of selling live bait shrimp at retail can also be by the quart, by the liter 
42
or by the dozen. Live bait shrimp wholesalers will tend to sell on a per thousand basis or per
500 unit basis, while retailers tend to sell on a per dozen or per quart basis. 
Simulation model
A computer simulation model was developed using STELLA  (iseesystems, Lebanon,?
NH). This software allows a representation of the biological process of shrimp production
and allows for the creation of user generated scenarios based on the production system of
interest and the production parameters of such systems that help in the decision process prior
to production. The current simulation model uses the parameters of the pond production in
CPMC as its basis. The simulation model for the pond system was created so that
modifications can be done to every production parameter, according to different production
protocols or methods that may be used by a producer, based on literature or experience. This
flexibility to change several of the production parameters in the model allows the producer
to test several production scenarios and help in decision making.
In this study, the simulation model incorporates production information such as
stocking density, daily growth rate, temperature dependent growth, daily mortality rate, feed
conversion ratio (FCR) and target weight for harvest. It also incorporates environmental
information that has an effect over production such as monthly average ambient temperature.
Growth rate data was obtained from previous studies with raceway production of L.
vannamei in Texas due to lack of detailed growth information on L. setiferus (Davis and
Arnold 1998). A polynomial regression line was fitted to the growth data to obtain a daily
growth rate curve to use in the simulation model. With the incorporation of monthly average
temperatures for Gulf Shores, the model can determine the length of the growth season and
43
influence the temperature dependent growth in the model which is designed as a proportion
of the total growth possible. Through the use of this computer simulation model, realistic
production results can be obtained and used for the elaboration of budgets and economic
analyses such as cash flow, and internal rate of return (IRR) and net present value (NPV)
measures of profitability. The detailed assumptions and formulas used in STELLA are
provided in Appendix 1.
Economic analysis
To determine the economic viability of the production of live bait shrimp in a pond
system, enterprise budgets were developed using the information from shrimp production of
CPMC, including aeration hours, feed fed, quantity of post larvae required and other inputs,
and information that has been gathered from other sources to complete the budget.
Assumptions were made to include production data based on different stocking densities and
survival rates that allow to determine different production yields, thus influencing potential
revenue and expenses. Sale prices used in the enterprise budget reflect the prices currently
observed in the live bait shrimp market of the Gulf of Mexico and have been used in the sale
of live bait shrimp produced in CPMC. Sales quantities and amount of post larvae needed
may be reported on an individual price basis, or on price per thousand units (shrimp), which
is the reporting method that will be used in the enterprise budget and throughout this work. 
Variable costs include the production costs involved, including feed, post larvae,
salaries, fuel, electricity use, maintenance and interest costs. Salaries include part time labor
needed for harvesting and a full time manager. Labor is not being included as a cost, due to
the subjective nature in determining a dollar amount and the net return being reported does
44
not take into account this expense. Variable costs are based on different production scenarios
but reflect those observed in CPMC. Fixed costs include depreciation, property taxes,
insurance premiums and interests paid on equipment. Fixed costs included in the enterprise
budget come from actual data that has been recorded for pond construction. Net returns in
the enterprise budgets are reported as net returns to land, labor, and management, allowing
for the information to be used when considering the difference in costs based on individual
situations of how the operation is set up and for occasions when a live bait shrimp production
is being done as a complementary activity to existing production. The enterprise budget has
also been used to provide a break even analysis of the production in ponds. The break-even
cost is calculated with the formula (Jolly and Clonts 1993):
Breakeven cost to cover
variable costs:
Total variable costs
Total production or yield
Breakeven cost to cover all
costs:
Total costs
Total production or yield
Seven year cash flow budgets were developed, to complete the planning and
budgeting process, and show the cash inflows and outflows and project any new loans that
will be needed to run the business (Kay 1981). The cash flow budgets also provides a
window into the financial situation of the production with a pond system over time. Seven
year income statements were also developed to determine future net income (Kay 1981).
Using the income statement, solvency and profitability were obtained. Solvency measure
included the debt to asset ratio, equity to asset ratio and the debt to equity ratio. The
measures of profitability include the rate of return on assets (ROA), the rate of return on
equity (ROE) and the operating profit margin ratio.
45
Results 
In all the simulated production runs, when targeting an average size of 4 gram shrimp
in the first crop, the second crop reached an average size of 4 grams. When targeting a 5
gram shrimp in the first crop, the second crop reached an average size of 5 grams When a 6
gram shrimp was targeted, the second crop reached an average size of 4 grams. It is necessary
to mention that whenever a 6 gram shrimp is grown in the first crop, the average production
will be higher due to a smaller animal being produced in the second crop with a better
survival that increases this average.
Assuming a stocking density of 50 shrimp/m2 and an average harvest weight of 4
grams, the simulated seven year production per pond averaged 37,742 shrimp with a survival
rate in the mid 70% range, and feed averaged 325 kg (Table 1).The total production for the
five ponds in two crops for the first year was 376,530 shrimp of which the first crop
represents 50%. The annual average production per pond for the simulation run with higher
survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 1. Assuming an
average harvest weight of 5 grams, the simulated seven year production per pond averaged
37,053 with a survival rate in the mid 70% range and feed averaged 401 kg (Table 1.). The
total production for the five ponds in two crops for the first year was 371,625 of which the
first crop represents 49.70%. The annual average production per pond for the simulation run
with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 1.
Assuming an average harvest weight of 6 grams, the simulated seven year production per
pond averaged 38,799, with a survival in the upper 70% range and feed averaged 422 kg
(Table 1). The total production for the five ponds in two crops for the first year was 386,960,
of which the first crop represents 47%. The annual average production per pond for the
46
simulation run with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found
in Table 1
Assuming a stocking density of 60 shrimp/m? and an average harvest weight of 4
grams, the simulated seven year production per pond averaged 45,359 shrimp, with a survival
rate in the mid 70% range, and feed averaged 391 kg (Table 2). The total production for the
five ponds in two crops for the first year was 453,780 shrimp, of which the first crop
represents 49.60%. The annual average production per pond for the simulation run with
higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 2.With an
average harvest weight of 5 grams and survival rate in the mid 70% range, the simulated
seven year production per pond averaged 44,500 animals and feed averaged 480 kg (Table
2). The total production for the five ponds in two crops for the first year was 444,045 shrimp,
of which 49.80% was from the first crop. The annual average production per pond for the
simulation run with higher survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found
in Table 2 Production of a 6 gram animal with a survival rate in the upper 70% range,
production averaged 46,578 animals and feed averaged 508 kg (Table 2).The total production
for the five ponds in two crops for the first year was 465,210, of which 47% comes from the
first crop. The annual average production per pond for the simulation run with higher
survivals, as well as simulated feed use and FCR can be found in Table 2.
Assuming a stocking density of 70 shrimp/m? and an average harvest weight of 4
grams, with a survival rate in the mid 70%, production averaged 52,742 animals and feed
averaged 454 kg (Table 3).The total production for the five ponds in two crops for the first
year was 553,175, of which the first crop represents 47%. The annual average production per
pond for the simulation run with higher survivals as well as simulated feed use and FCR can
47
be found in Table 3. Assuming an average weight of 5 grams, the simulated seven year
production per pond averaged 51,919 shrimp with a survival rate in the mid 70% range, and
feed averaged 560 kg (Table 3). The total production for the five ponds in two crops for the
first year was 521,285, of which the first crop represents 49%. The annual average
production per pond for the simulation run with higher survivals as well as simulated feed
use and FCR can be found in Table 3. Production of a 6 gram animal and a survival rate in
the mid 70% range, the seven year production per pond averaged 54,348 shrimp and feed
averaged 592 kg (Table 3). The total production for the five ponds in two crops for the first
year was 542,950 shrimp of which the first crop represents 47%. The annual average
production per pond for the simulation run with higher survivals as well as simulated feed
use and FCR can be found in Table 3. The average weekly growth rate obtained through the
simulation for the production of 4 grams animals was 0.41 g, for the production of 5 gram
animals the average weekly growth rate was 0.39 g and 0.41 g for the production of 6 gram
animals.
Using five 0.1-ha ponds and assuming a stocking density of 50,000 PL/pond, and an
average weight of 4 grams, production was 376,530 shrimp (Table 4). The average sales
price for the year was $100 per 1,000 shrimp. The total cost of production was $5,156/pond,
and the net return to land, labor and management was $12,223 or $2,445/pond. Variable
costs represent 57% of the total costs, with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing
11%, 23% and 34%, respectively. The breakeven price to cover all costs was $0.07 per
shrimp or $67 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow
(Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated projected seven year period. With a
stocking density of 50,000 PL/pond and increasing the average harvest weight to 5 g
48
production was 371,625 shrimp. The average sales price for the year was $100 per 1,000
shrimp and the total cost of production was $5,310/pond. The net return to land, labor and
management was $10,965 or $2,193/pond. Variable costs represent 58% of the total costs,
with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing 13%, 23% and 33%, respectively. The
breakeven price to cover all costs was $70.50 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income
statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated
projected seven year period. Increasing the average weight at harvest to 6 grams, production
was 386,960 shrimp. The average sales price for the year was $97 per 1,000 shrimp. The total
cost of production was $5,359/ pond and the net return to land, labor and management was
$10,883 or $2,177/pond. Variable costs represent 59% of all costs, with feed, post larvae and
depreciation representing 13%, 22% and 32%, respectively. The breakeven price to cover all
costs was $69.25 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow
(Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated projected seven year period. For
production of 50,000 shrimp/pond at 4, 5 and 6 grams, IRR was 16%, 14% and 10%
respectively; NPV (5% discount rate) was $32,821, $27,298 and $13,246 respectively.
Using five 0.1-ha ponds and assuming a stocking density of 60,000 PL/pond, with
an average weight of 4 grams, production was 453,780 shrimp. The average sales price for
the year was $100 per 1,000 shrimp. The total cost of production was $5,437/pond and the
net return to land, labor and management was $18,191 or $3,638/pond (Table 4). Variable
costs represent 60% of the total costs, with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing
12%, 26% and 32%, respectively. The breakeven price to cover all costs was $59.91 per
1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a
positive return for the simulated projected seven year period. Producing animals with an
49
average harvest weight of 5 grams, production was 444,045 shrimp. The average sales price
for the year was $100 per 1,000 shrimp. The total cost of production was $5,720/pond and
the net return to land, labor and management was $15,804 or $3,161/pond. Variable costs
represent 62% of the total costs with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing 14%,
25% and 30%, respectively. The breakeven price to cover all costs was $64.41 per 1,000
shrimp (Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive
return for the simulated projected seven year period. Increasing the average weight to 6
grams, production was 465,210 shrimp. The average sales price was $97 per 1,000 shrimp.
The total cost of production was $5,752/pond and the net return to land, labor and
management was $16,536 or $3,307/pond (Table 4). Variable costs represent 62% of the
total costs, with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing 15%, 25% and 30%,
respectively. The breakeven price to cover all costs was $61.82 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4).
The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the
simulated projected seven year period. For production of 60,000 shrimp/pond at 4, 5 and 6
grams, IRR was 26%, 23% and 19% respectively; NPV (5% discount rate) was $67,673,
$57,290 and $43,093, respectively.
Using five 0.1-ha ponds and assuming a stocking density of 70,000 PL/pond with an
average weight of 4 grams, production was 553,175 shrimp. The average sales price was
$100 per 1,000 shrimp. The total cost of production was $5,795/pond and the net return to
land, labor and management was $26,341 or $5,268/pond (Table 4). Variable costs represent
62% of the total costs with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing 13%, 29% and
30%, respectively. The breakeven price to cover all costs was $52.38 per 1,000 shrimp
(Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for
50
the simulated projected seven year period. Producing animals with an average harvest weight
of 5 grams, production was 521,285 shrimp. The average sales price was $100 per 1,000
shrimp. The total cost of production was $6,090/pond and the net return to land, labor and
management was $21,678 or $4,336/pond (Table 4). Variable costs represent 64% of the
total costs with feed, post larvae and depreciation representing 16%, 28% and 29%. The
breakeven price to cover all costs was $58.41 per 1,000 shrimp (Table 4). The income
statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 6) show a positive return for the simulated
projected seven year period. Increasing the average weight to 6 grams, production was
542,950 shrimp. The average sales price was $97 per 1,000 shrimp. The total cost of
production was $6,134/pond and the net return to land, labor and management was $22,195
or $4,439/pond (Table 4). The breakeven price to cover total costs was $56.49 per 1,000
shrimp (Table 4). The income statement (Table 5) and cash flow (Table 5) show a positive
return for the simulated projected seven year period. For production of 70,000 shrimp/pond
at 4, 5 and 6 grams, IRR was 39%, 31% and 32% respectively; NPV (5% discount rate) was
$116,374, $84,325 and $90,320, respectively.
Discussion
Simulation
The growout time necessary to reach a marketable size bait shrimp in the computer
simulations are comparable to the amount of time required in research trials for the
production of native live bait shrimp in ponds (Samocha et al. 1998; Neal and Latapie 1972).
Production of live bait shrimp between 4 and 6 grams allows production of two crops per
year. A longer growth period or cycle period increases the risk of running into problems and
51
losing animals and by producing a larger sized animal, the simulations show that the time
available for a subsequent production cycle is reduced.
Determining first what the smallest size bait shrimp that the consumer (bait store)
will accept will help optimize the production cycle, that is normally limited to 5 - 7 months
in the southern United States. Earlier studies with shrimp in ponds have demonstrated the
importance of stocking early, especially during the spring, to be able to take advantage of this
limited season (Latapie et al. 1972). The number of pond production cycles completed during
a year in these simulations were similar to earlier studies conducted with the Atlantic white
shrimp (McKee et al. 1989). Sandifer et al. (1988) also reported similar growth crops for the
production of bait shrimp in South Carolina under similar conditions to the ones used in the
simulations in this study. Samocha et al. (1998) reported similar sizes at harvest in pond
trials to the ones reported in this study, although densities were lower in the simulations. The
resulting feed conversion ratios obtained through the simulations fell inside the range
reported in previous studies (Gould et al. 1973; Samocha et al. 1998; Sandifer et al. 1988;
Sandifer et al. 1993). Feed conversion ratios can be improved through periodic sampling of
the population. This periodic sampling helps to determine the growth of the shrimp in a
pond, and based on these observations the feed rates being used can be adjusted. 
The harvest biomass is not being reported in this study, because the number of shrimp
being produced is considered, and the harvest biomass for the simulations are slightly lower
to studies done in South Carolina with the Pacific whit shrimp (L. vannamei), which is
expected since native shrimp species have lower growth rates and previous comparisons have
demonstrated this tendency (Sandifer et al. 1988; Sandifer et al. 1993). Latapie et al. (1972)
and later Parker and Holcomb (1973) were able to determine in experimental ponds that the
52
Atlantic white shrimp (L. setiferus) outperforms the other native shrimp species (F.
duorarum and P. aztecus). Sandifer et al. (1988) report a direct increase of harvest yields
with an increase in stocking density. This trend can be observed in the simulations in this
study, where increasing the stocking density resulted in a higher number of shrimp being
harvested. Another similar result in this study is that with an increase in the average harvest
weight of the first cycle or crop, the number of shrimp harvested is reduced because of a
longer growth period. The weekly growth rates in the simulation, which were temperature
dependent, and although more conservative are comparable to growth rates reported in earlier
studies (Neil and Latapie 1972; Gould et al. 1973; Parker and Holcomb 1973; Parker et al.
1974; Sandifer et al. 1993; Samocha et al. 1998).
Economic analysis
Under the current assumptions made for the simulations and for bait shrimp selling
prices and production input costs, the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1-ha ponds is
economically viable. As opposed to the food shrimp industry, where yield often determines
profitability, the live bait industry depends on the number and size of shrimp that can be
produced. Previous studies with native species stated that the production of live bait shrimp
in ponds is an unprofitable activity. McKee et al. (1989) determined that a live bait shrimp
business with a 10 year planning horizon would be bankrupt in 5 years. Samocha et al.
(1998) determined that the production of live bait shrimp with only one crop per year was
not profitable, but if 2 crops are possible, there is the possibility of having a profitable
activity. In this study with the information gathered from the simulations, the production of
live bait shrimp in ponds became economically viable when the number of ponds was
53
increased to five. Using fewer ponds resulted in negative net returns to land, labor and
management regardless of the stocking density used and the average weight of the animals
harvested. This same tendency was observed in previous studies with native shrimp species,
in which either an increase in pond size or amount of ponds improved profitability (Adams
et al. 1980; Hanson et al. 1985). Profitability will be determined by several factors, including
post larvae price and availability, feed cost, cost of labor, stocking density, number of ponds
used, harvest frequency and selling price (Adams et al. 1980; Pardy et al. 1983; McKee et
al. 1989; Sureshwaran et al. 1994).
Under any of the chosen stocking densities and the three average harvest weights, the
production of native live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds show net returns to land, labor and
management to be positive. Post larvae, feed and electricity are the most important operating
costs. The percentage of the operating costs that they represent is comparable to previous
studies and reflect prices that are currently found in the industry. The production numbers
chosen for the economic analysis come from the simulations with the lowest survival. This
avoids overestimating the gross revenue, and overestimating the net revenue that is possible
from the different scenarios. It is necessary to mention that revenue in this study is reported
as net returns to land, labor and management. This means that the net farm income does not
cover these expenses. 
Conclusions
The present simulations and analysis demonstrate that the economically viable
production of native live bait shrimp is possible in the Southeast United States. With the
advances in shrimp production that have been achieved in the last few years it is possible to
54
sustain a native live bait shrimp industry. Live bait shrimp production would be a great
opportunity to develop local family enterprises. Existing shrimp farmers can easily adapt to
establish native shrimp ponds. The main constraint that needs to be addressed is the supply
and availability of native shrimp post larvae as well as the willingness and capacity of the
buyers (mainly bait stores). This aspect of the industry will need to grow alongside the
production. 
55
Table 1. Simulated average production information for the production of native live bait
shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 50 PL/m? in one year with two
crops.
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
37,742 325 75 2.1
41,803 344 84 2.0
46,366 366 93 1.9 
5 g
 37,053 401 74 2.2
41,330 423 83 2.1
46,025 446 92 2.0
6 g
38,799 422 78 2.1
42,931 446 86 2.0
46,358 466 93 2.0
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 4 g, 5
g and 4 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
56
Table 2. Simulated average production information for the production of native live bait
shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 60 PL/m? in one year with
two crops
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
45,359 391 76 2.1
50,145 413 84 2.0
55,672 438 93 1.9
5 g
44,450 480 74 2.2
49,580 508 83 2.1
55,242 534 92 2.0
6 g
46,578 508 78 2.1
51,469 536 86 2.0
55,604 559 93 2.0
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 4 g, 5
g and 4 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
57
Table 3. Simulated average production information for the production of native live bait
shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds with a stocking density of 70 PL/m? in one year with
two crops
Harvest
weight?
Harvest
number
Feed use
(kg)
Survival
(%) FCR?
4 g
52,742 454 75 2.1
58,453 480 84 2.0
64,933 512 93 1.9
5 g
51,919 561 74 2.2
57,737 591 82 2.1
64,463 626 92 2.0
6 g
54,348 593 78 2.1
60,036 624 86 2.0
64,922 654 93 2.0
? Feed conversion ratio = Total artificial feed offered/biomass increase
? In the simulated production runs, the second crop average harvest weight reached 4 g, 5
g and 4 g when targeting 4 g, 5 g and 6 g in the first crop, respectively.
58
Table 4. Summary of enterprise budgets for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with two crops per year and densities of
50 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) and 70 shrimp/m? (70,000 shrimp/pond) .1
50,000 shrimp/pond 60,000 shrimp/pond 70,000 shrimp/pond
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Receipts $37,653 $37,163 $37,680 $45,378 $44,405 $45,296 $55,318 $52,129 $52,864
Variable Costs
(V.C.) $14,503 $15,622 $16,222 $16,2620 $17,673 17833 $18,049 $19,524 $19,742
Income above 
V. C. $23,150 $21,540 $21,458 $29,118 $26,731 $27,463 $37,268 $32,605 $33,122
Fixed Costs $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927 $10,927
Total Expenses $25,430 $26,549 $27,149 $27,187 $28,600 $28,760 $28,976 $30,451 $30,669
Net Returns? $12,223 $10,613 $10,531 $18,191 $15,804 $16,536 $26,341 $21,678 $22,195
Breakeven cost to cover:
All expenses $68 $71 $70 $60 $64 $62 $52 $58 $57
Variable expenses $39 $42 $42 $36 $40 $38 $33 $37 $36
 For detailed information refer to Appendix 31
? Net Returns are reported as Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management
59
Table 5. Summary of average annual income statement (7 years) for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with two crops
per year and densities of 50 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) and 70 shrimp/m? (70,000
shrimp/pond).  1
50,000 shrimp/pond 60,000 shrimp/pond 70,000 shrimp/pond
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Revenue $37,742 $37,113 $35,130 $45,033 $44,500 $42,208 $55,793 $51,405 $52,863
Expenses $27,418 $27,954 $28,453 $28,498 $29,782 $30,018 $30,230 $31,663 $31,928
Net Farm Income $10,324 $9,160 $6,677 $16,536 $14,718 $12,190 $25,563 $19,743 $20,935
Debt to Asset
ratio 50% 50% 51% 47% 47% 48% 43% 45% 44%
Equity to Asset
ratio 50% 50% 49% 53% 53% 52% 57% 55% 56%
Debt to Equity
ratio 120% 120% 125% 102% 104% 108% 86% 92% 90%
ROA 12% 11% 9% 17% 16% 14% 23% 19% 20%
ROE 25% 23% 19% 35% 31% 28% 45% 37% 39%
Operating profit
margin ratio 37% 34% 29% 45% 41% 37% 52% 45% 46%
 For detailed information refer to Appendix 3.1
60
Table 6. Summary of average annual cash flow (7 years) for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with two cycles per year
and densities of 50 shrimp/m? (50,000 shrimp/pond), 60 shrimp/m? (60,000 shrimp/pond) and 70 shrimp/m? (70,000
shrimp/pond).  1
50,000 shrimp/pond 60,000 shrimp/pond 70,000 shrimp/pond
4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g 4 g 5 g 6 g
Gross Receipts $37,742 $37,113 $35,130 $45,033 $44,500 $42,208 $55,793 $51,405 $52,863
Total Expenses $27,018 $27,414 $28,039 $28,044 $29,342 $29,691 $29,940 $31,401 $31,689
Net Income $10,724 $9,700 $7,091 $16,989 $15,158 $12,517 $25,853 $20,005 $21,175
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
Net Cash Flow $19,426 $18,401 $15,793 $25,691 $23,859 $21,219 $34,555 $28,706 $29,877
NPV 5% $32,821 $27,298 $13,246 $67,673 $57,290 $43,093 $116,374 $84,325 $90,320
NPV 10% $14,750 $10,415 ($607) $42,974 $34,432 $23,320 $81,958 $56,355 $60,848
IRR 16% 14% 10% 26% 23% 19% 39% 31% 32%
 For detailed information refer to Appendix 31
61
References
Adams, C.M., W.L. Griffin, J.P. Nichols and R.E. Brick. 1980. Application of a bio-
economic-engineering model for shrimp mariculture systems. Southern Journal of
Agricultural Economics 12, 135- 140.
Arnold, S.G., M.J. Sellars, P.J. Crocos and G.J. Coman. 2006. An evaluation of stocking
density on the intensive production of juvenile brown tiger shrimp (Penaeus
esculentus). Aquaculture 256, 174-179. 
Broom, J.G. 1968. Pond culture of shrimp on Grand Terre Island, Louisiana, 1962-1968.
Proceedings Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 21, 137-151.
Browdy, C.L., A.D. Stokes, J.S. Hopkins and P.A. Sandifer. 1991. Evaluation of intensive 
pond mono- and polyculture of Penaeus setiferus and P. vannamei in South Carolina.
Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 22 (3), 16A.
Caillouet, C.W., J.P. Norris, E.J. Heald and D.C. Tabb. 1976. Growth and yield of pink
shrimp (Penaeus duorarum duorarum) in feeding experiments in concrete tanks.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105, 259- 266.
CSREES (Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service). 2009. U.S.
shrimp farm locations. U.S. Marine Shrimp Farming Program:
http://www.usmsfp.org
Davis, D.A. and C.R. Arnold. 1998. The design, management and production of a 
recirculating raceway system for the production of marine shrimp. Aquaculture 
Engineering 17, 193-211.
62
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2009. The state of world 
fisheries and aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 176 pp.
Gould, R.A., D.V. Aldrich and C.R. Mock. 1973. Experimental pond culture of brown
shrimp (Penaeus aztecus) in power plant effluent water. Proceedings of the Annual
Meeting - World Mariculture Society 4 (1-4), 195-213.
Hanson, J.S., W.L. Griffin, J.W. Richardson and C.J. Nixon. 1985. Economic feasibility of
shrimp farming in Texas: an investment analysis for semi-intensive pond growout.
Journal of the World Mariculture Society 16, 129- 150.
Hasson, K.W., Y. Fan, T. Reisinger, J. Venuti and P.W. Varner. 2006. White-spot syndrome 
virus (WSSV) introduction into the Gulf of Mexico and Texas freshwater systems
through imported, frozen bait-shrimp. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 71, 91-100. 
Hysmith, B.T. and R.L. Colura. 1976. Effect of salinity on growth and survival of penaeid 
shrimp in ponds. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting - World Mariculture Society 7
(1-4), 289-303.
Jolly, C.M. and H.A. Clonts. 1993. Economics of aquaculture, The Haworth Press,
Binghamton, New York (1993). 319 pp 
Kay, R.D. 1981. Farm management- planning, control and implementation. McGraw Hill, 
Inc. United States of America.
Latapie Jr, W. R., J.G. Broom and D.A. Neal. 1972. Growth rates of Penaeus aztecus and P.
setiferus in artificial ponds under varying conditions. Proceedings of the World
Mariculture Society Annual Meeting 3(1-4), 241-254.
63
McKee, D.A., A.L. Lawrence and W.L. Griffin. 1989. Stocking strategies and an investment 
analysis for producing Penaeus setiferus as a live bait shrimp on the Texas Gulf
Coast. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 20 (2), 72-80.
Moss, S.M. 1995. Production of growth-enhancing particles in a plastic-lined shrimp pond.
Aquaculture 132, 253-260.
Neal, D.A. and W.R. Latapie Jr. 1972. Pond culture on Grand Terre Island, Louisiana, 1969-
1971. Proceedings of the World Mariculture Society Annual Meeting 3 (1-4), 227-
240. 
Pardy, C.R., W.L. Griffin, M.A. Johns and A.L. Lawrence. 1983. A preliminary economic 
analysis of stocking strategies for Penaeid shrimp culture. Journal of the World
Mariculture Society 14, 49-63
Parker, J.C. and H.W. Holcomb Jr. 1973. Growth and production of brown and white shrimp
(Penaeus aztecus and P. setiferus) from experimental ponds in Brazoria and Orange
counties, Texas. Proceedings of the World Aquaculture Society Annual Meeting 4
(1-4), 215-234. 
Parker, J.C., F.S. Conte, W.S. MacGrath and B.W. Miller. 1974. An intensive culture system
for penaeid shrimp. Proceedings of the World Aquaculture Society Annual Meeting
5 (1-4), 65-79.
Samocha, T.M., B.J. Burkott, A.L. Lawrence, Y.S. Juan, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 1998.
Management strategies for production of the atlantic white shrimp Penaeus setiferus
as bait shrimp in outdoor ponds. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 29 (2),
211-220.
64
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins and A.D. Stokes. 1988. Intensification of shrimp culture in 
earthen ponds in South Carolina: progress and prospects. Journal of the World 
Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 218-226.
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins, A.D. Stokes and C.L. Browdy. 1993. Preliminary comparisons 
of the native Penaeus setiferus and pacific P. vannamei white shrimp for pond
culture in South Carolina, USA. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 24 (3),
295-303.
Sureshwaran, S., C. Greene, R.J. Rhodes, C.L. Browdy and A. Stokes. 1994. Financial
viability of Penaeus setiferus versus Penaeus vannamei with continuous live
harvesting and one final harvest strategies in South Carolina. South Carolina Marine
Resources Division Technical Report Number 84. Charleston, S. C.
Wheeler, R.S. 1967. Experimental rearing of postlarval brown shrimp to marketable size in
ponds. Commercial Fisheries Review 29 (3), 49-52.
Wyban, J.A., J.N. Sweeny and R.A. Kanna. 1988. Shrimp yields and economic potential of 
intensive round pond systems. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 210-
217.
65
CHAPTER 4: Native Live Bait Shrimp Markets 
Introduction
The recreational fishing industry is a multi million dollar industry that positively
impacts coastal communities through the creation of new jobs and revenue. Native shrimp
are popular live bait that are in high demand and are key components of a good fishing
experience. The market value of bait is considered substantial but as monitoring is minimal
in most states the exact value and demand for bait is not well established. Meronek et al.
(1995) were able to estimate the size of the retail bait industry in the North central United
States at more than $250 million. It is thought that there is a substantial demand which is not
being met by wild harvest. It is essential to know the size of the live bait shrimp market in
the southeast United States, to determine if it is economically feasible to produce live bait
shrimp through aquaculture to supply the demand (McKee et al.1989).
The growing season, limited to five to seven months in the United States, is an
important consideration when determining if market demand can be supplied by cultured
native shrimp and the adaptations to culture techniques by farmers will determine if cultured
shrimp can compete against the wild shrimp fishery (Sandifer et al. 1988). Although limited
by weather, the production of bait shrimp is able to supply the demand period that lasts
approximately 22 weeks (McKee et al. 1989). Market supply of wild bait shrimp in the Gulf
of Mexico area currently depends on weather, currents and other environmental conditions
(Padgett 2003). 
66
Anglers in the Gulf of Mexico region pursuing spotted sea trout, red drum, flounder
and other saltwater fishes prefer the use of live shrimp with survey respondents stating that 
they choose shrimp as bait 65% to 75% of the time (Hanson et al. 2004). Live bait sales for
individual small businesses represent a total of annual sales ranging from $7,800 to $305,000
(Hanson et al. 2004). Gandy et al. (2001) described through a survey that approximately 50%
of sales are from live bait shrimp for 29% of the retailers surveyed and another 29% of the
retailers surveyed indicated that live bait account for 25 to 49% of sales. According to the
survey, the demand for live bait shrimp in Texas has increased without an increase in the
supply due to the restrictions limiting the catches per day (Gandy et al. 2001). This tendency
of increased demand and constant supply in Texas can be assumed for the rest of the
southeast Gulf of Mexico region. 
Recreational bait retailers will buy farm raised bait shrimp if the supply is reliable and
will accept mortality between 10% and 20% from cultured sources and will sell bait shrimp
approximately at 60 to 70 count per pound, representing individual weights of 6.50 to 7.50
grams Gandy 2001). The wholesale price for live bait shrimp in 2007 was between $7.50 and
$14 per pound (Gandy 2007). Mays (2003) revealed in a market study that farm produced
Farfantopenaeus aztecus, could be sold at $100 per 1000 shrimp, with good acceptance by
the retailers due to better health and activity of the farm produced product. This acceptance
by the market to F. aztecus can also be expected for the Atlantic white shrimp.
McKee (1986) identified in Texas that the preferred size for live bait shrimp is
between 5 and 5.50 grams. Clearly there is a great deal of potential for the commercial
culture of bait shrimp. If commercial culture is to be encouraged, then the depth of the
market must be identified. Consequently, the objectives of this study are: to determine the
67
size of the live bait shrimp market in the Gulf of Mexico, to assess time periods of low
availability of wild caught bait shrimp, to determine the willingness of retailers to purchase
culture live bait shrimp and to estimate a selling price range for the cultured live bait shrimp. 
Materials and Methods
A bait dealer survey developed by Dr. Terril R. Hanson while at Mississippi State
University, and carried out in 2008 prior to his arrival in Auburn University. The survey was
funded in part by NOAA and South Carolina?s Department of Natural Resources. The
survey?s objective was to examine several aspects of the current and potential live bait
shrimp market. It included questions pertaining to retail and wholesale demand for live bait
shrimp and the status of the live bait shrimp market in the Gulf of Mexico states and South
Carolina. Information was also gathered on the opinion of the people surveyed on trends that
they have observed throughout the years with the demand, supply, quality and other aspects
of the wild caught shrimp. This survey includes questions regarding the size of individual
bait businesses, wholesale and retail sales prices, willingness to purchase cultured live bait
shrimp, percentage of sales that live bait shrimp account for in their business,, size required,
preference of bait shrimp species to sell as well as demand and supply of live bait shrimp.
The bait businesses that were included to participate in this survey were chosen
through an internet search of bait businesses in the Gulf of Mexico states and South Carolina.
There was no previous contact with the bait business before sending the survey. The survey
included a cover letter stating the purpose of the survey as well as a prepaid envelope so that
the respondent would not incur in any expenses. Two weeks after the survey was mailed out,
a reminder card was sent out encouraging the businesses chosen to participate in the survey
and stating the importance of the survey. Two weeks after this reminder card had been sent,
68
a full survey, with cover letter and prepaid envelope, was re-sent to non responders. The
method used for the distribution of this survey followed the Dillman?s total design method,
including the use of the cover letter, prepaid return envelopes, ad follow-up mailings
(Dillman 1978). 
This survey was comprised of 35 questions, with its majority being multiple selection
questions. For an example of the survey please refer to Appendix 4. Some ordinal and Likert-
scale questions are included, designed to discover any trends and respondent?s knowledge
of the supply and demand in recent years for live bait shrimp. Ordinal and Likert-scale
questions use a ranking system set by the surveyor. Questions were included to determine
sale and purchase prices, price fluctuation, percentage of sales represented by live bait
shrimp, and amount of live bait shrimp sold. 
Results
A total of 546 surveys were mailed to bait businesses, 331 surveys were not returned
(61%), 124 surveys were undeliverable (23%), 3 surveys were returned stating that the
business had gone out of business (1%), 88 surveys were returned (16%) out of which only
60 respondents sell live bait shrimp (11%). The reason for this low response rate is mostly
due to the amount of surveys that were not returned and undeliverable, probably because of
an error with the mailing address, the survey being misplaced, appearing too difficult and
possibly the resemblance of the survey to ?junk? mail. Recreational fishing businesses
surveyed that are involved in the sale of live bait shrimp have been doing so for an average
of 16.2 years. One business surveyed has been selling live bait shrimp for one year, and one
69
business surveyed has been selling live bait shrimp for 65 years (Table 1). Of the businesses
surveyed, 97% considered the sale of live bait shrimp as important to very important
component of their business. For businesses in Mississippi, live bait shrimp represents
approximately 50% of their sales, while it represents 40%, 29% and 1% in businesses in
Texas, Florida and South Carolina, respectively (Figure 1).
Most respondents (46%) indicated they buy whatever species is available at the time,
while 24% prefer the brown shrimp, F. aztecus; 10% prefer the Atlantic white shrimp,
Litopenaeus  setiferus, and 3% prefer the pink shrimp, F. duorarum. According to the survey,
95% of respondents have less than 3 suppliers of live bait shrimp, with most of these
suppliers found locally (same city or town) or within the state. Most of the respondents were
from Florida where there is a predominance of retailers indicating a potential market for
cultured live bait shrimp. This trend is observed in Mississippi and South Carolina as well
(Table 2). Among the dealers surveyed, 88% were agreeable about buying farm raised bait
shrimp most of them (56%) would pay a higher price for farm raised bait shrimp if the
mortality in the holding tanks can be reduced.
Unfortunately the information from the survey was insufficient to quantify the amount
of suppliers due to a lack of response from businesses located in Alabama, Louisiana,
Georgia and North Carolina. During periods of high demand, 90% of the respondents
indicated they do daily restocking of their live holding tanks, while only 50% indicated daily
restocking during periods of low demand. Weekly restocking represents 2% and 23% during
periods of high and low demand, respectively. 
The preferred live shrimp size by retailers (12 respondents from Florida, 1 from
Texas and 1 from South Carolina) was 40 to 50 count, which corresponds to an individual
70
weight between 9 and 11 grams. There was an equal number of respondents that indicated
a preference for 60 to 70 count, corresponding to an individual weight between 6.4 and 8
grams, and respondents that have no preference over a single live shrimp count (Table 3).
The preferred wholesale purchasing unit in the region surveyed is on a per thousand shrimp
basis with an average price of $92 per thousand shrimp. Shrimp is also purchased in pounds,
dozens and half thousand units (Table 4). Mortalities of the live bait shrimp after purchase
and delivery were estimated by 58% of the respondents to be approximately 10 and 24%,
while 27% of the respondents estimated their mortalities ranged from 5 to 9%. Most of the
mortality observed after delivery was attributed to water quality (salinity and temperature of
delivery) and stress due to lengthy time to deliver. 
The most common unit for the retail sale of live bait shrimp is by the dozen and sold
at an average price of $3.16 per dozen, with a maximum price of $5.00 per dozen and a
minimum price of $2.00 per dozen, depending on location and demand. Live bait shrimp is
also sold in quarts, pints and individually, with average prices of $14.00, $7.00 and $0.20,
respectively. Survey respondents indicated that the present cost of live bait shrimp per
thousand to the bait shop is around $91, but they would be willing to pay from $99 to $116
per thousand. The majority of respondents also indicated that the price that they pay for the
live bait shrimp and the price they sell them for does not fluctuate during the year. Price is
not considered one of the important factors that determine who retailers buy their shrimp
from; consistency of the supply (32%), shrimp quality (24%), and availability (23%) and are
considered more important factors. This indicates the potential for higher wholesale prices.
Among the extrinsic factors that affect the sale of live bait shrimp, weather is
considered the most important one, while shrimp supply, tourist seasonality, quality of the
71
fishing and economic conditions are also regarded as having some importance (Figure
2).Respondents also felt that if a farmed source of live bait shrimp was available they would
prefer it over wild-caught live bait shrimp, even though only 53% would actually pay more
for a farmed live bait shrimp. 
Live bait shrimp businesses were also asked their perception concerning the
fluctuation in live bait shrimp demand by recreational fishermen. The periods when demand
was considered to be the lowest coincided with the months where the cold weather restricts
the recreational fishing activity, that is where more respondents pointed toward low or no
demand, although this was not shared by all the respondents (Figure 3). According to the
respondents, Independence day (July 4), Labor day (September 1) and Memorial day (last
Monday of May) are the three most important holidays in terms of live bait shrimp demands
by consumers. When asked if the demand for live bait shrimp has increased in the last five
years, most respondents agreed that there has been an increased demand, while many
disagreed when asked if the supply has kept up with the demand. 
Discussion
The continued development of a commercial bait shrimp industry is dependant on a
number of economic, biological and social factors. These include not only the adaptation of
suitable culture technologies but also the availability of wild live bait and the magnitude and
requirements of the market. The results of this survey have helped to characterize the live
bait shrimp market and the attitudes of the businesses towards farmed raised live bait shrimp.
A factor that can be considered as a weakness of this study was that the survey had a low
response rate in every state except Florida, but it helps to supplement previous surveys. 
72
Gandy (1997) determined that wild caught live shrimp can only meet the demand for
live bait shrimp during two months in Texas, six months in Mississippi, and four months in
Alabama. In a previous survey of the region, it was discovered that the period from May
though October corresponds to the highest customer demand for live bait shrimp, while the
period from December through February corresponds to the lowest (Hanson et al. 2004). This
period of low demand was also reflected in the actual survey, although categorized as a
period of low to medium demand. Hanson et al. (2004) also determined three periods in
which there is a lack of supply of live bait shrimp, one from August to November in which
41% of the respondents determined a complete lack of supply; one period from January to
February where the supply problem is less pronounced, and the period between March and
June where supply is less problematic. The present survey did reflect sufficient supply
between January and May and the period between September and December, but also
identified the period between May and August as the period of greater supply problems.
Thus, periods of sufficient supply can fluctuate from year to year.
Sale price per dozen since the survey by Hanson et al. (2004) to the present survey
has increased $ 0.95 while the purchase price per thousand of shrimp has increased $17. In
a similar comparison, Hanson et al. (2004) found that businesses would be willing to pay $74
for farm raised live bait shrimp while today they would be willing to pay $116, if this means
a constant and reliable supply. In the live bait shrimp production analysis in a recirculating
system and ponds, a sales price of $100 was used, which fall within the range that
respondents indicated and which is the price that bait shops use in Gulf Shores, Alabama. 
The size preference for live bait shrimp in terms of the preferred count for purchase reflects
the results obtained by Hanson et al. (2004). There was a tendency in the present survey
73
where larger shrimp sizes were preferred by retailers from Florida. This may reflect the need
of the Florida businesses surveyed and the type of fishing they are involved with, and will
vary from state to state depending on the local market. McKee (1986), reported a preference
for 5 to 5.5 gram shrimp for the live bait shrimp market in Texas. 
Adams et al. (1997) and Zajicek et al. (1998) developed surveys to determine the
characteristics of the Florida live bait fish market and in both cases it was found that the
market can allow for the production of bait fish due to seasonal variability of the supply of
wild caught bait fish. Similar conditions are assumed to exist in the live bait shrimp market
allowing the possibility of supplying the live bait shrimp market with cultured shrimp.
Adams et al. (1997) constructed an enterprise budget to determine the profitability of
culturing bait fish and in most cases profit did not exceed the total cost of producing bait fish. 
Similar results have been observed in the live bait shrimp production, with negative
net returns and unfavorable cash flows (McKee et al. 1989). Samocha et al. (1998) reported
similar results when one crop is produced per year, but did determine that culture of bait
shrimp can be profitable with two or more crops per year. The Texas live bait shrimp was
found to be under supplied during high demand periods and this tendency can be assumed
to be found in the rest of the southeast region (Gandy et al. 2001). The determination of
periods of high demand and low supply will allow for aquaculture production of live bait
shrimp to be possible, by accessing the market in periods of low supply from the wild, when
prices should be high enough to make production profitable.
74
Table 1. Bait dealer characteristics in the Southeast United States among respondents to a
Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp market survey of 2008. 
Respondents Average Mode Range St. Dev.
Years in Business 60 16.2 20 1 - 65 13.7
Percentage of Gross Sales
from Bait Shrimp 60 29% 50% 1 - 90% 20%
Number of
Suppliers
0 - 3 57 2 2 - -
4 - 6 3 5 5 - -
75
Table 2. Regional distribution of surveyed retailers, wholesalers and suppliers of live bait
shrimp responding to a Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp
market survey of 2008.
State Number of Respondents Retail Wholesale Supplier
  Alabama - - - -
  Georgia - - - -
  Florida 51 49 5 2
  Texas 3 3 - -
  Louisiana - - - -
  Mississippi 3 3 2 1
  North Carolina - - - -
  South Carolina 3 3 - -
  Total 60 58 7 3
Many of the respondent?s businesses include the retail, wholesale and supply of live bait
shrimp, so the number of respondents will not necessarily equal the number of retail,
wholesale and suppliers for a state.
76
Table 3. Live count (number of shrimp per pound) preference for the purchase of live bait
shrimp originating from a Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp
market survey of 2008.
Live Count Preference Number of Respondents % of Respondents
  40 - 50 count (9 - 11 g/shrimp) 14 27%
  50 - 60 count (8 - 9 g/ shrimp) 8 15%
  60 - 70 count (6.5 - 8 g/shrimp 10 19%
  70 - 80 count (5.5 - 6.5 g/shrimp) 2 4%
  No preference 10 19%
Other 8 15%
Total 52 100%
?No preference? and ?Other? respondents indicated purchasing any live count. Some
respondents in the ?Other? category indicated a preference for 4 gram shrimp. 
77
Table 4. Type of wholesale purchasing unit, cost per unit, and amount of units purchased
from live bait suppliers among respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South
Atlantic States live bait shrimp market survey.
Unit Cost / Unit Amount of Unit Survey Respondents
Pound $3.86 10,000 7
Thousand $92.32 158 48
Dozen $1.35 5,000 3
Five hundred $60.63 251 2
78
Figure 1. Percentage of gross sales accounted for by the sale of live bait shrimp among 
survey respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait 
shrimp market survey (N=60).
79
Figure 2. Factors having the greatest impacts on live bait shrimp sales according to 
respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States live bait shrimp 
market survey (N=60).
80
Figure 3. Annual demand of live bait shrimp compared to annual supply of wild live bait 
shrimp according to respondents to a 2008 Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States 
live bait shrimp market survey (N=60).
The weighed average in this figure represents results from ordinal scales: 1-No
demand/supply; 2-Low demand/supply; 3-Medium demand/supply, and 4-High
demand/supply. 
81
References
Adams, C.M., A.M. Lazur and P. Zajicek. 1997. An assessment of the market for live, 
marine baitfish in Florida. Project Final Report Department of Marine Resources 
195.
Dillman, D.A. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. Wiley and Sons, 
New York.
Gandy, R.L. 1997. U.S. national live bait shrimp market survey. Master's thesis. College of 
Science and Technology, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX.
Gandy, R.L., T.M. Samocha, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 2001. The Texas live bait shrimp 
market. Journal of Shellfish Research 20 (1), 365-367.
Gandy, R.L. 2007. Bait shrimp culture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (SRAC) 
Publication No. 1201.
Hanson, T.R., R.K. Wallace and L.U. Hatch. 2004. Coastal Alabama recreational live bait 
study. Mississippi State University Department of Agricultural Economics Staff
Report 2004-001.
Mays, R.M. 2003. Production and marketing of Farfantepenaeus aztecus for the live bait 
market. Master?s Thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA.
McKee, D.A. 1986. An investigation of the live bait shrimp industry of Texas and the culture
and economic potentials for rearing two Penaeid species as supplements to that 
industry. Doctoral Dissertation. Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi, Texas, USA.
McKee, D.A., A.L. Lawrence and W.L. Griffin. 1989. Stocking strategies and an investment 
analysis for producing Penaeus setiferus as a live bait-shrimp on the Texas Gulf 
Coast. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 20 (2), 72-80.
82
Meronek, T.G., F.A. Copes and D.W. Coble. 1995. A summary of bait regulations in the 
North Central United States. Fisheries 20 (11), 16-23. 
Padgett, S. 2003. The nursery and pond culture of brown shrimp Farfantepenaeus aztecus 
in Alabama as a live bait product. Master?s thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, 
Alabama, USA.
Samocha, T.M., B.J. Burkott, A.L. Lawrence, Y.S. Juan, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 1998. 
Management strategies for production of the Atlantic white shrimp Penaeus setiferus 
as bait shrimp in outdoor ponds. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 29 (2): 
211-220.
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins and A.D. Stokes. 1988. Intensification of shrimp culture in 
earthen ponds in South Carolina: progress and prospects. Journal of the World 
Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 218-226.
Zajicek, P., D. Zimet, C. Adams and A. Lazur. 1998. Live bait shrimp ? Market analysis 
and farm enterprise budget. Bureau of Seafood and Aquaculture, Florida Department 
of Agriculture and Consumer Services, University of Florida, Institute of Food and 
Agricultural Sciences, North Florida Research and Education Center, Enterprise 
Florida, Florida State Rural Development Council.
83
CHAPTER 5: Summary and Conclusions
The native live bait industry traditionally has depended heavily on wild caught shrimp
and this same fishery is also responsible for the supply of food shrimp, resulting in ever
increasing depletion pressure on the wild shrimp population. This increasing fishing pressure
has caused a growing concern over the possible short and long term effect on the shrimp
fishery in the Gulf of Mexico and the environment as evidenced by regulations in many Gulf
of Mexico states to control overexploitation of this resource. The native shrimp fishery is
also affected by environmental conditions, that can restrict the amount of shrimp available
for capture, thus affecting the annual supply of live bait shrimp. Previous studies, as well as
results presented in this study, demonstrate that the supply of wild caught live bait shrimp
does not meet the quantity demanded by the market. Availability issues are compounded with
problems that are reported in this study about the quality of the shrimp supplied.
Results of the present study suggest that live bait dealers are willing to purchase
cultured animals if it represents having a steady supply and good quality animals. This study
also demonstrates that the use of simulation software and models is applicable to help
visualize any possible outcome from different production scenarios that would interest a
producer. The simulation models developed for this study were validated by the historical
data obtained through years of research in Claude Peteet Mariculture Center (CPMC) with
the native species and by comparable results from previous studies. It is important to note
84
that even though a simulation model may be used as a tool, the information that it will
provide will be as accurate as the information that is used to produce the model. Another
drawback in the use of simulation software and the development of models is that certain
technical expertise is needed in order to work with the software and also to take into
consideration the cost related with the purchase of the software and the time needed to
develop the simulation models. One of the aspects of the simulation model developed for this
study in which further research is needed is the temperature dependent growth component, 
as well as the introduction of the effect that biomass would have on production.
Results of the present study suggest that the use of a closed recirculating system, if
properly designed, allows for the economically viable production of live bait shrimp.
Attention must be given to the cost associated with the construction of a recirculating system.
The system that was the basis for the analysis in this study was designed to keep the high
establishment costs that are normally associated with a recirculating system low. Even
though every effort was made to reduce costs in the construction of the system, there are still
many improvements and changes that could be made in order to further reduce construction
costs. Although not included in the scope of this study, the design of a recirculating system
for the production of live bait shrimp will determine the productivity and thus its viability.
The components of a closed recirculating system must be monitored, for them to be
optimized to help reduce production costs. The stocking densities that were selected for the
simulations in this study showed to be profitable, further research must be conducted with
higher stocking densities, allowing the increase in the productivity as long as there is no
negative effect on survival. The trial production run conducted with L. vannamei in CPMC
and previous studies have demonstrated that it is possible to produce shrimp with the
85
selected stocking densities in closed recirculating systems, which would allow for a producer
to experiment what stocking density would improve results. 
As well as the positive returns above land, labor and management that are reported
from the production of live bait shrimp in closed recirculating systems, the results of this
study show that production in ponds is also economically viable and is possible to give a
return over the investment  less land, labor and management costs in the Southeast United
States. The production in ponds only became viable when the amount of ponds was increased
from a single pond scenario to a five pond scenario. This change in the net revenue to land,
labor and management is a function of economy of scale in which the costs increase at a
lesser rate than the output. Attention must be given to the size of the ponds, that will have
an effect on how well they can be managed. Smaller ponds like the ones used for this study
allow for an ease of feeding and harvesting. A limitation that may arise with the use of
smaller ponds is the amount of shrimp that can be produced per cycle or per year due to the
space available. With the combination of stocking densities, average harvest size and number
of ponds reported in this study it is economically viable to produce native live bait shrimp.
The use of ponds will allow for the production of two cycles per year due to climatic
limitations. Producing more than one cycle allows for higher net revenues to land, labor and
management. 
It is necessary to point out that in the case of producing live bait shrimp in closed
recirculating systems and in ponds for this study, no management, labor and land costs are
included. Assigning a realistic managers salary for the analysis would be difficult due to its
subjective nature. In the case of a family owned business, the owner tends to manage the
enterprise so the opportunity cost assigned to this cost of management would depend heavily
86
on the person making the decision. It must be noted that revenue is reported as net returns
on land, labor and management. These costs will need to be taken in consideration when
analyzing the enterprise and making the decision on whether or not to incur in the production
of live bait shrimp. The assumptions made in this study for the production of live bait shrimp
in recirculating systems and ponds are based on Alabama and cost for land and labor vary
in the Gulf of Mexico region. It is also necessary to note that although these costs are not
included in the analysis, this study provides a good guide to anyone interested in the
possibility of producing live bait shrimp.
87
Literature Cited
Adams, C.M., W.L. Griffin, J.P. Nichols and R.E. Brick. 1980. Application of a bio-
economic-engineering model for shrimp mariculture systems. Southern Journal of
Agricultural Economics 12, 135- 140.
Adams, C.M., A.M. Lazur and P. Zajicek. 1997. An assessment of the market for live, 
marine baitfish in Florida. Project Final Report Department of Marine Resources 195.
AMRD (Alabama Marine Resources Division). 2008. Alabama saltwater commercial and
recreational licenses, and fees. 
Arnold, S.J., M.J. Sellars, P.J. Crocos and G.J. Coman. 2006. An evaluation of stocking
density on the intensive production of juvenile brown tiger shrimp (Penaeus
esculentus). Aquaculture 256, 174-179.
Baxter, K.N., C.H. Furr Jr. and E. Scott. 1988. The commercial bait shrimp fishery in
Galveston Bay, Texas, 1959-87. Marine Fisheries Review 50 (2), 20 - 28.
Berkeley, S.A., D.W. Pybas and W.L. Campos. 1985. Bait shrimp fishery of Biscayne Bay.
Florida Sea Grant Extension Program, Technical Paper No. 40.
Broom, J.G. 1968. Pond culture of shrimp on Grand Terre Island, Louisiana, 1962-1968.  
Proceedings Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 21, 137-151.
Browdy, C.L., A.D. Stokes, J.S. Hopkins and P.A. Sandifer. 1991. Evaluation of intensive 
pond mono- and polyculture of Penaeus setiferus and P. vannamei in South Carolina.
Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 22 (3), 16A.
88
Caillouet, C.W., J.P. Norris, E.J. Heald and D.C. Tabb. 1976. Growth and yield of pink
shrimp (Penaeus duorarum duorarum) in feeding experiments in concrete tanks.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105, 259- 266.
Chin, E. 1960. The bait shrimp fishery of Galveston Bay, Texas. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society 89 (2), 135- 141.
CSREES (Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service). 2009. U.S.
shrimp farm locations. U.S. Marine Shrimp Farming Program:
http://www.usmsfp.org.
Cummings, W.C. 1961. Maturation and spawning of the pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum 
Burkenroad. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 90 (4), 462 - 468.
Davis, D.A. and C.R. Arnold. 1998. The design, management and production of a
recirculating raceway system for the production of marine shrimp. Aquaculture
Engineering 17, 193-211.
 DeIonno, P.N., G.L. Wines, P.L. Jones and R.O. Collins. 2006. A bioeconomic evaluation of
a commercial scale recirculating finfish growout system ? An Australian perspective.
Aquaculture 259, 315-327.
Dillman, D.A. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. Wiley and Sons, 
New York.
Epperly, S., L. Avens, L. Garrison, T. Henwood, W. Hoggard, J. Mitchell, J. Nance, J.
Poffenberger, C. Sasso, E. Scott-Denton and C. Yeung. 2002. Analysis of sea turtle
bycatch in the commercial shrimp fisheries of southeast U.S. waters and the Gulf of
Mexico. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-
SEFSC-490, 88 pp.
89
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2009. The state of world fisheries and
aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. 176 pp.
FWRI (Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute). 2009. Marine fisheries information 
system: 2007 annual landings summary. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission.
Gandy, R.L. 1997. U.S. national live bait shrimp market survey. Master?s thesis. College of
Science and Technology, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, TX.
Gandy, R.L., T.M. Samocha, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 2001. The Texas live bait shrimp
market. Journal of Shellfish Research 20 (1),  365-367.
Gandy, R.L. 2007. Bait shrimp culture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (SRAC)
Publication No. 1201. 
Gracia, A. 1996. White shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) recruitment overfishing. Marine and
Freshwater Research 47, 59-65.
Gutherz, E.J. and G.J. Pellegrin. 1988. Estimate of the catch of red snapper, Lutjanus
campechanus, by shrimp trawlers in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Marine Fisheries
Review 50 (1),17-25.
Gould, R.A., D.V. Aldrich and C.R. Mock. 1973. Experimental pond culture of brown shrimp
(Penaeus aztecus) in power plant effluent water. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting -
World Mariculture Society 4 (1-4), 195-213.
Hanson, J.S., W.L. Griffin, J.W. Richardson and C.J. Nixon. 1985. Economic feasibility of
shrimp farming in Texas: an investment analysis for semi-intensive pond growout.
Journal of the World Mariculture Society 16, 129- 150.
90
Hanson, T.R., R.K. Wallace and L.U. Hatch. 2004. Coastal Alabama recreational live bait
study. Mississippi State University Department of Agricultural Economics Staff
Report 2004-001.
Hasson, K.W., Y. Fan, T. Reisinger, J. Venuti and P.W. Varner. 2006. White-spot syndrome
virus (WSSV) introduction into the Gulf of Mexico and Texas freshwater systems
through imported, frozen bait-shrimp. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 71, 91-100. 
Holthius, L.B. 1980. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 1. Shrimps and Prawns of the World. An
Annotated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Synopsis 125
(1). 271 pp.
Hysmith, B.T. and R.L. Colura. 1976. Effect of salinity on growth and survival of penaeid
shrimp in ponds. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting - World Mariculture Society 7
(1-4), 289-303.
Jolly, C.M. and H.A. Clonts. 1993. Economics of aquaculture. Haworth Press. 319 pp. 
Kay, R.D. 1981. Farm management- planning, control and implementation. McGraw Hill, Inc.
United States of America.
Kazmierczak Jr., R.F. and R.H. Caffey. 1995. Management ability and the economics of
recirculating aquaculture production systems. Marine Resources Economy 10, 187-
209.
LDWF (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries). 2009. General regulations and
information digest. Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. Baton Rouge, LA
Latapie Jr, W. R., J.G. Broom and D.A. Neal. 1972. Growth rates of Penaeus aztecus and P.
setiferus in artificial ponds under varying conditions. Proceedings of the Annual
Meeting-World Mariculture Society 3(1-4), 241-254.
91
Malone, R.F. and A.A. DeLosReyes Jr. 1997. Categories of recirculating aquaculture systems.
In: Aquacultural Engineering Society Proceeding, ISTA IV, Orlando, FL, pp. 197-208.
Mays, R.M. 2003. Production and marketing of Farfantepenaeus aztecus for the live bait 
market. Master's Thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA.
Mays, R., J.A. Venero, D.A. Davis, D.B. Rouse and I.P. Saoud. 2006. Nursery protocols for
the rearing of the brown shrimp, Farfantepenaeus aztecus: effects of stocking density
and salinity. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 18(2), 47-59.
McKee, D.A. 1986. An investigation of the live bait shrimp industry in Texas and the culture
and economic potentials for rearing two Penaeid species as supplements to that 
industry. Doctoral Dissertation. Texas A & M University, Corpus Christi, Texas, USA
McKee, D.A., A.L. Lawrence and W.L. Griffin. 1989. Stocking strategies and an investment 
analysis for producing Penaeus setiferus as a live bait shrimp on the Texas Gulf Coast.
Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 20 (2), 72-80.
Meronek, T.G., F.A. Copes and D.W. Coble. 1995. A summary of bait regulations in the
North Central United States. Fisheries 20 (11), 16-23. 
 Meyer, D.L., M.S. Fonseca, P.L. Murphey, R.H. McMichael Jr., M.M. Byerly, M.W. LaCroix,
P.E. Whitfield and G.W. Thayer. 1999. Effects of live bait shrimp trawling on seagrass
beds and fish bycatch in Tampa Bay, Florida. Fishery Bulletin 97 (1), 193-199.
Moss, S.M. 1995. Production of growth-enhancing particles in a plastic-lined shrimp pond.
Aquaculture 132, 253-260.
Muncy, R.J. 1984. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal
fishes and invertebrates (Gulf of Mexico) - White shrimp. U.S. Fisheries and Wildlife
Services. FWS/OBS-82/11.20. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4. 19 pp.
92
Nance, J., W. Keithly Jr., C. Caillouet Jr., J. Cole, W. Gaidry, B. Gallaway, W. Griffing, R.
Hart and M. Travis. 2006. Estimation of effort, maximum sustainable yield, and
maximum economic yield in the shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico. Report to the
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council by The Ad Hoc Shrimp Effort Working
Group.
Neal, D.A. and W.R. Latapie  Jr. 1972. Pond culture on Grand Terre Island, Louisiana, 1969-
1971. Proceedings of the Annual Workshop-World Mariculture Society 3 (1-4), 227-
240. 
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2009. Shrimp statistics,
September. GOM Data Management, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Padgett, S. 2003. The nursery and pond culture of brown shrimp Farfantepenaeus aztecus in
Alabama as a live bait product. Master?s thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama,
USA.
Palomino, G., F. Contreras, A. Sanchez and C. Rosas. 2001. Density and water exchange-
dependent growth and survival of Litopenaeus setiferus postlarvae. Journal of the
World Aquaculture Society 32 (2), 167-176. 
Pardy, C.R., W.L. Griffin, M.A. Johns and A.L. Lawrence. 1983. A preliminary economic
analysis of stocking strategies for Penaeid shrimp culture. Journal of the World
Mariculture Society 14, 49-63
Parker, J.C. and H.W. Holcomb Jr. 1973. Growth and production of brown and white shrimp
(Penaeus aztecus and P. setiferus) from experimental ponds in Brazoria and Orange
counties, Texas. Proceedings of the Annual Workshop-World Aquaculture Society 4
(1-4), 215-234. 
93
Parker, J.C., F.S. Conte, W.S. MacGrath and B.W. Miller. 1974. An intensive culture system
for penaeid shrimp. Proceedings of the Annual Workshop - World Aquaculture
Society 5 (1-4), 65-79.
Perez-Farfante, I. 1969. Western Atlantic shrimps of the genus Penaeus. Fishery Bulletin
67(3)
Reid, B. and C.R. Arnold. 1992. The intensive culture of the penaeid shrimp Penaeus
vannamei Boone in a recirculating raceway system. Journal of the World Aquaculture
Society 23(2), 146-153.
Rogers, B.D., R.F. Shaw, W.H. Herke and R.H. Blanchet. 1993. Recruitment of postlarval
and juvenile brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus Ives) from offshore to estuarine waters
of the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 36, 377 -
394.
Samocha, T.M., L. Hamper, C.R. Emberson, D.A. Davis, D. McIntosh, A.L.  Lawrence and
P.M. Van Wyk. 2002. Review of some recent developments in sustainable shrimp
farming practices in Texas, Arizona, and Florida. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 12,
1-30.
Samocha, T.M., B.J. Burkott, A.L. Lawrence, Y.S. Juan, E.R. Jones and D.A. McKee. 1998.
Management strategies for production of the atlantic white shrimp Penaeus setiferus
as bait shrimp in outdoor ponds. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 29 (2),
211-220.
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins and A.D. Stokes. 1988. Intensification of shrimp culture in
earthen ponds in South Carolina: progress and prospects. Journal of the World
Aquaculture Society 19 (4), 218-226.
94
Sandifer, P.A., J.S. Hopkins, A.D. Stokes and C.L. Browdy. 1993. Preliminary comparisons 
of the native Penaeus setiferus and Pacific P. vannamei white shrimp for pond culture
in South Carolina, USA. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 24 (3), 295-303.
Schuur, A.M. 2003. Evaluation of biosecurity applications for intensive shrimp farming.
Aquaculture Engineering 28, 3-20. 
Sureshwaran, S., C. Greene, R.J. Rhodes, C.L. Browdy and A. Stokes. 1994. Financial
viability of Penaeus setiferus versus Penaeus vannamei with continuous live
harvesting and one final harvest strategies in South Carolina. South Carolina Marine
Resources Division Technical Report Number 84.
TPWD (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department). 2002. The Texas shrimp fishery. A report to
the governor and the 77  legislature of Texas: Executive Summary.th
TPWD (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department). 2008. Recreational fishing: shrimp
regulations: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/annual/fish/shrimpreg.
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2009. Aquaculture data: U.S. shrimp
imports. Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Southwest Louisiana national wildlife refuge complex
fishing regulations: Cameron Prairie, Lacassine, and Sabine.
Williams, A.S., D.A. Davis and C.R. Arnold. 1996. Density dependent growth and survival
of Penaeus setiferus and Penaeus vannamei in a semi-closed recirculating system.
Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 27(1), 107-112.
Wheeler, R.S. 1967. Experimental rearing of postlarval brown shrimp to marketable size in
ponds. Commercial Fisheries Review 29 (3), 49-52.
95
Wyban, J.A., J.N. Sweeny and R.A. Kanna. 1988. Shrimp yields and economic potential of 
intensive round pond systems. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 19 (4): 210-
217.
Zajicek, P., D. Zimet, C. Adams, and A. Lazur. 1998. Live bait shrimp ? Market analysis and
farm enterprise budget. Bureau of Seafood and Aquaculture, Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services, University of Florida, Institute of Food and 
Agricultural Sciences, North Florida Research and Education Center, Florida State 
Rural Development Council.
96
Appendix 1:Assumptions and components used in the development of the STELLA?
simulation model 
The STELLA? programs for the development of the simulations used in this study
uses several tools for the creation of a model. The simulation model incorporates stocks,
which are reservoirs in which the information accumulates or is collected; flows which will
fill and drain the reservoirs; converters which hold the constant values, define external inputs
and also function to store graphical functions that may be used, and connectors which as the
name implies, serve to connect the elements of the model. 
Time at First Stocking 
The first stocking during the year is determined as:
First stocking: IF Temperature = Required temperature days THEN Stocking density ELSE 0 
where: Temperature = graphical representation of average daily temperature in a converter
Required temperature days = 3 days
Stocking density = number of shrimp stocked
The temperature in this equation represents the average temperatures for Gulf Shores,
Alabama (source: NOAA) and will be used to determine the length of the production. The
assumption used in the model is that no production occurs under 20 C. The required
temperature days are the minimum number of days at or above 20 C required for production
to commence; the number used in this model assures that the average temperature is above
20 C during shrimp production. Three stocking densities were used in tank production: 1,200
97
shrimp/m , 1,600 shrimp/m and 2,000 shrimp/m . Three stocking densities were used in pond3 3 3
production: 50 shrimp/m , 60 shrimp/m  , and 70 shrimp/m .2 2 2
Growth
Growth per day is a graphical representation contained in a converter, which is based on
historical data from research in the University of Texas (tank production) and Claude Peteet
Mariculture Center (pond production) and can be defined by the user to better simulate the
growth encountered in a producer?s farm. Temperature dependent growth is based on the
temperature ranges, where the allowable growth per day is multiplied by a user defined
percentage, making production numbers more realistic because of the effect of the temperature
on growth. Temperature dependent growth is defined as:
 Temperature dependent growth: IF (Temperature <= 20) THEN (growth_per_day * 0.50) ELSE IF
(20<Temperature<=22) THEN (growth_per_day*0.55) ELSE IF (22<Temperature<=24) THEN
(growth_per_day*0.6) ELSE IF (24<Temperature<=26) THEN (growth_per_day*0.65) ELSE IF
(26<Temperature<=28) THEN (growth_per_day*0.7) ELSE IF (28<=Temperature) THEN
(growth_per_day*0.8) ELSE 0
98
The average daily temperature converter is linked to the temperature dependent growth.
Growth curves from which growth per day was obtained were:
Mortality
Mortality in the model is defined as:
Mortality: IF stochastic_disaster=1 THEN Pond*disaster_mortality_rate ELSE death_rate*Pond 
where: Stochastic disaster = set at zero for this study.  
Pond = stock that holds the production numbers in the model, representing the
production unit
Disaster mortality rate = mortality that occurs in case of an unprecedented event
Death rate = mortality from historical data represented on a per day basis
The death rate converter that holds the information on mortality that is used in this model is
connected to a variability converter, making the model stochastic. This variability converter
will modify the daily death rate by multiplying the daily death rate by a proportion with a
range from 1% to 7% that is selected randomly with every time step of the model.  If the
variability converter is not used, each time the model is run the results will be the same and
would not be representative of real production results. Stochastic disaster represents cases of
99
equipment failure, water quality problems and other unexpected problems that may occur in
a random or unpredictable fashion.The death rate converter that holds the information on
mortality that is used in this model is connected to a variability connector that makes the
mortality in this model stochastic and non deterministic, introducing variability in the
production numbers. If this variability connector is not used, the production numbers would
be the same in every simulation.
The mortality rates used in the model were determined from 2009 results from Claude Peteet
Mariculture center:
Harvest weight 70% Survival 80% Survival 90% Survival
4 grams 0.022020/7 0.014140/7 0.005922/7
5 grams 0.017990/7 0.011520/7 0.004969/7
6 grams 0.015287/7 0.009280/7 0.0045788/7
Harvest
Harvest in the model occurs when the average target size has been reached or when the
average temperature declines to < = 20 C. Harvest in the model is defined as:
Harvest: IF Temperature < Minimum_temperature OR Avg_Size>= Target_Size THEN Pond ELSE 0
where: Temperature = graphical representation of average daily temperatures in a converter
Minimum temperature = 20 C, previously defined as the minimum temperature
Average size = calculated by sub-model that accumulates the daily growth (g/day) and
adds it to the initial size of the shrimp at stocking.
Target size = three average harvest weights were used: 4, 5 and 6 grams.
Pond = stock that holds the production numbers in the model, representing the
production unit (pond or tank).
100
Restocking
Restocking of the ponds or tanks is done after a post harvest delay period of 10 days in this
study and after the first harvest has occurred. Restocking in the model is determined as:
Restocking:  IF TIME = Harvest Time + post-harvest delay THEN Stocking density ELSE 0
where: Harvest Time = day at which harvest occurs
Post harvest delay = 10 days
Stocking density = number of shrimp stocked
The post-harvest delay is found in a converter and can be modified according to the specific
production scenarios for the farmers.
Time to harvest
The time to harvest in this model depends on temperature, average size at harvest and the
temperature dependent growth and is defined as:
Time to harvest: IF (Temperature > 20) THEN Target_Size / Temp_dependent_growth ELSE 0
where: Temperature = graphical representation of average daily temperatures in a converter
Target size = three average harvest weights were used: 4, 5 and 6 grams.
Temp dependent growth = Temperature dependent growth, in which, based on
temperature ranges the allowable growth per day is multiplied by a user defined
percentage making the production numbers simulated more realistic.
Feeding
The amount of feed that is used during the simulations is also determined by the model. The
feed utilization is defined in a sub-model and is determined by:
Feeding: ((Pond*Temp_dependent_growth)*FCR)/1000
101
where: Pond = stock that holds the production numbers in the model, representing the
production unit
Temp dependent growth = Temperature dependent growth, in which, based on
temperature ranges the allowable growth per day is multiplied by a user defined
percentage making the production numbers simulated more realistic.
FCR = Feed conversion ratio
The feed conversion ratio in the model is determined in a converter and defined as:
FCR: Random (1.7,2.1)
The random function in this converter allows for a different feed conversion ratio in every
time step of the model. In this study every iteration had an FCR between 1.7 and 2.1, which
were obtained from historical production data from Claude Peteet Mariculture Center. These
FCRs can be changed by the user to reflect their production more accurately. The feed used,
as determined by the sub-model, is reported in kilograms of feed used and accumulates
through the production periods. 
The model used in this study is stochastic, or non-deterministic, producing model
results that differ between runs. This was done to produce more realistic data that may reflect
on real farm productions. Parameters that are stochastic include the mortality rate when
connected to the variability converter and the feed sub-model that will assign different feed
conversion ratios, reflecting what happens in real production. The study evaluates the
production of live bait shrimp for a period of seven years. The model was run two times per
year, and the average numbers were used. 
102
APPENDIX 2: Detailed economic information collected for the production of live
bait shrimp in a six tank-150m  recirculating system 3
Capital outlay and depreciation for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank-150 m?
recirculating system in Gulf Shores, AL.
Item Price Units Total Years Depreciation
Electrical panel $4,272 1 $4,272 15 $285
Plastic tank liner (roll) $280 6 $1,680 15 $112
Tank wire mesh (roll) $855 3.23 $2,761 15 $184
Main PVC components $72.1 94 $6,794 15 $453
PVC components $4.65 111 $518
Lumber $2.49 35.7 $89 10 $9
Storage shed $2,184 1 $2,184 20 $109
Electric blowers $1,023 2 $2,046 7 $292
Nets $0.74 24 $18 1 $18
Diffusers $3.85 24 $92 1 $92
Pressure relief valve $168 2 $337 7 $48
Water quality kit $188 1 $188 1 $188
Multiparameter meter $755 1 $755 3 $252
Truck (? ton)? $27,000 1 $5,400 5 $1,080
Golf cart $1,200 1 $1,200 5 $240
TOTAL $29,519 $3,362
? Only 20% contribution to the production in recirculating systems.
103
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a six tank-150 m? recirculating system with a density
of 1,200 shrimp/m  (30,000 shrimp/tank) and harvest weight of 4 grams with direct stocking with3
two crops per year.
Unit Quantity Price orCost Total Value or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 303,756 $95 $28,832
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 360,000 12 4,320
Feed kg 2,268 0.84 1,905
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04  63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 8,674 0.05 434
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $9,107
3. Income above Variable Costs $19,725
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $13,359
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $15,473
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
       - All expenses       $44
       - Variable expenses $30
104
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in Alabama in a six tank-150m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m at 4 grams with3 
two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $28,832 $28,838 $28,085 $28,847 $28,809 $28,861 $28,822
Cash Paid for PLs $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $1,905 $1,875 $1,895 $1,885 $1,870 $1,890 $1,880
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $18,284 $18,546 $17,873 $18,748 $18,834 $18,979 $19,071
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $3,978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,144 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $28,557 $24,654 $23,785 $24,453 $24,323 $24,240 $24,093
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $20,392 $36,974 $52,785 $69,368 $85,929 $102,521
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $20,392 $36,974 $52,785 $69,368 $85,929 $102,521 $126,614
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
105
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m  at 4 grams with two3
crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $28,832 $28,838 $28,085 $28,847 $28,809 $28,861 $28,822
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $28,832 $28,838 $28,085 $28,847 $28,809 $28,861 $28,822
Expenses
PL purchases $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Feed purchases $1,905 $1,875 $1,895 $1,885 $1,870 $1,890 $1,880
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $12,299 $12,269 $12,289 $12,279 $12,264 $12,284 $12,274
Interest
Interest paid $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $14,922 $15,184 $14,511 $15,386 $15,472 $15,617 $15,708
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $61,832 $61,838 $61,085 $61,847 $61,809 $61,861 $61,822
Total Equity at the End of the Year $28,335 $34,190 $35,400 $38,225 $40,353 $42,678 $45,027
106
Enterprise Budget for the live bait shrimp production in a six tank-150 m? recirculating system with a 
               density of 1,200 shrimp/m  (30,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 5 grams with direct stocking 3
             and two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 302,550 $84 $25,459
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 360,000 12 4,320
Feed kg 2,231 0.84 1,874
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 8,643 0.05 432
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $9,075
3. Income above Variable Costs $16,384
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $13,327
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $12,132
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$44
                $30
107
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in Alabama in a six tank-150 m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m at 5 grams with3 
two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $25,459 $25,445 $25,471 $25,486 $27,473 $25,449 $25,406
Cash Paid for PLs $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $1,874 $1,882 $1,906 $1,901 $1,900 $1,901 $1,880
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $14,942 $15,145 $15,248 $15,372 $15,468 $15,557 $15,654
Investing activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $3,978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,144 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $25,214 $21,253 $21,160 $21,077 $20,956 $20,818 $20,676
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $17,049 $30,230 $43,416 $59,985 $76,542 $93,075
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $25,214 $38,302 $51,390 $64,493 $80,942 $97,360 $113,751
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
108
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m  at 5 grams with two3
crops per year.
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $25,459 $25,445 $25,471 $25,486 $25,473 $25,449 $25,406
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $25,459 $25,445 $25,471 $25,486 $25,473 $25,449 $25,406
Expenses
PL purchases $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Feed purchases $1,874 $1,882 $1,906 $1,901 $1,900 $1,901 $1,880
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $12,269 $12,277 $12,301 $12,296 $12,294 $12,295 $12,275
Interest
Interest paid $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $11,579 $11,783 $11,886 $12,010 $12,106 $12,195 $12,292
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $58,459 $58,445 $58,471 $58,486 $58,473 $58,449 $58,406
Total Equity at the End of the Year $24,961 $30,796 $32,787 $34,864 $37,017 $39,266 $41,611
109
Enterprise Budget for the live bait shrimp production in a six tank-150 m? recirculating system with a density    
           of 1,200  shrimp/m  (30,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 6 grams with direct stocking and two            3
          crops per year.
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts 
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 315,816 $73 $22,952
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 360,000 12 4,320
Feed kg 2,292 0.84 1,925
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 8,694 0.05 435
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $9,129
3. Income Above Variable Costs $13,823
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $13,380
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $9,572
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$42
                  $29
110
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in Alabama in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m at 6 grams with3 
two crops per year.
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $22,952 $22,924 $22,975 $22,936 $22,961 $22,950 $22,962
Cash Paid for PLs $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $1,925 $1,950 $1,940 $1,930 $1,925 $1,930 $1,930
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $12,384 $12,556 $12,718 $12,793 $12,931 $13,028 $13,159
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $3,978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,144 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $22,657 $18,664 $18,629 $18,498 $18,419 $18,289 $18,182
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $14,491 $25,083 $35,739 $49,729 $63,748 $77,752
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $22,657 $33,156 $43,713 $54,237 $68,148 $82,038 $95,934
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
111
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,200 shrimp/m  at 6 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $22,952 $22,924 $22,975 $22,936 $22,961 $22,950 $22,962
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $22,952 $22,924 $22,975 $22,936 $22,961 $22,950 $22,962
Expenses
PL purchases $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320 $4,320
Feed purchases $1,925 $1,950 $1,940 $1,930 $1,925 $1,930 $1,930
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $12,320 $12,345 $12,335 $12,325 $12,320 $12,325 $12,325
Interest
Interest paid $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,611 $1,385 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $9,022 $9,194 $9,356 $9,431 $9,569 $9,666 $9,797
Total Debt at the End of the Year $33,497 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $55,952 $55,924 $55,975 $55,936 $55,961 $55,950 $55,962
Total Equity at the End of the Year $22,455 $28,275 $30,290 $32,314 $34,504 $36,767 $39,166
112
Enterprise budget for the live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system with a
density of 1,600 shrimp/m  (40,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 4 grams with direct stocking3
and two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 393,672 $95 $37,362
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 480,000 12 5,760
Feed kg 2,964 0.84 2,490
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 10,698 0.05 535
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $11,233
3. Income above Variable Costs $26,129
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $15,485
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $21,877
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$39
                $29
113
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150m  recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m at 4 grams with3 3 
two crops per year.
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $37,362 $39,380 $39,340 $39,389 $39,365 $39,340 $39,431
Cash Paid for PLs $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $2,490 $2,454 $2,465 $2,495 $2,480 $2,490 $2,485
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700
Cash Paid for Interest $1,634 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $24,777 $27,077 $27,130 $27,253 $27,352 $27,430 $27,646
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $4,695 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,860 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $35,767 $33,185 $33,041 $32,958 $32,840 $32,691 $32,669
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $27,602 $52,715 $77,783 $102,871 $127,949 $152,992
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $27,602 $52,715 $77,783 $102,871 $127,949 $152,992 $178,132
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $34,214 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,214 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
114
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m  at 4 grams with two3
crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $37,362 $39,380 $39,340 $39,389 $39,365 $39,340 $39,431
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $37,362 $39,380 $39,340 $39,389 $39,365 $39,340 $39,431
Expenses
PL purchases $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Feed purchases $2,490 $2,454 $2,465 $2,495 $2,480 $2,490 $2,485
Cash Operating expenses $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $14,312 $14,277 $14,287 $14,317 $14,302 $14,312 $14,307
Interest
Interest paid $1,634 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,634 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $21,415 $23,715 $23,768 $23,891 $23,990 $24,068 $24,284
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,214 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $70,362 $72,380 $72,340 $72,389 $72,365 $72,340 $72,431
Total Equity at the End of the Year $36,148 $44,732 $46,655 $48,767 $50,908 $53,157 $55,636
115
Enterprise budget for the live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m3 recirculating system with a
density of 1,600 shrimp/m  (40,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 5 grams with direct stocking3
and two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 405,432 $84 $33,708
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 480,000 12 5,760
Feed kg 2,988 0.84 2,510
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 143
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 53
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 10,719 0.05 536
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $11,255
3. Income above Variable Costs $22,453
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $15,506
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $18,202
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$38
 $28
116
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank-150 m3 recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m at 5 grams3 
with two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $34,128 $34,148 $34,132 $34,171 $34,185 $34,188 $34,109
Cash Paid for PLs $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $2,510 $2,539 $2,515 $2,538 $2,527 $2,539 $2,530
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,635 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $21,511 $21,748 $21,860 $21,980 $22,113 $22,218 $22,267
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $4,704 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,870 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $35,718 $31,066 $30,985 $30,898 $30,814 $30,688 $30,498
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $27,552 $50,547 $73,559 $96,587 $119,639 $142,679
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $27,552 $50,547 $73,559 $96,587 $119,639 $142,679 $165,648
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
117
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m  at 5 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $33,708 $34,148 $34,132 $34,171 $34,185 $34,188 $34,109
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $33,708 $34,148 $34,132 $34,171 $34,185 $34,188 $34,109
Expenses
PL purchases $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Feed purchases $2,510 $2,539 $2,515 $2,538 $2,527 $2,539 $2,530
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $14,344 $14,374 $14,350 $14,373 $14,361 $14,373 $14,364
Interest
Interest paid $1,635 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,634 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $17,729 $18,386 $18,498 $18,618 $18,751 $18,856 $18,905
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $66,708 $67,148 $67,132 $67,171 $67,185 $67,188 $67,109
Total Equity at the End of the Year $32,484 $39,499 $41,448 $43,549 $45,728 $48,005 $50,313
118
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system with a
density of 1,600 shrimp/m  (40,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 6 grams with direct3
stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 421,362 $78 $30,616
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 480,000 12 5,760
Feed kg 3,078 0.84 2,586
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 10,794 0.05 540
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $11,334
3. Income above Variable Costs $19,282
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $15,585
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $15,031
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$37
 $27
119
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m at 6grams with3 
two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $30,616 $30,615 $30,569 $30,585 $30,583 $30,575 $30,587
Cash Paid for PLs $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $2,586 $2,570 $2,601 $2,575 $2,575 $2,545 $2,570
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,635 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $17,924 $18,185 $18,212 $18,356 $18,463 $18,598 $18,705
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $4,704 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $12,870 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $28,923 $24,292 $24,123 $24,061 $23,951 $23,859 $23,727
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $20,758 $36,978 $53,128 $69,319 $85,508 $101,719
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $20,758 $36,978 $53,128 $69,319 $85,508 $101,719 $117,917
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
120
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 1,600 shrimp/m  at 6 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $32,920 $32,916 $32,868 $32,885 $32,884 $32,873 $32,888
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $32,920 $32,916 $32,868 $32,885 $32,884 $32,873 $32,888
PL purchases $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760 $5,760
Feed purchases $2,586 $2,570 $2,601 $2,575 $2,575 $2,545 $2,570
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $14,420 $14,405 $14,435 $14,410 $14,410 $14,379 $14,405
Interest
Interest paid $1,635 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,634 $1,388 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $16,866 $17,123 $17,149 $17,294 $17,401 $17,535 $17,644
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $63,616 $63,615 $63,569 $63,585 $63,583 $63,575 $63,587
Total Equity at the End of the Year $29,393 $35,967 $37,884 $39,963 $42,127 $44,392 $46,792
121
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system with a
density of 2,000 shrimp/m  (50,000 sh/tank) and harvest weight of 4 grams with direct3
stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receips
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 491,466 $95 $46,646
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 3,714 0.84 3,120
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 12,768 0.05 638
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $13,417
3. Income above Variable Costs $33,229
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $17,658
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $28,988
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$36
$27
122
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m at 4 grams with3 
two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $46,646 $49,238 $49,310 $49,104 $49,258 $49,130 $49,240
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,120 $2,777 $2,777 $2,782 $2,782 $2,777 $2,782
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $31,955 $32,651 $32,823 $32,729 $32,983 $32,980 $35,706
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $5,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $13,596 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $43,680 $38,758 $38,735 $38,434 $38,471 $38,241 $40,728
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $35,515 $66,201 $96,962 $127,526 $158,235 $188,828
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $35,515 $66,201 $96,962 $127,526 $158,235 $188,828 $222,027
TOTAL DEBT AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $29,519 $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
TOTAL DEBT AT END OF YEAR $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
123
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank - 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m  at 4 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $46,646 $46,731 $46,797 $46,605 $46,750 $46,628 $49,240
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $46,646 $46,731 $46,797 $46,605 $46,750 $46,628 $49,240
Expesnes
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $3,120 $2,777 $2,777 $2,782 $2,782 $2,777 $2,782
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $16,394 $16,051 $16,051 $16,056 $16,056 $16,051 $16,056
Interest
Interest paid $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $28,593 $29,288 $29,461 $29,367 $29,621 $29,618 $32,344
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $79,646 $79,731 $79,797 $79,605 $79,750 $79,628 $82,240
Total Equity at the End of the Year $44,697 $52,082 $54,112 $55,983 $58,293 $60,445 $65,445
124
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system with a
density of 2,000 shrimp/m  (50,000 shrimp/tank) and harvest weight of 5 grams with direct3
stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 500,574 $84 $42,105
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 3,738 0.84 3,177
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 12,826 0.05 641
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $13,467
3. Income above Variable Costs $28,638
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $17,718
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $24,387
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$35
$26
125
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m at 5 grams with3 
two crops per year.
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $42,105 $42,705 $42,640 $42,706 $42,731 $42,665 $42,728
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,177 $3,169 $3,171 $3,177 $3,155 $3,166 $3,162
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $27,357 $28,233 $28,273 $28,435 $28,590 $28,627 $28,814
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $5,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $13,596 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $39,082 $34,341 $34,184 $34,140 $34,079 $33,888 $33,836
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $30,917 $57,186 $83,396 $109,666 $135,982 $162,222
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $30,917 $57,186 $83,396 $109,666 $135,982 $162,222 $188,529
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $34,223 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
126
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m  at 5 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $42,105 $42,705 $42,640 $42,706 $42,731 $42,665 $42,728
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $42,105 $42,705 $42,640 $42,706 $42,731 $42,665 $42,728
Expenses
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $3,177 $3,169 $3,171 $3,177 $3,155 $3,166 $3,162
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $16,451 $16,443 $16,445 $16,452 $16,430 $16,441 $16,436
Interest
Interest paid $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $23,995 $24,871 $24,910 $25,073 $25,228 $25,265 $25,452
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $75,105 $75,705 $75,640 $75,706 $75,731 $75,665 $75,728
Total Equity at the End of the Year $40,156 $48,057 $49,955 $52,083 $54,274 $56,482 $58,932
127
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system with a
density of 2,000 shrimp/m  (50,000 shrimp/tank) and harvest weight of 6 grams with direct3
stocking with two crops per year.
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 525,726 $73 $38,188
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 3,822 0.84 3,210
Fuel gal 130 2.2 286
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 21,807 0.09 1,963
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 150 0.04 63
Electricity - additional $/m 50 0.04 23
Maintenance year 1 192 192
Interest on operating costs dol 12,859 0.05 643
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $13,502
3. Income above Variable Costs $24,686
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $3,362
Interest on equipment dol & % 5,018 0.05 $251
Interest on capital costs dol & % 9,483 0.05 $474
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 10,036 0.004 $40
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $4,251
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $17,753
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $20,435
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$34
 $26
128
Seven year cash flow budget for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m at 6 grams with3 
two crops per year
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $38,188 $38,234 $38,274 $38,219 $38,282 $38,215 $38,248
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,210 $3,200 $3,221 $3,221 $3,210 $3,226 $3,221
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Cash Paid for Interest $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $23,406 $23,731 $23,857 $23,905 $24,087 $24,118 $24,276
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$1,871 -$1,964 -$2,062 -$2,165 -$2,274 -$2,387 -$2,507
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $5,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $1,871 $1,964 $2,062 $2,165 $2,274 $2,387 $2,507
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $13,596 $8,072 $7,973 $7,870 $7,762 $7,648 $7,529
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $35,131 $29,838 $29,768 $29,610 $29,575 $29,379 $29,298
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $26,966 $48,733 $70,528 $95,629 $120,805 $145,898
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $26,966 $48,733 $70,528 $92,267 $114,080 $135,810 $157,579
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $29,519 $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
129
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in a six tank- 150 m? recirculating system: 2,000 shrimp/m  at 6 grams with3
two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $38,188 $38,234 $38,274 $38,219 $38,282 $38,215 $38,248
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $38,188 $38,234 $38,274 $38,219 $38,282 $38,215 $38,248
Expenses
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $3,210 $3,200 $3,221 $3,221 $3,210 $3,226 $3,221
Cash Operating expenses $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712 $2,712
Depreciation $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362 $3,362
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $16,485 $16,475 $16,495 $16,495 $16,485 $16,500 $16,495
Interest
Interest paid $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $1,659 $1,391 $1,284 $1,181 $1,073 $959 $840
Net Farm Income from Operations $20,044 $20,369 $20,495 $20,543 $20,725 $20,756 $20,914
Total Debt at the End of the Year $34,949 $27,649 $25,684 $23,622 $21,457 $19,183 $16,796
Total Assets at the End of the Year $71,188 $71,234 $71,274 $71,219 $71,282 $71,215 $71,248
Total Equity at the End of the Year $36,238 $43,586 $45,590 $47,596 $49,825 $52,032 $54,453
130
APPENDIX 3: Detailed economic information collected for the production of live
bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds 
Capital outlay and depreciation for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha
ponds in Gulf Shores, AL
Item Price Units Total Years Depreciation
Pond construction $17,880 1 $17,880 15 $1,192
Water intake $15,000 1 $15,000 20 $750
Storage shed $1,294 2 $2,588 10 $259
Pump $2,880 1 $2,880 7 $411
Electric aerators (2 hp) $3,000 10 $30,000 7 $4,286
Electric Generator $3,199 1 $3,199 7 $366
Feed hauler $1,200 1 $1,200 5 $240
Feed hauler trailer $200 1 $200 5 $40
Water quality kit $188 1 $188 1 $188
Multiparameter meter $755 1 $755 5 $151
Weedeater* $480 1 $96 5 $19
Truck* $20,000 1 $4,000 5 $2,000
TOTAL $77,347 $8,702
* Only 20% contribution to the production in recirculating systems.
131
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with a density of
50 shrimp/m  and harvest weight of 4 grams with direct stocking with two crops2
per year.
Unit Quantity Price orCost Total Value or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 376,530 $100 $37,653
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 500,000 12 6,000
Feed kg 3,285 0.84 2,759
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 19,594 0.09 1,763
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 7,246 0.05 362
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $14,855
3. Income above Variable Costs $22,798
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $25,782
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $11,871
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
- All expenses $68
- Variable expenses  $39
132
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in 5 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $37,653 $37,721 $37,708 $37,766 $37,761 $37,840 $37,750
Cash Paid for PLs $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $2,759 $2,705 $2,705 $2,726 $2,722 $2,738 $2,743
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356
Cash Paid for Interest $4,084 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $18,454 $19,079 $19,095 $19,132 $19,131 $19,193 $19,099
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $6,780 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $42,353 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $18,929 $47,717 $47,071 $46,412 $45,682 $44,978 $44,079
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $18,929 $102,219 $149,290 $195,702 $241,384 $286,362
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $18,929 $102,219 $149,290 $195,702 $241,384 $286,362 $330,441
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $77,347 $84,126 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,126 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
133
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $37,653 $37,721 $37,708 $37,766 $37,761 $37,840 $37,750
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $37,653 $37,721 $37,708 $37,766 $37,761 $37,840 $37,750
Expenses
PL purchases $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Feed purchases $2,759 $2,705 $2,705 $2,726 $2,722 $2,738 $2,743
Cash Operating expenses $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356 $6,356
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $23,817 $23,763 $23,763 $23,784 $23,779 $23,796 $23,800
Interest
Interest paid $4,084 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,084 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $9,752 $10,378 $10,393 $10,430 $10,429 $10,491 $10,397
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,126 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $115,053 $115,121 $115,108 $115,166 $115,161 $115,240 $115,150
Total Equity at the End of the Year $30,927 $44,079 $50,686 $57,695 $64,989 $72,731 $80,689
134
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in 5 0.1 ha ponds with a density of 50
shrimp/m  and harvest weight of 5 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year2
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 371,625 $100 $37,163
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 500,000 12 6,000
Feed kg 4,035 0.84 3,390
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 7,621 0.05 381
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $15,622
3. Income above Variable Costs $21,540
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $26,549
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $10,613
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$71
$42
135
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $37,163 $36,950 $37,116 $37,135 $37,155 $37,185 $37,091
Cash Paid for PLs $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,390 $3,372 $3,357 $3,388 $3,347 $3,338 $3,342
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261
Cash Paid for Interest $4,063 $3,576 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $17,449 $17,741 $17,945 $17,933 $17,995 $18,033 $17,936
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $5,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $41,373 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $16,944 $46,379 $45,921 $45,214 $44,546 $43,818 $42,915
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $16,944 $28,064 $39,059 $49,693 $60,024 $70,011
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $16,944 $98,896 $144,817 $190,031 $234,577 $278,394 $321,310
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $77,347 $83,146 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
Total Debt at the End of the Year $83,146 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
136
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $37,163 $36,950 $37,116 $37,135 $37,155 $37,185 $37,091
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $37,163 $36,950 $37,078 $37,135 $37,098 $37,185 $36,950
Expenses
PL purchases $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Feed purchases $3,390 $3,372 $3,357 $3,388 $3,347 $3,338 $3,342
Cash Operating expenses $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261 $6,261
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $24,353 $24,335 $24,320 $24,351 $24,310 $24,301 $24,305
Interest
Interest paid $4,063 $3,576 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,063 $3,576 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $8,747 $9,039 $9,244 $9,232 $9,293 $9,331 $9,234
Total Debt at the End of the Year $83,146 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $114,563 $114,350 $114,516 $114,535 $114,555 $114,585 $114,491
Total Equity at the End of the Year $31,416 $43,308 $50,094 $57,065 $64,383 $72,076 $80,030
137
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with a density of 50 shrimp/m2
and harvest weight of 6 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 386,960 $97 $37,680
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 500,000 12 6,000
Feed kg 4,234 0.84 3,557
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 7,913 0.05 396
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $16,222
3. Income above Variable Costs $21,458
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $27,149
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $10,531
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$37
$27
138
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 sh/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $37,680 $36,720 $34,716 $34,716 $34,672 $34,821 $34,825
Cash Paid for PLs $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,557 $3,522 $3,532 $3,529 $3,562 $3,555 $3,576
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713
Cash Paid for Interest $4,081 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $17,825 $17,401 $14,919 $14,922 $14,844 $15,000 $14,984
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $6,683 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $42,257 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $18,203 $46,039 $42,895 $42,202 $41,395 $40,785 $39,964
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $18,203 $28,984 $36,952 $44,574 $51,755 $58,708
CASH / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $18,203 $28,984 $36,952 $44,574 $51,755 $58,708 $65,243
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $77,347 $84,030 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,030 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
139
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 50,000 shrimp/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $37,680 $36,720 $34,716 $34,716 $34,672 $34,821 $34,825
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $37,680 $38,756 $38,779 $38,796 $38,748 $38,912 $38,908
Expenses
PL purchases $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
Feed purchases $3,557 $3,522 $3,532 $3,529 $3,562 $3,555 $3,576
Cash Operating expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713 $6,713
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $24,476 $24,441 $24,947 $24,944 $24,978 $24,970 $24,991
Interest
Interest paid $4,081 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,081 $3,580 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $9,123 $8,699 $6,217 $6,220 $6,142 $6,298 $6,282
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $84,030 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $115,080 $114,120 $112,116 $112,116 $112,072 $112,221 $112,225
Total Equity at the End of the Year $31,050 $43,078 $47,694 $54,645 $61,900 $69,713 $77,764
140
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with a density of 60 shrimp/m2
and harvest weight of 4 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 453,780 $100 $45,378
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 3,897 0.84 3,273
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 19,594 0.09 1,763
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 8,103 0.05 405
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $16,612
3. Income above Variable Costs $28,766
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $27,539
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $17,839
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$61
$37
141
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $45,378 $45,254 $45,391 $45,634 $45,288 $45,112 $45,454
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,273 $3,279 $3,272 $3,324 $3,263 $3,280 $3,290
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681
Cash Paid for Interest $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $25,141 $25,515 $25,686 $25,877 $25,592 $25,399 $25,731
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $6,405 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $41,978 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $25,241 $54,153 $53,662 $53,157 $52,142 $51,183 $50,711
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $25,241 $44,135 $62,870 $81,448 $99,376 $116,728
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $25,241 $114,967 $168,629 $221,786 $273,929 $325,112 $375,822
TOTAL DEBT AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $77,347 $83,751 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
TOTAL DEBT AT END OF YEAR $83,751 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
142
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $45,378 $45,254 $45,391 $45,634 $45,288 $45,112 $45,454
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $45,378 $45,254 $45,391 $45,634 $45,288 $45,112 $45,454
Expenses
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $3,273 $3,279 $3,272 $3,324 $3,263 $3,280 $3,290
Cash Operating expenses $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $22,238 $22,239 $22,237 $22,248 $22,235 $22,239 $22,241
Interest
Interest paid $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $16,439 $16,813 $16,984 $17,175 $16,890 $16,697 $17,029 
Total Debt at the End of the Year $83,751 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $122,778 $122,654 $122,791 $123,034 $122,688 $122,512 $120,578
Total Equity at the End of the Year $39,027 $51,612 $58,369 $65,564 $72,516 $80,003 $86,117
143
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ha ponds with a density of 60 shrimp/m2
and harvest weight of 5 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 444,045 $100 $44,405
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 4,795 0.84 4,028
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 8,793 0.05 440
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $18,025
3. Income above Variable Costs $26,379
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $28,952
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $15,452
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$65
$41
144
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $44,405 $44,407 $44,610 $44,502 $44,570 $44,402 $44,606
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $4,028 $4,013 $4,030 $4,025 $4,058 $4,037 $4,029
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Cash Paid for Interest $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,575 $3,581 $3,581 $3,581
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $22,876 $23,397 $23,610 $23,508 $23,542 $23,395 $23,607
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $6,498 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $42,071 $35,258 $34,927 $35,957 $35,581 $35,219 $34,819
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $23,068 $52,035 $51,586 $50,788 $50,093 $49,180 $48,586
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $23,068 $39,845 $56,505 $72,714 $88,592 $103,941
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $23,068 $110,677 $162,263 $213,051 $263,145 $312,325 $360,911
TOTAL DEBT AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $77,347 $83,844 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
TOTAL DEBT AT END OF YEAR $83,844 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
145
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $44,405 $44,407 $44,610 $44,502 $44,570 $44,402 $44,606
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $44,405 $44,407 $44,610 $44,502 $44,570 $44,402 $44,606
Expenses
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $4,028 $4,013 $4,030 $4,025 $4,058 $4,037 $4,029
Cash Operating expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $26,147 $26,132 $26,149 $26,144 $26,177 $26,156 $26,149
Interest
Interest paid $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,083 $3,579 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $14,174 $14,695 $14,909 $14,806 $14,841 $14,693 $14,905
Total Debt at the End of the Year $83,844 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $121,805 $121,807 $122,010 $121,902 $121,970 $121,802 $118,621
Total Equity at the End of the Year $37,960 $50,765 $57,588 $64,432 $71,798 $79,294 $84,160
146
Enterprise Budgets for live bait shrimp production in five 0.1 ponds with a density of 60 shrimp/m  and2
harvest weight of 6 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 465,210 $97 $45,296
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 600,000 12 7,200
Feed kg 5,086 0.84 4,272
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 8,871 0.05 444
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $18,275
3. Income above Variable Costs $27,110
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $29,112
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $16,183
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
    $65
$39
147
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $45,296 $41,646 $41,803 $41,687 $41,637 $41,566 $41,823
Cash Paid for PLs $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $4,272 $4,209 $4,264 $4,306 $4,252 $4,283 $4,260
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Cash Paid for Interest $4,101 $3,582 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $23,505 $20,437 $20,569 $20,411 $20,415 $20,313 $20,593
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $7,291 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $42,864 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $24,491 $49,075 $48,545 $47,692 $46,966 $46,097 $45,573
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $24,491 $38,308 $51,926 $65,039 $77,791 $90,057
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $24,491 $38,308 $51,926 $65,039 $77,791 $90,057 $102,201
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $77,347 $84,638 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,638 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
148
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 60,000 shrimp/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $45,296 $41,646 $41,803 $41,687 $41,637 $41,566 $41,823
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $45,296 $41,646 $41,803 $41,687 $41,637 $41,566 $41,823
Expenses
PL purchases $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200 $7,200
Feed purchases $4,272 $4,209 $4,264 $4,306 $4,252 $4,283 $4,260
Cash Operating expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $26,391 $26,329 $26,383 $26,425 $26,371 $26,402 $26,379
Interest
Interest paid $4,101 $3,582 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,101 $3,582 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $14,803 $11,735 $11,868 $11,710 $11,714 $11,611 $11,891
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,638 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $122,696 $119,046 $119,203 $119,087 $119,037 $118,966 $119,223
Total Equity at the End of the Year $38,058 $48,004 $54,781 $61,617 $68,865 $76,457 $84,761
149
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a pond system with a density of 70 shrimp/m  and2
harvest weight of 4 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 553,175 $100 $55,318
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 700,000 12 8,400
Feed kg 4547 0.84 3,820
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 19,594 0.09 1,763
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 8,976 0.05 449
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $18,402
3. Income above Variable Costs $36,916
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. TOTAL EXPENSES (TVC+TFC) $29,329
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $25,989
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$53
$33
150
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $55,318 $57,067 $56,280 $55,907 $55,858 $56,917 $56,192
Cash Paid for PLs $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $3,820 $3,814 $3,839 $3,791 $3,772 $3,834 $3,804
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681
Cash Paid for Interest $4,114 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $33,303 $35,588 $34,807 $34,482 $34,453 $35,450 $34,755
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $7,544 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $43,117 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $34,542 $64,225 $62,783 $61,763 $61,004 $61,234 $59,734
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $34,542 $63,509 $91,366 $118,549 $145,338 $172,741
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $34,542 $134,341 $197,124 $258,887 $319,891 $381,125 $440,859
TOTAL DEBT AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $77,347 $84,890 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
TOTAL DEBT AT END OF YEAR $84,890 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
151
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 4 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $55,318 $57,067 $56,280 $55,907 $55,858 $56,917 $56,192
Government payments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $55,318 $57,067 $56,280 $55,907 $55,858 $56,917 $56,192
Expenses
PL purchases $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Feed purchases $3,820 $3,814 $3,839 $3,791 $3,772 $3,834 $3,804
Cash Operating expenses $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681 $5,681
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $26,603 $26,597 $26,622 $26,574 $26,555 $26,617 $26,587
Interest
Interest paid $4,114 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,114 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $24,601 $26,886 $26,106 $25,781 $25,751 $26,748 $26,053
Total Debt at the End of the Year $84,890 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $132,718 $134,467 $133,680 $133,307 $133,258 $134,317 $130,606
Total Equity at the End of the Year $47,827 $63,425 $69,258 $75,836 $83,086 $91,809 $96,145
152
Enterprise Budget for live bait shrimp production in a pond system with a density of 70 shrimp/m  and2
harvest weight of 5 grams with direct stocking with two crops per year 
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 521,285 $100 $52,129
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 700,000 12 8,400
Feed kg 5,621 0.84 4,722
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 9,696 0.05 480
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $19,876
3. Income above Variable Costs $32,252
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $30,803
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $21,326
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$59
$38
153
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $48,185 $48,138 $47,876 $47,935 $48,084 $48,071 $48,005
Cash Paid for PLs $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $4,722 $4,705 $4,700 $4,696 $4,687 $4,727 $4,705
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Cash Paid for Interest $4,117 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $24,729 $25,231 $25,006 $25,069 $25,227 $25,175 $25,130
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $7,743 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH  ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $43,316 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $26,167 $53,869 $52,982 $52,350 $51,778 $50,960 $50,110
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $26,167 $44,778 $62,833 $80,603 $98,167 $115,295
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $26,167 $44,778 $62,833 $80,603 $98,167 $115,295 $131,976
Total Debt at the Beginning of the Year $77,347 $84,089 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
Total Debt at the End of the Year $85,089 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
154
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 5 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $48,185 $48,138 $47,876 $47,935 $48,084 $48,071 $48,005
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $48,185 $48,138 $47,876 $47,935 $48,084 $48,071 $48,005
Expenses
PL purchases $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Feed purchases $4,722 $4,705 $4,700 $4,696 $4,687 $4,727 $4,705
Cash Operating expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $28,041 $28,024 $28,019 $28,016 $28,007 $28,046 $28,025
Interest
Interest paid $4,117 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,117 $3,584 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $16,027 $16,529 $16,305 $16,367 $16,525 $16,473 $16,429
Total Debt at the End of the Year $85,089 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $125,585 $125,538 $125,276 $125,335 $125,484 $125,471 $125,405
Total Equity at the End of the Year $40,496 $54,496 $60,854 $67,864 $75,313 $82,963 $90,944
155
Live bait shrimp production in a pond system with a density of 70 shrimp/m  and harvest weight of 62
grams with direct stocking with two crops per year
Unit Quantity
Price or
Cost
Total Value 
or Cost
1. Gross Receipts
Live bait shrimp sales $/1000 542,950 $97 $52,864
2. Variable Costs
Post larvae $/1000 700,000 12 8,400
Feed kg 5,875 0.84 4,935
Fuel gal 240 2.2 528
Harvest labor year 150 10 1,500
Electricity - aeration Kw-hr 25,554 0.09 2,300
Electricity - initial fill up $/m 5000 0.09 4503
Electricity - additional $/m 1875 0.09 1693
Maintenance year 1 1,323 1,323
Interest on operating costs dol 9,802 0.05 490
Total Variable Costs (TVC) $20,094
3. Income above Variable Costs $32,770
4. Fixed Costs
Equipment depreciation dol $8,702
Interest on equipment dol & % 20,939 0.05 $1,047
Interest on capital costs dol & % 17,734 0.05 $887
Taxes ha 1 45 $45
Insurance, general ha 1 79 $79
Insurance, equipment dol & % 41,878 0.004 $168
Total Fixed Costs (TFC) $10,927
5. Total Expenses (TVC+TFC) $31,021
6. Net Returns to Land, Labor and Management $21,843
Breakeven cost, $/1,000 to cover:
      - All expenses
      - Variable expenses
$57
$37
156
Seven year cash flow for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year 
YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7
Operating Activities
Cash Received from Operations $52,864 $52,921 $52,967 $52,786 $53,091 $52,656 $52,760
Cash Paid for PLs $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Cash Paid for Purchased Feed $4,935 $5,031 $5,002 $4,936 $4,980 $4,959 $4,956
Cash Paid for Operating Expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Cash Paid for Interest $4,121 $3,585 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
NET CASH - OPERATING ACTIVITIES $29,190 $29,688 $29,795 $29,681 $29,942 $29,528 $29,635
Investing Activities
Cash Paid to Purchase Machinery and Equipment and RE $41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878 41,878
NET CASH  ? INVESTING ACTIVITIES -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878 -$41,878
Financing Activities
Proceeds from Operating Loans $7,899 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Scheduled Principal Payments ? Term Debt $6,305 $6,620 $6,951 $7,299 $7,664 $8,047 $8,449
NET CASH ? FINANCING ACTIVITIES $43,472 $35,258 $34,927 $34,579 $34,215 $33,831 $33,429
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash $30,784 $58,326 $57,771 $56,961 $56,493 $55,312 $54,615
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the Beginning of the Year 0 $30,784 $53,851 $76,696 $99,078 $121,356 $142,836
Cash / Cash Equivalents at the End of the Year $30,784 $126,109 $185,311 $243,698 $301,620 $358,348 $414,381
TOTAL DEBT AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $77,347 $85,245 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508
TOTAL DEBT AT END OF YEAR $85,245 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
157
Seven year income statement for the production of live bait shrimp in five 0.1 ha ponds: 70,000 shrimp/pond at 6 grams with two crops per year
Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7
Revenue
Live Bait shrimp $52,864 $52,921 $52,967 $52,786 $53,091 $52,656 $52,760
Other farm income $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
GROSS REVENUE $52,864 $52,921 $52,967 $52,786 $53,091 $52,656 $52,760
Expenses
PL purchases $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400 $8,400
Feed purchases $4,935 $5,031 $5,002 $4,936 $4,980 $4,959 $4,956
Cash Operating expenses $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217 $6,217
Depreciation $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702 $8,702
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $28,254 $28,350 $28,322 $28,255 $28,299 $28,278 $28,275
Interest
Interest paid $4,121 $3,585 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Accrued interest change $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE $4,121 $3,585 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552 $3,552
Net Farm Income from Operations $20,488 $20,986 $21,094 $20,979 $21,240 $20,826 $20,933
Total Debt at the End of the Year $85,245 $71,042 $64,422 $57,470 $50,172 $42,508 $34,461
Total Assets at the End of the Year $130,264 $130,321 $130,367 $130,186 $130,491 $130,056 $130,160
Total Equity at the End of the Year $45,018 $59,279 $65,946 $72,715 $80,319 $87,548 $95,699
158
APPENDIX 4: Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic States Live Bait Shrimp Market
Survey
Instructions: circle one (or more) of the   
following answers or fill in the provided
blank space.
1.  Do you buy live bait shrimp for use in your business?  Circle one.
1. Yes
2.  No 
If yes, continue with the survey; if No, discontinue and send back the survey.
2.  In what area(s) of live bait shrimp do you do business? Circle all that apply.
1. Retail
2. Wholesale
3. Supplier
4. Other, please specify ______________________________________
3.  How many years have you been in the live bait shrimp business? ________ years
4.  How important are live bait shrimp sales to your overall business?
1. Very important
2. Important
3. Somewhat important
4. Not important
5. What percentage of your gross sales is accounted for by selling live bait shrimp?
_______%
6a. What is the maximum amount of shrimp your holding tanks can hold?
       Circle number below and circle units below in question 6b.
1.  0-50
2.  51-100
3.  101-150
4.  151-200
5.  201-250
6.  251-300
7.  More than 300
6b. Circle the unit associated with the above amount.
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
159
7.  How many suppliers do you buy live bait shrimp from? Circle one.
1.   0-3
2.   4-6
3.   7-10
4. 11-15
5. More than 16
8.  Where is (are) your live bait shrimp supplier(s) located?  Circle all that apply. 
1. Local
2. within the state
3. Out of state
9.  If your supplier(s) is/are out of state, indicate which state(s) the main supply
comes from. Circle all that apply.
1. Alabama
2. Georgia
3. Florida
4. Texas
5. Louisiana
6. Mississippi
7. North Carolina
8. South Carolina
9. Other, please specify ____________________
10.  What live shrimp count (number of shrimp per pound) do you prefer to buy?  
1. 40 - 50 count
2. 50 - 60 count
3. 60 - 70 count
4. 70 ? 80 count
5. No preference
6. Other, please specify count size (number of shrimp per pound)
11.  In what units do you buy live bait shrimp?  
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
12.  How much do the units (from the question 11.) cost you?  __________
13.  How many units (from the question 11.) do you purchase in a year? 
___________
160
14.  What percent of your live bait shrimp die after they are delivered to your store?
1. Less than 2%
2. 2-4%
3. 5-9%
4. 10-24%
5. 25-49%
6. 50% or greater
15.  What do you attribute the dying of live bait shrimp to?
a. The condition they are in when received
b. Problems with holding tanks
c. Other, please specify ___________________________________
16.  What species of shrimp do you prefer to buy and sell? 
1. Pink shrimp, also known as ?Hoppers?
2. Brown shrimp, also known as ?Brownies?
3. White Shrimp
4. Does not matter
5. Whatever is available
6. Other, please specify __________________________________
17.  Fishermen purchase live bait shrimp at varying levels throughout the year. 
Please check your customers demand level for live bait shrimp (no demand; low
demand; medium demand, or high demand) for each month of the year.
Check one box for each month under the appropriate demand level column.
1
No Demand
2
Low Demand
3
Medium Demand
4
High Demand
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
161
18. You obtain live bait shrimp during the year and we would like you to rate each
month?s live bait shrimp supply available to you and whether it is sufficient to meet
your customer quantity requirements.
Check a ?supply meets needs? level for each month by placing a check under
the appropriate supply level column for each month of the year.
1
Supply Meets My
Needs
2
Supply Does Not
Meet My Needs
3
Supply Sometimes
Meets My Needs
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
19.  During high demand periods how often do you restock your tank(s)?
1.  Daily
2.  Weekly
   3.  Monthly
4. Other, please specify _____________________________________________
20.  During low demand periods how often do you restock your tank(s)? 
1.  Daily
2.  Weekly
   3.  Monthly
4. Other, please specify _____________________________________________
21.  What is the retail price that you sell live bait shrimp?  $_____ per ___ (unit)
Circle the unit associated with the above price:
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
22a. Does your retail or selling price change during the year?
1. Yes
2.  No 
22b. If yes to 22a, the highest selling price was: $ _______ per ______ unit
and the lowest selling price was:  $ _______ per _______ unit
Circle the unit associated with the above prices:
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
162
23a. Does the price you pay for live bait shrimp fluctuate during the year?
 1. Yes
2.  No 
23b. If yes to 23a, the highest price paid was: $ _______ per ______ unit
and the lowest price paid was:  $ _______ per _______ unit
Circle the unit associated with the above prices:
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
24.  What would you say is the most important factor in determining who you buy
your live bait shrimp from?  
1. Price
2. Quality
3. Availability
4. Consistency of supply
5. Availability of preferred sizes
6. Historical supplier
7. Other, please specify __________________
25.  Would you buy live bait shrimp from a farm raised source if the consistency,
quality of product, and price were equal to that of the wild caught supply?
1. Yes
2.  No 
26a. If farm-raised live bait shrimp resulted in holding tank deaths being reduced
by 50%, would you pay a higher amount for these bait shrimp?
1. Yes
2.  No 
26b. If you responded yes to 26a, what price would you pay for the farm-raised
shrimp that would reduce holding tank deaths by 50%?
$__________ per ______ (unit)
Circle the unit associated with the above price:
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
27.  What has the greatest impact on live bait shrimp sales in your area? 
1. Weather
2. Economic conditions
3. Shrimp supply
4. Quality of fishing
5. Tourist seasonality
6. Other, please specify _____               
163
28.  Are there any times during the year when there are no live shrimp available to
you?
1. Yes
2.  No 
If you answered ?Yes?, during which months are no shrimp available to you?
Check the box next to the month when live bait shrimp are not normally
available to you.
Live Bait Shrimp
Not Available
Live Bait Shrimp Not
Available
January July
February August
March September
April October
May November
June December
 
29a. Would you be willing to pay more to have a supply of live bait shrimp during
the periods of low or no availability?
1. Yes
2.  No 
29b. If you responded ?Yes? to 29a, what price would you pay for the supply of
farm-raised live bait shrimp during periods of low to no availability?
$__________ per ______ (unit)
30a. The following holidays and seasons have been mentioned to us as being times
when live bait shrimp supply was less than desired.
       If you could have guaranteed live bait shrimp available during THREE of these
low availability periods, which dates or seasons would you most want to have live
bait shrimp available?
For THREE of the following holidays/seasons, put a 1, 2, or 3 next to each to
indicate which is most important (1), second most important (2), and third most
important (3).
____ Labor Day
____ Memorial Day
____ Independence Day
____ Thanksgiving
____ Christmas
____ Weekends in spring
____ Weekends in fall
____ Beginning and ending of summer season
____ Other, please specify ___________________________________________
164
30b. How much would you be willing to pay for live bait shrimp during holiday or
seasonal periods?
$_____ per _____ (unit)
 Circle the unit associated with the above prices:
a. Pounds b. Thousand c. Dozen d. Gallon
e. Quart f.  Pints g. Other, please specify ___________
31.  Do you sell live bait shrimp to any of the following?  Circle all that apply.
1.  Charter boat captains
2.  Fishing guides
3.  Fishing rodeos or tournaments
4. Other, please specify ______________________________________________
For the following questions, please circle the appropriate response to the following
statements, using this scale:
1 = strongly disagree,  2 = disagree,  3 = undecided,  4 = agree, or  5 = strongly agree
32.  Over the past five years the demand for live bait shrimp has increased. Circle
one number.
1 2 3 4 5
33.  A supply of live bait shrimp is always available when needed. Circle one
number.
1 2 3 4 5
34.  If large shrimp were available I could sell them for a higher price. Circle one
number.
1 2 3 4 5
35.  Customers prefer to buy shrimp of various sizes. Circle one number
1 2 3 4 5
36.  Any additional comments you would like to add?
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this survey!
165