Marine cage culture and the environment: twenty-first century science informing a sustainable industry

Technological innovation has made it possible to grow marine finfish in the coastal and open ocean. Along with this opportunity comes environmental risk. As a federal agency charged with stewardship of the nation’s marine resources, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) requires tools to evaluate the benefits and risks that aquaculture poses in the marine environment, to implement policies and regulations which safeguard our marine and coastal ecosystems, and to inform production designs and operational procedures compatible with marine stewardship. There is an opportunity to apply the best available science and globally proven best management practices to regulate and guide a sustainable United States (U.S.) marine finfish farming aquaculture industry. There are strong economic incentives to develop this industry, and doing so in an environmentally responsible way is possible if stakeholders, the public and regulatory agencies have a clear understanding of the relative risks to the environment and the feasible solutions to minimize, manage or eliminate those risks. This report spans many of the environmental challenges that marine finfish aquaculture faces. We believe that it will serve as a useful tool to those interested in and responsible for the industry and safeguarding the health, productivity and resilience of our marine ecosystems. This report aims to provide a comprehensive review of some predominant environmental risks that marine fish cage culture aquaculture, as it is currently conducted, poses in the marine environment and designs and practices now in use to address these environmental risks in the U.S. and elsewhere. Today’s finfish aquaculture industry has learned, adapted and improved to lessen or eliminate impacts to the marine habitats in which it operates. What progress has been made? What has been learned? How have practices changed and what are the results in terms of water quality, benthic, and other environmental effects? To answer these questions we conducted a critical review of the large body of scientific work published since 2000 on the environmental impacts of marine finfish aquaculture around the world. Our report includes results, findings and recommendations from over 420 papers, primarily from peer-reviewed professional journals. This report provides a broad overview of the twenty-first century marine finfish aquaculture industry, with a targeted focus on potential impacts to water quality, sediment chemistry, benthic communities, marine life and sensitive habitats. Other environmental issues including fish health, genetic issues, and feed formulation were beyond the scope of this report and are being addressed in other initiatives and reports. Also absent is detailed information about complex computer simulations that are used to model discharge, assimilation and accumulation of nutrient waste from farms. These tools are instrumental for siting and managing farms, and a comparative analysis of these models is underway by NOAA.

Synthesis of marine ecosystem monitoring activities for the United States Virgin Islands: 1990-2009

The ecological integrity of coral reef ecosystems in the U.S. Caribbean is widely considered to have deteriorated in the last three decades due to a range of threats and stressors from both human and non-human processes Rothenberger 2008, Wilkinson 2008). In response to the threats to Caribbean coral reef ecosystems and other regions around the world, the United States Government authorized the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 to: (1) preserve, sustain, and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems; (2) promote the wise management and sustainable use of coral reef ecosystems to benefit local communities and the Nation; and (3) develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems. The Act also resulted in the formation of a National Coral Reef Action Strategy and a Coral Reef Conservation Program. The Action Strategy (Goal 2 of Action Theme 1) outlined the importance of monitoring and assessing coral reef health as a mechanism toward reducing many threats to these ecosystems. Monitoring was considered of high importance in addressing impacts from climate change; disease; overfishing; destructive fishing practices; habitat destruction; invasive species; coastal development; coastal pollution; sedimentation/runoff and overuse from tourism. The strategy states that successful coral reef ecosystem conservation requires adaptive management that responds quickly to changing environmental conditions. This, in turn, depends on monitoring programs that track trends in coral reef ecosystem health and reveal patterns in their condition before irreparable harm occurs. As such, monitoring plays a vital role in guiding and supporting the establishment of complex or potentially controversial management strategies such as no-take ecological reserves, fishing gear restrictions, or habitat restoration, by documenting the impacts of gaps in existing management schemes and illustrating the effectiveness of new measures over time. Long-term monitoring is also required to determine the effectiveness of various management strategies to conserve and enhance coral reef ecosystems.

Estimation of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) of hilsa (Tenualosa ilisha Ham.) in the Meghna river of Bangladesh

MSY per recruit of Tenualosa ilisha in the Meghna river was predicted as 112 g per recruit at the F(msy)=0.6/yr and at T(c)=0.6/yr. But Y/R=95 g per recruit was obtained at the existing fishing level, F=1.14/yr and at T(c)=0.6/yr. Existing F level was nearly double than the F(msy) level. Fishing pressure should be reduced immediately from F=1.14/yr to F(msy)=0.6/yr. F(msy)=1.14/yr was the same at first capture, T(c)=1.0, 1.2 and 1.4/yr, and MSY could be obtained as 142 g, 162 g and 176 g per recruit respectively. It is easier to change the first capture age (Tc) rather than changing off level. So, hilsa fishery manager may adopt F(msy)=1.14/yr while age at first capture must be increased from T(c)=0.6/yr (3 cm size group) to T(c)=1.4/yr (25 cm size group), by which 1.8 times production could be increased than the present production. MSY also possible to obtain as 201 g and 210 g per recruit at F(msy)=2.0/yr and 4.0/yr at T(c)=1.7/yr and 1.9/yr respectively. Under both the situations, hilsa production could be increased 2 times than the present production. To obtain the MSY=210 g per recruit the fishing level could be increased up to F=4.0/yr at T(c)=1.9/yr (34 cm size group). Economic point of view, hilsa fishery managers may choose to obtain the economic MSY as 201 g per recruit at F(msy)=2.0/yr and T(c)=1.7yr (31 cm size group) in the Meghna river of Bangladesh.

Voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries in the context of food security and poverty eradication: summary

The Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication (SSF Guidelines) were adopted by member countries of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and were officially approved as an international instrument in June 2014. What is very special about the SSF Guidelines is that it was created as a result of a very long history of the struggles of small-scale fishworkers around the world appealing for greater recognition of their status and their role in the fisheries sector of their countries. These Guidelines have 100 paragraphs which are distributed across 13 sections. This document is only a summation of the contents of the Guidelines. It was produced for ICSF by John Kurien, founder Member of ICSF, who has worked for the last four decades with small-scale fishing communities in many areas around the world, particularly in Kerala, India.