Offshore Aquaculture Initiatives

There has been a lot of recent attention on the potential for aquaculture in the federal waters outside of state jurisdiction, 3 to 200 miles offshore. While industry has generally met these initiatives with a certain amount of skepticism, because they question the economic and technical viability of these waters. Regulators and environmentalists see the offshore environment as an answer to the user conflicts that tend to dominate lease locations in the increasingly developed near-shore waters.

Two unrelated efforts that would give more authority over marine aquaculture to NOAA are coming to a head. NOAA has recently released a Draft Code of Conduct for Responsible Aquaculture in the EEZ and is seeking comment from concerned stakeholders by October 23. The 40 page text of the Draft Code can be downloaded off the web at aquaculture.noaa.gov. The Code contains recommendations on siting and operations that are variously referred to as "soft regulations" or "voluntary." The Code covers subjects such as the disposal of wastes or mortalities; the use of therapeutics, non-native species or feeds containing fish meal.

In a move that industry critics have called inappropriate, the authors also use The Draft Code to recommend increased authority and support for NOAA in an apparent pitch to make that agency the lead regulatory agency in marine waters. It is clear that the draft Code will be used by states to justify changes in their state regulations, so everyone with a stake in marine aquaculture (inshore or offshore) should take the time to read it and submit comments.

The second EEZ initiative is a Sea Grant-funded project that has been working for the past three years trying to define an Operational Framework for Aquaculture in the EEZ. This group has been trying to make recommendations on who should be in charge of permitting and leasing in federal waters. Currently no federal agency has the legal authority to grant aquaculture leases outside of state waters. In a preliminary report last year the group recommended new legislation authorizing a new Office of Aquaculture in NOAA that would share permitting, leasing and enforcement responsibilities with the Army Corps. Existing authorities over aquaculture such as EPA's discharge permits or NMFS control over endangered species or marine mammals would remain intact.

The group has just developed a draft and is holding workshops around the country to take comments from stakeholders. I have been working with the group and have been trying to make sure that the plan that develops is one that works for industry. The one point I have been consistently trying to hammer home is this: We have some of the best environmental protection regulations in the world, but if we make the costs of those regulations too onerous, then investment capitol will simply take their dollars elsewhere. Chile, Canada, Norway and China are offering new projects millions of dollars of subsidies - and all we can seem to talk about is how much of a royalty to charge and how tight the regulations should be.

If we drive off investors to nations with lesser environmental protections then we are simply exporting our environmental problems to other parts of the world. Sebastian Belle from Maine's Aquaculture Association calls this "eco-racism." We then turn around and subsidize those countries when we import $6 billion in fish! -RBR