AT: Waste Open oceans solve waste concerns
Strasser 2014 (Annie-Rose [Senior Editor of ThinkProgress]; The new, innovative and more efficient way of feeding people; Apr 21; thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/21/3422486/big-ag-takes-to-the-ocean/; kdf)
Permitting challenges is just one of the reasons Belle would like to take more aquaculture offshore. Going further out, he explained, also helps to stabilize temperatures. And experts say that the open ocean can have other environmental benefits, too; one of the big criticisms of the industry is that plopping a bunch of fish out in the ocean means increasing the amount of waste being put into the seas. Open ocean environments can help deal with this concern by creating free-flowing water to distribute that waste evenly. “If I go five miles out to sea, I’m in 300 feet of water that has a quarter to a half-knot current that’s consistently moving clean water across it,” explains Hubbs-Sea World’s Don Kent. “So, the water itself doesn’t accumulate the materials that the fish are producing — the metabolites, the nitrogen, the phosphorous, that they’re putting out. And it disperses the carbon waste that they’ve got coming out of them in such a manner that it feeds bottom fauna on the bottom, but it doesn’t accumulate so densely that it overpowers them. This has all been demonstrated in models, computer simulations that allow us to say, ‘if I want to grow this many fish in this location with this current, what impact do we think we can predict on the bottom?’”
Fish Waste From Aquaculture Does Not Harm the Ecosystem
NOAA 12 (NOAA -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- a federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere. “10 Myths about U.S. Marine Aquaculture.” NOAA.gov. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/10myths.html. May, 2012)
Nutrient discharge from fish farming operations is organic and comes from two sources – uneaten feed and fish poop! Both of these are biodegradable and readily used by most aquatic ecosystems. In the U.S., decades of experience have led to net-pen aquaculture in balance with the ecosystem. This comes from effective management plans, proper siting, and regulatory regimes that ensure minimum impacts to the environment.
The plan provides a comprehensive federal framework allows for a sustainable and safe transition to offshore aquacultures
Johns 2013 (Kristen L. [USC School of Law; B.S. Environmental Systems: Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, University of California San Diego]; Farm fishing holes: Gaps in federal regulation offshore aquaculture; 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681; kdf)
I propose that a comprehensive and centralized framework for the offshore aquaculture industry be developed, and the roles of the relevant federal agencies and regulatory bodies be clarified. Without such a framework, U.S. aquaculturists are discouraged from moving their operations offshore due to the lack of any regulatory consistency or predictability, which not only makes it difficult to obtain sufficient investment capital, but also leaves anyoffshore operation vulnerable to legal challenge. In fact, the very first commercial offshore aquaculture project to be issued a fishing permit to operate in federal waters was challenged in federal court. n12 At the same time, regulations are essential to ensuring that the environmental effects of offshore aquaculture - including biological, organic, and chemical pollution, the impact of escaped farmed fish on native populations and marine ecosystems, and habitat modification - are minimized. This Note first explains why the offshore aquaculture industry needs to be regulated and why it is imperative that such regulations be put in place now. Specifically, Part II will explain why the ever-increasing demand for seafood will lead to a rise in aquaculture production. As the industry moves offshore into the federal waters of the open ocean (known as the exclusive economic zone, or "EEZ"), explicit regulations are needed to promote the offshoreindustry's development as well as to address its environmental effects. Part III highlights the deficiencies of the current regulatory system - namely, the problems of administrative overlap and ambiguous statutory bases for each agency's regulatory authority. Finally, Part IV recommends that Congress create, through new legislation, a comprehensive regulatory framework that identifies one federal agency as [*686] having primary regulatory authority over offshore aquaculture practices. Specifically, the proposed National Sustainable Offshore Act of 2011, which identifies the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ("NOAA") as the lead agency to regulateoffshore aquaculture, is the ideal legislation for such a task. Part V concludes.
AT: Biological pollution
The plan puts offshore farms under regulation, solves biological pollution
Johns 2013 (Kristen L. [USC School of Law; B.S. Environmental Systems: Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, University of California San Diego]; Farm fishing holes: Gaps in federal regulation offshore aquaculture; 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681; kdf)
Biological pollution may be caused by the unintentional release of farmed fish into the ocean, which can harm native fish populations in a number of ways. Nonnative farmed fish can compete with native fish for food, habitat, or spawning grounds. In the Pacific Northwest, escaped fish from salmon farms have threatened or displaced native salmon populations for years, n66 while many scientists believe nonnative escaped fish contributed to the extinction and endangerment of several native fish species, such as the bonytail and humpback chubs, the desert pupfish, the Gulf sturgeon, and the June and razorback suckers. n67 Because farmed fish are either selectively bred or artificially engineered to mature faster and [*695] grow larger, they can also alter the genetic makeup of wild populations by interbreeding, which can decrease that population's fitness. n68 Scientists and policymakers alike are already calling for regulation of genetically modified or "transgenic" fish. n69 Finally, escaped fish can create biological pollution by introducing parasites and pathogens to native stock, the incidences of which are increased by aquaculture's practice of raising large densities of fish in small areas. One deadly pathogen, infectious salmon anemia ("ISA"), was first detected in the United States in Maine in 2001, n70 and by 2011 had made its way to the West Coast. n71 The virus, highly contagious, can kill up to 70 percent of fish on infected farms and could "devastate" Pacific salmon stocks if left unchecked. n72 In fact, a 2007 outbreak of the virus was responsible for decimating the Chilean salmon aquaculture industry, reducing production by half and resulting in more than $ 2 billion in losses. n73 Notably, the risk of escaped fish may be higher in offshore aquaculture facilities since they are often more susceptible to damage by storms and are more likely to experience accidental releases of fish and their pathogens. In fact, net pens - the kind currently used in most offshore [*696] facilities - are "extremely prone to fish escapes" because of their vulnerability to storm damage, accidents during transfers, and damage from boats or other marine life. n74 Indeed, nearly one hundred thousand Atlantic salmon escaped from net pens in Washington in 1996, with another three hundred thousand escaping from a single farm in 1997. n75 Any potential offshore facility, therefore, must be regulated and managed to avoid this risk.
AT: Deadzones 80 percent of the chemicals that contribute to dead zones come from unregulated aquacultures
Johns 2013 (Kristen L. [USC School of Law; B.S. Environmental Systems: Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, University of California San Diego]; Farm fishing holes: Gaps in federal regulation offshore aquaculture; 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681; kdf)
Aquaculture systems can contribute to organic pollution and eutrophication of aquatic environments by discharging fish wastes and uneaten fish feed into the water column. n76 Eutrophication, or nutrient loading, occurs when a body of water becomes enriched with organic material, which stimulates nutrient concentrations to harmful levels. n77 High levels of nitrogen and phosphorus, the main nutrients in fish food, are considered to be the primary causes of environmental degradation in marine waters - contributing to low dissolved oxygen levels ("dead zones"), murky water, seagrass and coral death, fish kills, and possibly harmful algal blooms. n78 These nutrients are deposited from marine aquaculture systems directly into the water and are free to escape into the marine environment: as much as 70 percent of total phosphorus and 80 percent of total nitrogen found in the feed added to marine fish farms may be discharged. n79 Although offshore facilities may decrease the instances of eutrophication because strong currents in the open ocean can dilute or disperse these organic wastes and nutrients, the risk of environmental degradation is serious for facilities that are located in shallow waters or in weak current systems. Indeed, one study found that 80 percent of the nitrogen and phosphorous added to marine fish farms contribute to eutrophication. n80
The plan solves for chemical pollution, which causes disease amongst humans and fish
Johns 2013 (Kristen L. [USC School of Law; B.S. Environmental Systems: Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, University of California San Diego]; Farm fishing holes: Gaps in federal regulation offshore aquaculture; 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681; kdf)
Chemical pollution is caused by the extensive use of antibiotics, pesticides, herbicides, hormones, parasiticides, and fertilizers in [*697] aquaculture operations. Once these chemicals are added to marine farms, they readily disperse into the environment and can impact nontarget species. n81 For example, one parasiticide used in marine aquaculture systems to kill sea lice - but which is toxic to marine invertebrates - can remain in the water column for up to five hours and travel up to a half mile from the application site. n82 Furthermore, overuse of antibiotics in fish farms may pose a health risk to farmed fish, native fish, and even humans. n83 One recent study found that excessive use of antibiotics in fish farms in Chile and Norway has led to an antibiotic resistance in several of the aquatic bacteria causing infection and disease. n84 Because many of the bacteria found in the aquatic environment belong to the same group as human pathogens, scientists are now worried that "resistant genes from bacteria in aquaculture have spread to human pathogens." n85 This threat is taken seriously by the U.S. government: the Fish and Wildlife Service is required to recommend to the Food and Drug Administration which drugs should or should not be allowed for use in private aquaculture projects. n86
The plan provides the regulatory framework to allow for sustainable development
Johns 2013 (Kristen L. [USC School of Law; B.S. Environmental Systems: Ecology, Behavior and Evolution, University of California San Diego]; Farm fishing holes: Gaps in federal regulation offshore aquaculture; 86 S. Cal. L. Rev. 681; kdf)
Offshore aquaculture has the potential to become a significant aspect of U.S. seafood production. Yet, without an effective regulatory framework in place, incentives to participate in offshore activities are few and the industry will flounder. At the same time, an ineffective regulatory scheme will allow the environmental risks of offshore aquaculture to go unchecked, which could have serious consequences for both marine and human environments. For these reasons, it is imperative that a precautionary national framework be in place in advance of industry development. Part III below will examine whether an effective framework does in fact already exist.
AT: Overfishing
, Peter F 2011. is a marine ecologist with over 40 years experience in tropical coastal ecosystems, particularly coral reefs.Our Dying Planet: An Ecologist's View of the Crisis We Face. Berkeley: U of California,. Print.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZRQTYRA3OI4C&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=aquaculture+replaces+overfished+stock&source=bl&ots=OLLHP3M7mP&sig=8gylmWjAeP3IMIDFzSTJeM_mzLo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nbyxU8eiMIjl8AH-l4DgAg&ved=0CCQQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=aquaculture%20replaces%20overfished%20stock&f=false
Aquaculture is an enormous and growing industry around the world. In practice and effect, it is very different from fishing, although many of the fish, crustaceans, and shellfish we consume today are aquaculture products, and it is often difficult to tell the difference. Extensive areas of freshwater ponds and lakes and coastal wetlands are employed to raise aquaculture species, and pen culture (also termed sea ranching) is extending aquaculture out across the continental shelves. A logical and commonly held view is that just as agriculture replaced hunting and gathering as a much more efficient way of acquiring terrestrial food products, aquaculture will eventually replace fishing of wild stocks. It is quite true that aquaculture has become important and will continue to grow in importance, and it is probably also true that our seafood diet will become predominantly based on aquaculture species over the next few years. Indeed, the only way of further increasing our global consumption of seafood is through increased aquaculture. But it would be unwise to anticipate that a shift to aquaculture will permit us to market ever-greater quantities of seafood while permitting natural marine systems to recover from the present state of overfishing.
Aquaculture will crowdout overfishing
Naylor, R. L. et.all (2000). Standford Professor, Environmental Earth System Science; Associate Professor of Economics, by courtesy and William Wrigley Senior Fellow; FSI and Woods Institute Senior FellowEffect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature, 405(6790), 1017-1024. “Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies”
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6790/full/4051017a0.html#B4
Market dynamics affecting both the supply and demand for aquaculture products differ sharply among types of fish. Expanding aquaculture production can alleviate pressure on wild fisheries stocks; for example, increasing the production of farmed fish that compete directly with wild fish (such as shrimp, salmon and molluscs) reduces prices and creates conditions that can lower investments in fishing fleets and fishing effort over time. Other farmed fish, such as tilapia, milkfish and channel catfish, provide alternatives to ocean fish such as cod, hake, haddock and pollock. Because niche markets have started to develop for several types of wild-caught fish, however, capture rates have remained high even as the production of viable substitutes has increased4. The ability of the aquaculture sector to replace or provide market alternatives for ocean catches depends significantly on the economics and policies of fisheries.
Aquacultures can preserve endangered aquatic species and re-store damaged marine ecosystems damaged by overfishing
John Corbin 2010, President at Aquaculture Planning and Advocacy LLC and advises the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce on the management of the living marine resources and fisheries and aquaculture development."Marine Stock Enhancement, a Valuable Extension of Expanded U.S. Marine Aquaculture." Marine Technology Society Journal 44.3 (2010): 113-18.
Marine aquaculture technologies can be developed to produce a variety of organisms that could help preserve endangered aquatic species and re-store damaged marine ecosystems. Bottlenecks exist in closing the life cycle of many species of interest, for example, a food small enough for first feeding of some marine fish, but research is underway on a few species, largely at public and private aquariums. Many of the larger aquariums, for example, the Georgia Aquarium, have breeding programs for the rarer aquatic species they have on display so that they do not have to continuously capture wild specimens. In this context, some aquaria are also working with threatened and endangered organisms to develop propagation technology that could be used to restock and re-build populations that are or could be in crisis and view this as an important role in the 21st century (Garibaldi, 2001). For example, the Seattle Aquar-ium (2010) carries out genetics research on the leafy seadragon, an endemicspe-cies ofAustralia that is endangered. The Waikiki Aquarium (WA) was the first facility to culture the Chambered Nau-tilus, considered a living fossil and threatened by overfishing for its beauti-ful shell (WA, 2010). Cultured organisms could also be used to restore ecosystems damaged by natural and man-made disasters. For example, the WA currently has the oldest and largest collection of liv-ing corals in the United States. The aquarium has regularly been asked to use its Hawaiian coral stock to help the State in reestablishing coral colonies damaged by ship groundings (WA, 2010).
Aquaculture restores ecosystems damaged by overfishing
John Corbin 2010, President at Aquaculture Planning and Advocacy LLC and advises the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce on the management of the living marine resources and fisheries and aquaculture development."Marine Stock Enhancement, a Valuable Extension of Expanded U.S. Marine Aquaculture." Marine Technology Society Journal 44.3 (2010): 113-18.
Clearly, releasing aquaculture produced stock to enhance wild populations of fish and shellfish and restore distressed ecosystems or habitats could be a valuable tool to incorporate into existing fishery and habitat management approaches. Moreover, the United States has a growing cadre of capable researchers and research institutions that are developing mass rearing hatchery technologies for species of economic and ecological importance. A few state stocking programs using the responsible approach are demonstrating the positive influences of wild stock enhancement today.
AT: Contaminated
NOAA 12 (NOAA -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- a federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere. “10 Myths about U.S. Marine Aquaculture.” NOAA.gov. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/10myths.html. May, 2012)
No farmed fish are on any “avoid” list due to mercury or other pollutants. These harmful compounds enter and concentrate in organisms largely through what they eat. The FDA and state Departments of Agriculture conduct inspections as well as collect and analyze feed and fish samples to ensure that feeds and the fish that consume them meet strict requirements. Formulated feed ingredients used in aquaculture are regularly monitored to avoid possible contamination.
AT: Antibiotics Farmed Fish No Longer Contain Antibiotics In US
NOAA 12 (NOAA -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- a federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere. “10 Myths about U.S. Marine Aquaculture.” NOAA.gov. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/10myths.html. May, 2012)
Antibiotic use in aquaculture has all but disappeared for species like salmon in most countries and is rare in others due to better husbandry and vaccines that have been developed for the major bacterial diseases. While good management practices and vaccines alone are usually enough to prevent or control disease, a farmer may, in consultation with a licensed veterinarian, use a limited number of aquatic animal drugs including antibiotics, in the case where they have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat specific conditions. The use of antibiotics for non-therapeutic purposes in aquaculture is prohibited by law.
AT: Disease Aquaculture Don’t Causes Diseases in Wild Fish
NOAA 12 (NOAA -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- a federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere. “10 Myths about U.S. Marine Aquaculture.” NOAA.gov. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/10myths.html. May, 2012)
Pathogens and disease are a fact of life with all forms of animal production, but the mere presence of a pathogen does not necessarily result in a disease event. The animal host needs to be in a distressed/immunosuppressed condition for disease to take hold. In the wild, disease outbreaks are controlled/prevented by predators picking off sick individuals within the population, movement of the fish to better environmental conditions (better oxygen, optimum temperatures), and other ecological interactions.¶ On fish farms, disease is kept at bay by vaccination, good nutrition, using specific pathogen-free fingerlings, biosecurity, and husbandry practices that minimize stress. The use of theraputants is a last resort. Pathogen transfer, particularly bacteria and virus, from cultured finfish to wild finfish that results in clinical disease and mortality is a rare event; however, there are examples of this phenomenon with parasites. Aquatic animal health practices include measures to reduce risks of disease in both cultured and wild fish.
AT: Sea Lice Farmed salmon Don’t Contain Sea Lice
NOAA 12 (NOAA -National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- a federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and the atmosphere. “10 Myths about U.S. Marine Aquaculture.” NOAA.gov. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/10myths.html. May, 2012)
The parasite of greatest concern to salmon farmers is sea lice. Historically, sea lice occasionally have been a problem for farmed salmon in the State of Maine – where they exist naturally in the wild. In contrast, sea lice are not a problem for Washington State, where the water is less saline. Maine has made great strides in minimizing the incidence of sea lice by adopting an integrated pest management strategy similar to that used by organic farmers. This strategy includes reducing stocking density, bay-wide coordination among farms, early and coordinated treatments, and letting sites lie fallow between harvests.
Share with your friends: |
