development of a policy framework for offshore marine aquaculture in the 3-200 mile us ocean zone

177 Pages·2001·3.49 MB·English

by  Marine Policy 3

DEVELOPMENT OF A
POLICY FRAMEWORK
FOR OFFSHORE
MARINE AQUACULTURE
IN THE 3-200 MILE
U.S. OCEAN ZONE
Prepared by:
Biliana Cicin-Sain, University of Delaware
Susan M. Bunsick, University of Delaware
Rick DeVoe, South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium
Tim Eichenberg, Legal Consultant, San Francisco
John Ewart, Delaware Aquaculture Resource Center
Harlyn Halvorson, University of Massachusetts
Robert W. Knecht, University of Delaware
Robert Rheault, Moonstone Oysters, Rhode Island
Center for the Study of Marine Policy
University of Delaware
DEVELOPMENT OF A POLICY FRAMEWORK
FOR OFFSHORE MARINE AQUACULTURE
IN THE 3-200 MILE U.S. OCEAN ZONE
Prepared by:
Biliana Cicin-Sain, University of Delaware
Susan M. Bunsick, University of Delaware
Rick DeVoe, South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium
Tim Eichenberg, Legal Consultant, San Francisco
John Ewart, Delaware Aquaculture Resource Center
Harlyn Halvorson, University of Massachusetts
Robert W. Knecht, University of Delaware
Robert Rheault, Moonstone Oysters, Rhode Island
Center for the Study of Marine Policy
University of Delaware

OFFSHOREMARINEAQUACULTURE | i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY 1 FindingsandRecommendationsofPast
StudiesonThreeMajorIssues 38
1. MARINEAQUACULTUREINTHE
AbsenceofPolicyFramework 38
UNITEDSTATES: POTENTIALAND
OBSTACLES 9 EnvironmentalIssues 40
Introduction 9 PublicTrustandConflictsIssues 43
MajorPurposeandOrientationoftheStudy 10 Conclusion 44
TheAbsenceofaPolicyFramework
forOffshoreAquaculture 11 3. ANALYSISOFPASTANDCURRENT
EFFORTSTOESTABLISHANDOPERATE
IssuesConfrontingMarineAquaculture 13 MARINEAQUACULTUREFACILITIES
INTHEUNITEDSTATES 45
AquacultureintheUnitedStates 13
ExperienceswithOffshoreMarineAquaculture 45
NatureoftheMarineAquacultureIndustry 13
AmericanNorwegianFishFarm,Inc. 46
ExampleofEconomicSuccessofOffshore
AquacultureinJapan 15 SeaSteadProject 50
TheNatureoftheIssuesConfrontingthe SeaFishMariculture 53
DevelopmentofMarineAquaculture
OpenOceanDemonstrationProjects 54
intheUnitedStates 17
LessonsLearned 59
OtherImpedimentstoIndustryDevelopment 19
ArmyCorpsofEngineersPermitting 59
MajorQuestionsintheGovernance
ofOffshoreAquaculture 20
FisheryManagementCouncilApproval 60
OrganizationoftheReport 22
IntegrationwithOtherUses: Research 60
2. REVIEWOFPASTSTUDIES IntegrationwithOtherUses: CommercialFishing 60
ONMARINEAQUACULTURE 25
SynergywithOtherUses:
Introduction 25 OffshoreOilandGasProduction 61
HistoricalOverviewofMajorStudies 25 MovingAhead: FederalOpenOcean
DemonstrationProjects 61
LayingthePolicyGroundwork 26
TheBigGaps: AddressingtheSecurity
AssessingtheTechnologicalProspects ofTenure,PublicTrust,andEnvironmentalIssues 61
forOffshoreAquaculture 27
TheBottomLine: NoActiveCommercial
EnvironmentalPerspectives 28 Projectsinthe3-200MileOceanZone 62
DocumentingtheCurrentPolicyFramework 28
PolicyDevelopment 29
ii | OFFSHORE MARINEAQUACULTURE
4. THEFEDERALFRAMEWORKFOR StateEffortstoCoordinate/Streamline
ADMINISTRATIONOFOFFSHORE AquaculturePermittingProcess 96
MARINEAQUACULTURE 63
InstitutionalBodiesCreatedtoAddress
Introduction 63 AquacultureIssues 97
TheFederalGovernmentandAquaculture 64 StatePoliciestoAddress
Environmental/BiologicalRisks 98
TheNationalAquacultureActandthe
JointSubcommitteeonAquaculture 64 IncorporatingAquacultureinStateLegislation
andRegulation 99
CurrentPrograms 65
IntegrationofMarineAquacultureinState
TheFederalGovernmentandthe
CoastalZoneManagement 100
ManagementofOffshoreMarineAquaculture 66
ApplicableLessonsfromCoastal
OverviewofFederalAgencyRoles 70
StateExperiences 102
TheKeyAgenciesCurrentlyInvolved
Planning 102
inMarineAquaculture 73
Permitting/Leasing 102
RegulatoryAgencies 73
Operations 102
AgencieswithMixedRoles 77
Termination 103
Conclusions: ProblemsandGaps
thatNeedtoBeAddressed 82 Conclusion 103
LimitationsofExistingStatutoryAuthorities:
6. POLICYDEVELOPMENTON
FewExplicitReferencesto 82
OFFSHOREAQUACULTURE:
Conflicts 83 LESSONSFROMTHE
INTERNATIONALARENA 105
MajorGaps 84
TheExperiencesofOtherNationswith
OffshoreMarineAquaculture 106
5. RELEVANTEXPERIENCES
FROMTHEU.S.COASTALSTATES 85
Norway 106
Introduction 85
UnitedKingdom(Scotland) 108
SummaryOverviewofState
Ireland 114
AquaculturePolicies 86
Canada 116
DesignationofaLeadAgency
forMarineAquaculture 88 Chile 118
CurrentLeasingPolicy 88 Australia 121
AdministrativeRequirements 88 NewZealand 124
States’CritiquesofCurrentPolicyFramework 89 Japan 127
LearningfromtheStates: Examples PolicyGuidancefromInternationalEntities 129
ofGoodPracticesinU.S.CoastalStates 93
FAOCodeofConductforResponsibleFisheries 129
StatePolicyforAquacultureLeases/Permits
inOpenWaters 93 FAOAquacultureGuidelines 131
OFFSHORE MARINEAQUACULTURE | iii
ThePrecautionaryApproach 131 4.3FederalFundingforAquaculture,SelectedAgencies
ICESCodeofPractice 133 4.4Aquaculture-RelatedProgramsintheFederal
Government
SustainableDevelopment 134
4.5AgencieswithaRoleinOffshoreMarineAquaculture
LessonsLearnedRelevanttothePolicy
andRegulatoryFramework forAquaculture 4.6StatutoryAuthoritiesfortheRegulationofOffshore
intheU.S.EEZ 135 MarineAquaculture,byAgency
4.7ExplicitReferencestoAquacultureinCurrentU.S.
7. PROPOSEDPOLICYFRAMEWORKFOR
Statutes
OFFSHOREMARINEAQUACULTURE 137
5.1SummaryofMarineAquaculturePoliciesinCoastal
Introduction 137 States
SummaryofIssuesRaisedinPastStudies 5.2TypesofMarineAquacultureLeasesOfferedinState
andExperiencesandCriteriaforEvaluation 138 Waters
CriteriaGuidingRecommendedPolicyFramework 139 5.3StatePermitting/LeasingRequirementsforMarine
Aquaculture
ProposedPolicyFramework 140
5.4SuggestionsforFederalOffshoreMarineAquaculture
OutlineofMajorFeaturesoftheProposed Policy
PolicyFramework 140
5.5RelationshipofAquaculturetoStateCoastalZone
Planning 141 ManagementPlans
Permitting/Leasing 143
OperationandMonitoringofFacilities 148
AbandonmentofFacilities 149
Conclusion 150
BIBLIOGRAPHY 151
APPENDIX1. LISTOFADVISORY
COMMITTEEMEMBERS 161
APPENDIX2. SURVEYOFU.S.
COASTALSTATES 163
3.4SiteSelectionCriteriaforNewHampshireOpenOcean
AquacultureDemonstrationProject
3.5PermittingProcessforNewHampshireProject
4.1JointSubcommitteeonAquaculture
4.2MajorIssuesAddressedintheNationalAquaculture
DevelopmentPlan
CSMP- University of Delaware -
iv | OFFSHORE MARINEAQUACULTURE
CSMP- University of Delaware -
OFFSHORE MARINEAQUACULTURE | v
FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
MarineaquacultureisapromisingnewuseofoffshorewatersintheUnitedStates. Asoneofthenewer
usesoftheocean,marineaquacultureneedstobedevelopedinanenvironmentallysustainablemanner
takingintoaccountimpactsthatmayresultforoceanresources,environments,andusers. However,at
present,thereisnoexplicitpolicyframeworkatthefederallevelintheU.S.formanagingandproviding
guidanceforthedevelopmentofoffshoremarine aquaculture.
This report addresses issues that must be confronted in the development of this new industry;
especially those related to environmental impacts, effects on other users, and issues related to the
exclusive private use of public waters. The study draws lessons from past efforts to address these
concerns, and from the experience of coastal states and other nations in managing offshore marine
aquaculture. A policy framework for managing aquaculture operations in federal waters in the U.S.
ExclusiveEconomicZoneisproposed.
This work is the product of the research and discussions among a diverse and multidisciplinary
researchteam,includingscholarsandpractitionersinthefieldsofmarinescience,aquacultureindustry,
ocean policy, and environmental law. It is interesting to note that, notwithstanding the variety of
perspectives and backgrounds represented on the research team, after extended discussions, the team
was able to develop a broad consensus on the policy framework proposed here, although not always
agreeingoneverydetailoftheframework.
Much of the research and the writing of the report was carried out by the University of Delaware
members of the research team (Susan Bunsick, Biliana Cicin-Sain, John Ewart, and Robert Knecht)
withvaluableinputfromRichardDeVoe(marineaquaculture,SouthCarolinaSeaGrantConsortium),
Tim Eichenberg (environmental law, legal consultant, San Francisco), Harlyn Halvorson (marine
science and biotechnology, University of Massachusetts, Boston, and Robert Rheault (marine
aquacultureindustry,RhodeIsland). ManythanksareduetoDanielleM.Tesch,CenterfortheStudyof
MarinePolicy,forherassistanceintheproject,especiallyintheanalysispresentedinChapter2ofthe
report,toJorgeA.Gutierrez,CenterfortheStudyofMarinePolicy,fortechnicalediting,graphics,and
formatting of the report, and to Catherine Johnston, Center Program Coordinator, for managerial
support.
The project benefitted greatly from the advice and feedback provided by an advisory committee
composed of distinguished individuals from the Congress, state and federal agencies, aquaculture
industry, fishing industry, and environmental groups: Charles Chesnutt, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers; John Corbin, Hawaii Department of Agriculture; Tom Ellis, National Association of State
Aquaculture Coordinators; Jean Flemma, Resources Committee, U.S. House of Representatives;
Rebecca Goldburg, Environmental Defense; Betsy Hart, National Aquaculture Association; Roger
CSMP- University of Delaware -
vi | OFFSHOREMARINEAQUACULTURE
McManus, Center for Marine Conservation; Luke Nachbar, Office of Senator Judd Gregg (New
Hampshire); Pietro Parravano, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations; Jeff Peterson,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; David Redlin, Office of Senator Bill Roth (Delaware); Ed
Rhodes, National Marine Fisheries Service; Louise Scura, World Bank; Margaret Spring, Commerce
Committee, U.S. Senate; Boyce Thorne-Miller, SeaWeb; and Ken Turgeon, Minerals Management
Service. Many thanks are due to the members of the advisory committee for their time and energy in
providinginitialguidanceontheprojectandcommentsondraftreports.
This work has also benefitted significantly from the input and comments provided by Meryl
Broussard, Chair of the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture (JSA), Ben Mieremet, NOAA Office of
Sustainable Development and Intergovernmental Affairs, Jim McVey, National Sea Grant Office, and
by the input provided by members of the JSA during several JSA meetings in 1999-2000 when the
projectwasdiscussed.
FundingforthestudycamefromtheNationalSeaGrantTechnologyProgramthroughtheDelaware
SeaGrantCollegeProgram;thissupportisacknowledgedwithsincerethanks.
Notwithstanding all the valuable inputs received from various reviewers, the members of the
researchteamaresolelyresponsibleforthecontentsofthereport. Theviewsexpressedherealsodonot
representthoseofthefundingagency.
Dr.Biliana Cicin-Sain
ProjectDirector
CSMP-UniversityofDelaware-
OFFSHOREMARINEAQUACULTURE | vii
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 DefinitionsofSustainability 3.3 LocationofUniversityofNewHampshireProject
1.2 ThePrecautionaryApproach 3.4 OceanSparSeaStation
1.3 MajorTypesof OffshoreAquacultureOperations 3.5 TubeUsedinStockingSeaCage inHawaii
1.4 U.S.AquacultureProductionand Value,1992 6.1 FAOCodeofConductContainstheMajorProvisions
and1997 forAquaculture
1.5 ScallopLandingsintheUnitedStatesandJapan 6.2 AQuestionnaireBasedontheFAOCodeofConduct
forResponsibleFisheries—Article9
3.1 ExampleofaNetpen/BargeConfiguration
3.2 LocationofSeaSteadProject
LIST OF TABLES
1.1 EstimatedU.S.AquacultureProduction,1992-1997 4.4Aquaculture-RelatedProgramsintheFederal
Government
2.1SummaryofMajorPastStudiesRelevanttoMarine
Aquaculture 4.5AgencieswithaRoleinOffshoreMarineAquaculture
3.1SummaryofOffshoreAquacultureProjectsinthe 4.6StatutoryAuthoritiesfortheRegulationofOffshore
UnitedStates MarineAquaculture,byAgency
3.2IssuesRaisedbytheConservationLawFoundationina 4.7ExplicitReferencestoAquacultureinCurrentU.S.
SuitAgainsttheAmericanNorwegianFishFarm,Inc. Statutes
Permit
5.1SummaryofMarineAquaculturePoliciesinCoastal
3.3EventsAssociatedwiththePermittingProcessforthe States
SeaSteadProject
5.2TypesofMarineAquacultureLeasesOfferedinState
3.4SiteSelectionCriteriaforNewHampshireOpenOcean Waters
AquacultureDemonstrationProject
5.3StatePermitting/LeasingRequirementsforMarine
3.5PermittingProcessforNewHampshireProject Aquaculture
4.1JointSubcommitteeonAquaculture 5.4SuggestionsforFederalOffshoreMarineAquaculture
Policy
4.2MajorIssuesAddressedintheNationalAquaculture
DevelopmentPlan 5.5RelationshipofAquaculturetoStateCoastalZone
ManagementPlans
4.3FederalFundingforAquaculture,SelectedAgencies
CSMP-UniversityofDelaware-