Follow up to "The simple truth"

On my last post, "The simple truth," someone anonymous made the following comment: "Like any other human activity, we can screw it up. It's up to us to do it right. It makes no sense to foul your own nest."

I began my own short response, which quickly grew into something more fitting as its own post. So here it is.

Thanks, anonymous for your comment. Of course, you're right. People can screw it up. And there are plenty of examples out there of how NOT to operate a fish farm, from over use of pesticides in Asian fish farms to the overcrowding in the Chilean salmon farming industry that led to its own demise. But those opposed to open-ocean fish farming in this country use those examples, plus the argument that people screw it up, to oppose any expansion of this industry, no matter the motives of the fish farmers. Using the same logic, those same people should oppose any industry that impacts the environment.

We need to evaluate each fish farm on an individual basis: Does it operate in as sustainable manner as possible? Does it make efforts to reduce disease and subsequent use of antibiotics by farming at a low density? Does it source its feed from vendors who use fish meal and oil from sustainably-managed fisheries? Is it using Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture?

Then, we as consumers, make the choice of where we want to buy our fish, just like we do with any other farmed product. Do we want to buy fish from a Chinese farm with questionable practices (80% of seafood is imported in this country and the FDA inspects roughly 2% of it)? Or do we want to buy a fish from a local fish farm that makes an effort to operate in as sustainable a manner as possible?

I agree that people can screw up. But I also believe some people have the right intentions and are working to farm fish in a sustainable manner.

The simple truth

"There is nothing inherently unsustainable with aquaculture as long as the producers choose to operate on a sustainable basis."

This simple comment -- made by University of Stavanger Professor Frank Asche, in recent remarks at the AquaVision conference in Stavanger, Norway -- pretty much sums up the issue for me. Like in any industry, it's the people who decide whether they operate in a sustainable matter. In the case of aquaculture, it behooves people operating fish farms to do it in a sustainable way because, in the long run, fish farmers need clean water and healthy fish.

Senator cites Gulf oil spill to stymie aquaculture

Citing the Gulf oil spill, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) on May 25 introduced legislation aimed at halting any federal attempts to set up a regulatory framework to permit offshore fish farms in U.S. waters. The bill -- the Research in Aquaculture Opportunity and Responsibility Act of 2010 -- could throw a wrench in NOAA's plans to set up a national offshore aquaculture policy.

Vitter claims the Gulf and its marine ecosystem, as well as its recreational and commercial fisheries, are under too much pressure because of the oil spill to be subjected to the potential additional stresses of fish farms. (Here's his press release.)

The irony, however, is that Vitter opposes President Obama's moratorium on offshore oil drilling in the Gulf. Apparently, the aquaculture industry puts more stress on the marine environment than the oil industry. As noted recently over at SeafoodSource.com, fish farms don't explode.

Vitter's bill would do the following:

• Prohibit any federal agency or Regional Fishery Management Council from developing or approving of "any rule, regulation, fishery management plan, or fishery management plan amendment to permit or regulate offshore aquaculture" for three and a half years.

• Provide grants for research related to land-based recirculating aquaculture systems.

• Require the U.S. Secretary of Commerce to prepare a report on the environmental and economic impacts of open ocean aquaculture on native fish species, recreational and commercial fisheries, coastal communities, and land-based recirculating aquaculture systems.

• And, finally, require a report be written on the economic potential of land-based aquaculture systems.

I'm sensing Sen. Vitter is partial to land-based aquaculture systems. What do you think?

Food & Water Watch, the ubiquitous opponent of all things mariculture, quickly threw its support behind Vitter's bill. "Given the current challenges facing the Gulf, it is important that we avoid introducing any additional factors that could jeopardize the region's socio-economic or environmental health," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch.