Imagine thousands of salmon or tuna living in steel
cages 20 feet below the surface of the ocean, 10 miles
off the Mendocino Coast.
That vision could become reality under a bill
proposed to Congress by President George Bush last week.
Bush's plan to create a process that would allow fish
farms from 3-200 miles offshore came at the same time as
a broad ocean health bill was introduced by Sen. Barbara
Boxer.
The national media are predicting the Bush and Boxer
bills could conflict over aquaculture-fish farms.
Environmentalists and some commercial fishing groups
support the Boxer bill, while the Bush bill is opposed
by both groups.
Fish farms in California could have potentially
devastating effects on our already
ailing coastal community and salmon fishery. Especially
if they are outside state jurisdiction, said Mike Hudson
of the Small Boat Commercial Salmon Fishermen's
Association.
"We have witnessed displacement of local fishing
fleets by fish farm operations in other countries. What
seems to be a boon of opportunity at first turns into
welfare lines soon enough," Hudson said.
Boxers comprehensive plan would turn the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) into a
freestanding scientific agency, responsible for reviving
fisheries and finding comprehensive solutions to
problems such as pollution and invasive species.
The Boxer bill would yank NOAA away from the
Department of Commerce and its current mission to make
money off the oceans.
Boxer's bill would prohibit NOAA from issuing any
leases for fish farms, wave energy plants or wind energy
facilities in the open ocean until national standards
are written that consider the downsides for the ocean
and fisheries.
Boxer's plan would use revenues from such leases to
help displaced fishermen, among other ocean-related
purposes. It would also establish standards for reducing
bycatch (unintentional catch) and create new individual
fishing quotas.
Fishing groups have generally opposed the limits,
which have ended up being traded as commodities in the
past.
The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations (PCFFA) has backed the Boxer bill.
David Sandretti, Boxer's press secretary, said the
quotas would be tied to the bycatch and fish would be
available to small commercial operations and
recreational fishermen.
Officials interviewed Friday at NOAA were unfamiliar
with the Boxer ocean bill, which had been on front pages
for several days at that point.
In boosting Bush's bill, they pointed to the fact
that 70 percent of all seafood is imported currently and
about 40 percent comes from foreign fish farms.
Michael Rubino of NOAA said Americans currently
consume 16 pounds of seafood per year each, totaling 6
million metric tons. He said by 2025 another 2 million
metric tons will be needed each year.
"This bill creates a framework where we can grow
more of our own seafood, rather than importing it,"
Rubino said.
He said the big Pacific storms and deep Northern
California offshore waters wouldn't preclude a fish
farm. Open ocean fish farming in Puerto Rico wasn't
disturbed by hurricanes last year, he said.
The Bush bill was sent from the White House to
Congress, where sponsors from Hawaii and Alaska
introduced it on Friday, according to NOAA.
"This is intended to complement not compete with
[commercial fishing]," Rubino said, pointing to
evidence the market will grow.
Salmon is one of the worlds most farmed fish, with
dozens of farms along the Canadian Coast and massive
operations in the North Sea.
The United States has had limited salmon farming only
in Maine and Washington so far, with other states not
being keen on the idea.
The Bush bill would create a permitting process for
fish and shellfish farms in federal waters. Rubino knew
of no current plans to create any tuna or salmon farms
in Northern California.
"There is a lot of salmon on the market right
now," he said.
Wayne Scott of Fort Bragg, the former head of the
Salmon Trollers Marketing Association, said fish farms can
create disease that can spread to wild
fish stocks. He said when fish are packed that close
together they often
require antibiotics to prevent disease.
"You don't want that in the food stock," he
said.
Scott questioned the idea that aquaculture can be an
economic salvation.
"The people that are thinking that it would be
are probably corporations who have the money to do
something like this. They may like the idea of doing it
out in the open ocean with minimal environmental
regulation," he said.
Salmon farms in Canada raise the fish from egg stage
to freshwater tanks on shore. Fingerling fish are moved
into steel framed cages offshore, enclosed by netting,
where they are fed. Farmed salmon sometimes need to have
red dye added to be the same color as wild salmon.
Boxer's legislation was prompted by declines in fish
and other marine species documented by the
Pew Oceans Commission and the U.S. Commission on Ocean
Policy. The two agencies warned
of greater threats from invasive species, disappearing
wetlands and polluted runoff of topsoil, fertilizer and
toxic chemicals.
The Bush bills study in the Pacific Ocean was done by
entrepreneur Randy Cates, who runs a fish farm two miles
offshore of Oahu. Rubino said the bill relies on 20 to
30 years of science that has accumulated on fish farms.
Commercial fishing groups backed Mendocino County's
battle against GMOs and some worry about the combination
of corporate fish farms, federal regulations and genetic
engineering.
"How about genetically engineered tuna [that
are] bred to thrive in the colder waters of our
coast? These kind of fish would become voracious
competitors to any fish residing on our coast,"
Hudson said.
What President Bush's
bill would do:
The National Offshore Aquaculture Act of 2005 would
grant the Secretary of Commerce new authority to issue
permits for offshore aquaculture in federal ocean
waters, while providing environmental and other
safeguards to protect wild stocks, marine ecosystems,
and other users.
The act provides for coordination and consultation
with other federal agencies, Fishery Management
Councils, and coastal states.
What Boxer's National
Oceans Protection Act would do:
Limit nutrient pollution runoff from agriculture and
municipal water districts. Authorize $11.2 billion a
year for state and local efforts to reduce storm-water
pollution.
Make the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration an independent agency.
Create new "individual fishing quotas" to
protect against overfishing and establish new bycatch
standards.
Require new regulations to consider the health of the
entire ecosystem, not just a single fish species.
Create "coral management areas"and
authorize $3 million a year to research the effects of
sonar on marine mammals.
Prohibit dumping of ballast tanks in U.S. waters and
create emergency action plans to deal with invasive
species.
Require that all activities on the Outer Continental
Shelf -- such as wave energy projects,
bioextraction by biotech companies, and wind energy
projects -- get a federal permit (current law only
requires permits for oil and gas activities).
Authorize $550 million per year in grants to local
communities to restore
fishery and coastal habitats and to purchase lands that
are vulnerable to development and are important to the
protection and preservation of habitats.
Authorize $115 million over five years for NOAA and
the regional fishery
councils to develop
ecosystem-wide plans to protect
and sustain fisheries.