The environmental community is voicing its approbation and concern with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) national aquaculture policy, a draft of which was released last week. The purpose of the policy is to guide agency’s activities with respect to fish farming and provide a national approach to supporting sustainable aquaculture.
In the works for months, the policy is open to public comment through 11 April.
Some environmental groups, including Washington, D.C.-based Food & Water Watch (F&WW), oppose the policy. In a statement on Thursday, F&WW executive Director Wenonah Hauter called industrial fish farming “dirty.”
“Contrary to … NOAA’s claims, [industrial fish farming] is not a sustainable means to supplement the U.S. seafood supply, protect ocean resources or promote a healthy economy in the U.S.,” said Hauter, voicing her support for land-based re-circulating aquaculture systems, deeming them more sustainable than ocean fish farming.
Hauter added that bolstering aquaculture production at home will do nothing to narrow the nation’s seafood trade deficit, as the United States exports most of the seafood it produces. “We’ll export the fish, but keep the pollution,” she claimed.
However, other environmental groups are more supportive of the policy. Ocean Conservancy, also based in Washington, D.C., called it “a step in the right direction.”
“It acknowledges NOAA’s responsibility for ocean stewardship and clarifies the agency’s overarching view of how finfish and shellfish can be farmed responsibly in federal waters. These are important advances, and we commend [NOAA] Administrator Lubchenco and her team for their willingness to develop a thoughtful policy in a vital area that has lacked any overarching framework until today,” said Dr. George Leonard, director of Ocean Conservancy’s aquaculture program.
“While the policy rightly acknowledges that aquaculture development must not undermine marine food webs through the use of forage fish for feed, additional scientific research and strengthened fishery management are needed to solve this challenge,” he cautioned. “Furthermore, because the policy is largely discretionary there is no guarantee that future fish farms will meet the suite of policy guidelines proposed today.”
