Site selection and carrying capacity in Mediterranean ... - FAO Sipam

More documents

Recommendations

Info

68 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 would not be expected to extend outside the farm. Risks of organic enrichment of the seabed and reduced food resources for other filter feeders were both rated as low. The Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment of Marine Fish Aquaculture of NOAA (Cash et al., 2005) provide a basic set of guidelines for risk management of marine fish aquaculture. The document provides risk analysis of 10 areas (increased organic loading, increased inorganic loading, residual heavy metals, transmission of disease organisms, residual therapeutants, biological interaction of escapes with wild populations, physical interaction with marine wildlife, physical impact on marine habitat, using wild juveniles for grow-out, harvesting industrial fisheries for aqua-feeds), giving the degree of potential adversity, together with its mitigation. Other examples of risk assessment are provided by ICES (2006). The potential genetic interaction of non-salmonid farmer fish (cod, sea bass, sea bream, halibut and turbot) with local native wild stocks is examined by a risk assessment procedure. Additional to the mitigation of environmental impacts, appropriate risk analysis can also accomplish the following goals: (i) reduce the need for technically based environmental mitigation measures and costly ongoing management and monitoring measures, (ii) substantially reduce the cost of establishment and operation, and (iii) reduce levels of public scrutiny. A lack of spatial planning without any risk analysis process can have negative impact on future aquaculture production because of the environmental or social consequences of the activity. An example is the reallocation of fish farms in Turkey operating at Akbük; the order for translocation of the fish farms was issued because cages belonging to different companies were next to each to other and located close to the shore. Problems of pollution because of the low hydrodynamism that characterised the site, resulting in accumulation of fish wastes and food, led to complaints by the holiday homes owners, including objections to the unsightly fish pens. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry sent notices and the coastguard headquarters warned the fish farmers that they had to move their fish farms elsewhere. A total of 16 sea bass/sea bream fish farms in the Akbük Gulf and 133 in the Güllük Gulf, near Bodrum, were at the risk of being fined if they did not move to the new production areas allocated specifically for the purpose. The cost for farmers translated to around 2.4 million dollars for each farm because the existing facilities are not suitable for the open sea and therefore the installations required upgrading. Furthermore, there are problems with regard to the duration of the new concession as there is no guarantee that this will be permanent (Fish Farming International). References Austin, B. (1985). Antibiotic pollution from fish farms: effects on aquatic microflora. Microbiological Sciences 2: 113-117. Barbera, C., Bordehore, C., Borg, J.A., Glemarec, M., Grall, J., Hall-Spencer, J.M., De la Huz, C., Lanfranco, E., Lastra, M., Moore, P.G., Mora, J., Pita, M.E., Ramos-Espla, A.A., Rizzo, M., Sanchez-Mata, A., Seva, A., Schembri, P.J. and Valle, C., 2003. Conservation and management of northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean maerl beds. Aquatic Conservation – Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13, pp. S65–S76. Bayarri S, Baldassarri LT, Iacovella N, Ferrara F, Domenico AD (2001) PCDDs, PCDFs, PCBs and DDE in edible marine species from the Adriatic Sea. Chemosphere, 43: 601-610 Bell, S.M and Nash, C.E. 2008. Better Management practices for net-pen aquaculture. In: Environmental Best management practices for aquaculture (Tucker, C.S. and Hargreaves, J.A. eds.) Wiley-Blackwell. 261-330 pp. Bell JG, Waagbo R (2008) Safe and nutritious aquaculture produce: benefits and risks of alternative sustainable aquafeeds. In Holmer M, Black K, Duarte CM, Marba N, Karakassis I (eds) “Aquaculture in the Ecosystem”, Springer p. 185-225. 68
69 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Beveridge, M.C.M. (1985). Cage and pen fish farming. Carrying capacity models and environmental impact. FAO Fisheries Technical Papers 255: 131. Boudouresque, C.F., Avon, M., Gravez, V. (1991). Les espèces marines à proteger en Méditerranée. GIS Posidonie publishers. France. Boyra, A., Nascimento, F.J.A., Tuya, F., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Haroun R. (2005) Impact of sea cage fish farms on intertidal macrobenthic assemblages. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the U.K. 84: 665-668. Boyra, A., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Tuya, F., Espino, F., Haroun, R. (2004). Attraction of wild coastal fishes to Atlantic subtropical cage fish farms, Gran Canaria, Canary Islands. Environmental Biology of Fishes 70: 393-401. Carubelli G, Fanelli R, Mariani G, Nichetti S, Crosa G, Calamari D, Fattore E (2007) PCB contamination in farmed and wild sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax L.) from a coastal wetland area in central Italy. Chemosphere 68:1630-1635. Cesaroni, D.; Venanzetti, F.; Allegrucci, G.; Sbordoni, V., (1997). Mitochondrial DNA length variation and heteroplasmy in natural populations of the European sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax. Molecular Biology and Evolution 14: 560-568. Cirillov T, Viscardie V, Fasanoa E (2009) Polychlorinated biphenyls, organochlorine pesticides, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in wild, farmed, and frozen marine seafood marketed in Campania, Italy. Journal of Food Protection 72: 1677-1685. DeBruyn, A.M.H., Trudel, M., Eyding, N., Harding, J., McNally, H., Mountain, R., Orr, C., Urban, D., Verenitch, S., Mazumder, A. (2006). Ecosystem effects of salmon farming increase mercury contamination in wild fish. Environmental Science & Technology 40: 3489-3493. Dempster, T. and Sanchez-Jerez, P. (2008). Aquaculture and Coastal Space Management in Europe: An Ecological Perspective. In ‘Aquaculture in the Ecosystem’. (Eds: M. Holmer, K. Black, C.M. Duarte, N. Marbà and I. Karakassis). pp. 87-116. Springer Verlag. ISBN:1402068093 Dempster, T., Fernandez-Jover, D., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Tuya, Bayle-Sempere, Boyra, Haroun, R., (2005). Vertical variability of wild fish assemblages around sea cage fish faro: implications for management. Marine Ecology Progress Series 304: 15-29. Dempster, T., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Bayle-Sempere, J. T., Giménez-Casalduero, F. Valle, C. (2002). Attraction of wild fish to sea cage fish farms in the south-western Mediterranean Sea: spatial and short-term temporal variability. Marine Ecology Progress Series 242: 237-252. Dempster, T., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Bayle-Sempere, J., Kingsford, M. (2004). Extensive aggregations of wild fish at coastal seacage fish farms. Hydrobiologia 525: 245-248. Díaz López, B., Marini, L. Polo, F. (2005) The impact of a fish farm on a bottlenose dolphin population in the Mediterranean Sea. Thalassas, 21, 53–58. European Science Foundation-Marine Board study report (2007) Impact of climate change on European marine and coastal environment - Ecosystem approach. Fernandez-Jover, D., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Bayle-Sempere, J.T., Valle, C., Dempster, T. (2008). Seasonal patterns and diets of wild fish assemblages associated to mediterranean Coastal fish farms. ICES Journal of Marine Science 65: 1153-1160. Halide, H. A. Stigebrandt, M. Rehbein, A.D. McKinnon, 2009. Developing a decision support system for sustainable cage aquaculture, Environmental Modelling & Software, Volume 24 (6): 694- 702. Hall-Spencer, J., White, N., Gillespie, E., Gilham, K. and Foggo, A. (2006). Impact of fish farms on maerl beds in strongly tidal areas. Marine Ecology Progress Series 326, 1-9. Hektoen, H., Berge, J.A., Hormazabal, V. Yndestad M. (1995). Persistence of antibacterial agents in marine sediments. Aquaculture 133: 175-184. Hites RA, Foran JA, Carpenter DO, Hamilton MC, Knuth BA, Schwager SJ (2004) Global Assessment of Organic Contaminants in Farmed Salmon. Science 303:226-229. 69
Page 1 and 2:
March 2011 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 GEN
Page 3 and 4:
3 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 CONTENTS PRE
Page 5 and 6:
5 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 1. Introduct
Page 7 and 8:
7 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Although var
Page 9 and 10:
9 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 different di
Page 11 and 12:
11 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Participant
Page 13 and 14:
13 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 • there i
Page 15 and 16:
15 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 2.2 Effects
Page 17 and 18: 17 2.3 Effects on ecosystems, habit
Page 19 and 20: 19 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Table 2 - S
Page 21 and 22: 21 21 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 others (
Page 23 and 24: 23 23 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 farming
Page 25 and 26: 25 25 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 seabed d
Page 27 and 28: 27 27 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 o MedVeg
Page 29 and 30: 29 29 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 In concl
Page 31 and 32: 31 31 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Georgiad
Page 33 and 34: 33 33 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Leriche
Page 35 and 36: 35 35 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Pujalte
Page 37 and 38: 37 37 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 In the f
Page 39 and 40: 39 39 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Level of
Page 41 and 42: 41 41 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 et al.,
Page 43 and 44: Table 3 - Aspects of environmental
Page 45 and 46: March 2011 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Sec
Page 47 and 48: 47 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Hyland J, B
Page 49 and 50: 49 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 vicinity of
Page 51 and 52: 51 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 The complex
Page 53 and 54: 53 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 monitoring
Page 55 and 56: 55 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 same time e
Page 57 and 58: 57 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 5.2 Environ
Page 59 and 60: 59 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 contribute
Page 61 and 62: 61 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 countries h
Page 63 and 64: 63 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 5.2.7 Sprea
Page 65 and 66: 65 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 The latest
Page 67: 67 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Decisions r
Page 71 and 72: 71 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 and reducin
Page 73 and 74: 73 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 illustrates
Page 75 and 76: 75 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 have compli
Page 77 and 78: 77 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 EGYPT Egypt
Page 79 and 80: 79 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Dempster, T
Page 81 and 82: 81 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 production
Page 83 and 84: 83 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 regional, n
Page 85 and 86: 85 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 the United
Page 87 and 88: 87 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Response by
Page 89 and 90: 89 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Dempster, T
Page 91 and 92: 91 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 8. Procedur
Page 93 and 94: 93 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 In this sce
Page 95 and 96: 95 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 In the past
Page 97 and 98: 97 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 The present
Page 99 and 100: 99 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Lack of con
Page 101 and 102: 101 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Figure 6 -
Page 103 and 104: 103 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Figure 7 -
Page 105 and 106: 105 Figure 8 - Licensing procedure
Page 107 and 108: 107 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Box 3 - Li
Page 109 and 110: 109 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 through nu
Page 111 and 112: 111 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Morocco, T
Page 113 and 114: 113 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 3. aquacul
Page 115 and 116: 115 context, economic economic poli
Page 117 and 118: 117 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Figure 15
Page 119 and 120:
119 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 when bad w
Page 121 and 122:
121 Figure 17 - Standards for carry
Page 123 and 124:
123 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Currently,
Page 125 and 126:
125 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 environmen
Page 127 and 128:
127 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 recommenda
Page 129 and 130:
Assuring appropriate and responsibl
Page 131 and 132:
131 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Based on t
Page 133 and 134:
133 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 13. Aquacu
Page 135 and 136:
135 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Bermúdez,
Page 137 and 138:
137 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Participan
Page 139 and 140:
139 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Rosa CHAPE
Page 141 and 142:
141 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Spyros KLA
Page 143 and 144:
143 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 143 ANNEX
Page 145 and 146:
145 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 The collec
Page 147 and 148:
147 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 C. Social
Page 149 and 150:
149 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 F. The Ada
Page 151 and 152:
151 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Principle
Page 153 and 154:
153 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Common ad
Page 155 and 156:
155 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Guidelines
Page 157 and 158:
157 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 taking int
Page 159 and 160:
159 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 sampling t
Page 161 and 162:
161 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Introducti
Page 163 and 164:
163 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Internatio
Page 165 and 166:
165 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Acta Adria
Page 167 and 168:
167 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Mesnage V.
Page 169 and 170:
169 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 119 Cook E
Page 171 and 172:
171 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 155 Lampad
Page 173 and 174:
173 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 190 Bartol
Page 175 and 176:
175 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 western Me
Page 177 and 178:
177 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 Mediterr 6
Page 179 and 180:
179 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9 4. What is
show all

Site selection and carrying capacity in Mediterranean ... - FAO Sipam

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?