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

78 GFCM:XXXV/2011/Dma.9
2. it is a source of seafood and related products that can potentially relieve pressure on already
stressed wild fish stocks;
3. for communities previously reliant on capture fisheries, aquaculture and its upstream
businesses (e.g.: processing, transport, marketing) can be a source of employment and
economic opportunities;
4. properly managed, aquaculture installations can also help to guarantee good water quality as
they are highly sensitive to environmental changes.
Finally, while the discussion in this section has focused on stakeholder aspects of integrated planning
and conflict resolution, the aspect of identifying and capitalizing on synergies should not be
overlooked. Recently, the issue of complementarities between aquaculture and increased fish landings
has been the focus of attention. While tourism and aquaculture are often in conflict in the
Mediterranean, cases elsewhere show that the two can coexist well. In Thailand, both tourism and
aquaculture are economically important. Tour operators and fish farmers have developed day tours of
farms for foreign tourists. These include boat rides out to the facilities, demonstrations and meals (P.
Edwards, pers. com.). In Malta, tuna farms accept groups of SCUBA divers which are allowed to dive
and swim with the tuna in the cages (J. A. Borg, pers. Com.)
The sector has become part of the tourist experience and offers benefits to the aquaculture operator.
Artificial reefs in combination with fish cages may have similar potential for bringing together
tourism/recreation and aquaculture. Artificial reefs have been used for a variety of purposes, including
recreational diving and fishing in North America and Australia. The combination of fish cages and
benthic artificial reefs was tested in the Red Sea to evaluate its potential to limit the negative effects
of fish farms on the benthic environment (Angel et al., 2002). The idea was adopted in various
countries (e.g. Gao et al 2008) and it appears that the combination of fish attraction and nutrients
could create a micro-environment that could be very attractive for other purposes as well. With
adequate attention to property rights to ensure that both farmers and recreational users benefit,
cage/reef combinations could be an option for maintaining sustainable coastal operations. Efforts need
to be made to identify potential complementarities such as these and this is best done in the context of
integrated management with broad stakeholder participation.
References
Angel, D.L., Eden, N., Breitsteiniyf, S., Yurman, A., Katz, T., and E. Spanier. 2002. In situ
biofiltration: a means to limit the dispersal of effluents from marine finfish cage aquaculture.
Hydrobiologia 469:1-10.
CEDARE (2007) Stakeholders Analysis Report City of Alexandria Egypt, Center for Environment
and Development in the Arab Region and Europe (CEDARE).
Chapela-Perez, R. (2009) Cage Aquaculture Development in the RECOFI Region. “Regional
technical workshop on sustainable marine cage aquaculture development” Draft Review
document on cage aquaculture licensing procedures Case Studies in Spain, Chile, Greece, USA
and Norway. Centro Tecnológico del Mar Fundación CETMAR Vigo Spain.
CSTT (1994) Comprehensive studies for the purposes of Article 6 of DIR 91/271 EEC, the Urban
Waste Water Treatment Directive. Published for the Comprehensive Studies Task Team of
Group Coordinating Sea Disposal Monitoring by the Forth River Purification Board,
Edinburgh.
Dempster, T. and Sanchez-Jerez, P. (2008). Aquaculture and Coastal Space Management in Europe:
An Ecological Perspective. In M. Holmer, K. Black, C.M. Duarte, N. Marbà and I. Karakassis
(eds) Aquaculture in the Ecosystem’. Springer Verlag. pp. 87-116
Dempster, T, Sanchez-Jerez, P., Tuya, F., Fernandez-Jover, D., Bayle-Sempere, J., Boyra, A., and
Haroun, R. (2006). Coastal aquaculture and conservation can work together. Marine Ecology
Progress Series: 314: 309–310.
78