Aquaculture in the United States faces many environmental issues. Despite oversight by U.S. federal and state regulatory agencies and despite sustainability efforts within the aquaculture industry, advocacy groups and the public are concerned about the effects of aquaculture on the environment.
Specific concerns include the effects of effuents and nutrient-loading; water, land and energy use; feed composition; drugs and chemicals; and food safety. These issues challenge the growth and sustainability of aquaculture.
One of the greatest concerns has to do with the potential for non-native species, genes and pathogens to escape from culture systems and enter the environment. Four of the main emerging topics related to non-native species in aquaculture are:
- the culture of new species,
- introduced pathogens and parasites,
- genetic alterations of native stocks, and
- genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
These topics are not all negative. For example, new species and GMOs may someday increase food supplies and improve the economics of U.S. aquaculture. Unless they are properly managed, however, these issues could cause economic losses to disease or lead to more restrictive regulations.
It is important for the U.S. aquaculture industry and those who support and regulate aquaculture to understand these issues, address the environmental concerns, and participate in the process of defining and managing risks.
Non-native species:
Non-native species may be raised for their favourable culture characteristics, to diversify products, to meet market demands, or to improve profitability. However, non-native species may escape from aquaculture facilities or during transport, or may be released by purchasers if a live product is sold.
Some non-native species may establish permanent populations and become invasive, causing harm to the environment, economic activities (including aquaculture), or human health.
Producers who plan to culture new non-native species should investigate pertinent regulations before spending time and money. The possession and culture of non-native aquaculture species is primarily regulated at the state level.
Federal regulations mainly pertain to interstate and international commerce. Because state regulations differ, producers should contact their state agriculture, fish and wildlife, or natural resources department for specific regulations. The “injurious wildlife” listing by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Lacey Act is the main federal regulation. Injurious wildlife may not be imported into the U.S. or transported across state lines except by permit from the USFWS; possession of injurious wildlife within states is regulated by state agencies.
Producers should understand that proposing a new non-native species for culture may cause concern among scientists, regulators, or environmental groups. Even if the new non-native species is approved, stronger risk management requirements may be imposed, which will increase production costs.
Proposals to culture large, predatory fish or species with a history of invasiveness may cause the greatest concern, but many other aquaculture species could be problematic as well.
Expanding the uses of non-native species already being cultured, especially those cultured in small industries, may also trigger increased scrutiny and potential regulation.
For example, adding fee fishing to an existing barramundi (Lates calcarifer) operation caused the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission to conduct a risk analysis of barramundi culture, re-evaluate existing regulations, and subsequently increase restrictions on the possession and culture of all Lates species in Florida (Fig. 1).
Regulators may mandate the use of biosecure facilities or sterile stocks such as triploids for non-native species; such requirements might make production economically or technically infeasible.
Species that are unlikely to survive outside an aquaculture facility (such as tropical species in temperate zones) may face fewer regulatory hurdles, but this is not consistent across all states or all species.
Some states have specific regulations and culture requirements to prevent the escape of tilapia and some tropical aquarium fish even though these species would not survive winters except in warm sewer or power plant effuent or geothermal springs.
Producers who ship aquaculture species in interstate commerce must be familiar with federal regulations and those of the receiving state. This is especially important when shipping a non-native species to a state for the first time. Illegal shipments across state lines are violations of the Lacey Act and subject to federal prosecution. Ignorance of regulations is not a valid excuse or legal defense.
The USFWS has an online document that explains the injurious wildlife provisions of the Lacey Act and penalties for violations. Both current regulations and the potential for regulatory change must be considered when planning any aquaculture venture.
This makes the commercial development of new non-native species a potentially risky business enterprise. Producers who are already culturing nonnative species should be aware that state and federal regulations may change over time and affect their business.
Examples at the federal level include listing snakeheads and some Asian carp as injurious wildlife and recent initiatives to institute national lists of approved non-native species
Author:
Jeffrey E. Hill
