WiLD Blog

The Comision Nacional de Acuacultura y Pesca (CONAPESCA) de la SAGARPA
has informed that NOM029 of shark and rayas that went in effect May 15th, will be revised and modified with technical and
scientific support.

Among the modifications that are planned to be done we emphasize the following three:
1. To forbid the marketing of Picudos and dorado
2. To set the “by catch limits”
3. To regionalize permits for shark fishing.

Conapesca maintains that Marlin, sailfish, swordfish, Sabalo o Chiro,
roosterfish and dorado inside 50 miles will still be for the exclusive use of
sports fishermen.

CONAPESCA makes clear that before this went under effect, the rayas and
shark fishing ships, could fish on any area at any time and with this NOM029;
they will not be able to do this within less that 20 miles away from the west
coast of Peninsula de Baja California, 15 miles corresponding the rest of the
Pacific Ocean seacoast or 50 miles for big ships over 89’.

CONAPESCA states that it is false that NOM029 allows fishermen to fish and
market species reserved for sport fishing, this is because the action is legally
forbidden and law is always above any NOM. It is important to consider that
law refers to WHAT and NOM refers to HOW.

Finally they want to reiterate that the regulations effect positively the sports
fishing activities since now the boats can’t come inside 15 miles (20 miles on
the outside of the Baja), establishes use of circle hooks to reduce by catch
and they have to release species not targeted. FAY

In Washington, D.C., Rep. Nick Rahall recently introduced the National Offshore Aquaculture Act to create a permit system for fish farming in U.S. waters from three to 200 miles offshore. Rahall, D-W.Va., is chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Environmentalists are urging Congress to copy the strict regulatory framework that California adopted last year for marine aquaculture. At its worst, aquaculture can contaminate coastal ecosystems and spread disease and inferior genes to stocks of wild fish. Sea ranching poses a host of dangers to the environment. Drugs used to control sea lice, disease and waste from the fish can pollute the surrounding waters. Fish that escape their pens can infiltrate the wild population, spreading disease and contaminating the gene pool. The increasing demand for fish meal to feed farm-raised fish could deplete the stocks of sardines and anchovies.

In San Diego, the Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute is pushing to become a leader in U.S. aquaculture research. Yesterday, the institute's officials outlined their case for expanding marine fish farming to the California Fish & Game Commission.

Don Kent, the director of Hubbs, said decades of advancing the science behind aquaculture has left him bullish about the U.S. industry's vast untapped potential. “If we're going to keep the ocean abundant, we have to start farming the sea the way we farm the land,” he said.

China dominates the global aquaculture market, accounting for 70 percent of its $70 billion in annual output. The rest of Asia accounts for 22 percent. The United States is a minor player with roughly $1 billion in yearly revenue.
The U.S. focus is shifting from freshwater aquaculture, which dominates domestic production with species like catfish, to raising high-value fish, such as cobia and yellowtail, in the open ocean.

Marine aquaculture has become a national priority because 81 percent of the seafood consumed in the country is imported. About 60 percent of these imports are wild fish caught in the ocean; the remainder are farm-raised.

The United States' seafood trade deficit of $8 billion last year was second only to the one for oil imports. “We're at a crossroads in terms of our seafood supply,” said Michael Rubino, manager of aquaculture for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Before the boom can begin, the nation needs to establish a regulatory framework to separate competing users, focus growth in the most productive areas and safeguard the environment, Rubino said.

If Congress can do its part by passing the Aquaculture Act, he said, completing a nationwide environmental study and finalizing related regulations would take about two years.

Sea ranching might ease the pressure on over-exploited fish stocks in the wild and satisfy a growing consumer demand for seafood, which is widely touted for its nutritional and health benefits. It also could increase the variety of seafood while lowering retail prices – as it has for shrimp.

In addition, marine aquaculture could help revitalize many of the nation's working waterfronts and ports that have suffered due to the decline of commercial fishing.

Kate Wing of the Natural Resources Defense Council recommended restraint and caution in expanding marine aquaculture.
“We are looking to oceans to meet so many of our needs, from new sources of energy to farming,” Wing said. “We need someone to take the long view so we don't have a train wreck in the oceans.”  FAY

Info from the San Diego Union-Tribune 

We have lost 25 percent of the world’s corals in the last 25 years,” David E. Vaughan, director of the Center for Coral Reef Research at Mote, said in an interview, adding that 25 percent more are expected to die in the next decade or two. “Sometimes we sound like doomsday sayers,” Dr. Vaughan said, “but those are the facts.”

Environmental disruption is one answer and they take many forms. Fishing boats, and even dive boats and divers, can damage reefs. Sea turtles bang into corals, breaking them. Polluted runoff can deprive corals of the clear, oxygen-rich water they need to survive.

And then there is global warming. So far, scientists say, it has had two main effects on coral, both potentially lethal. First, as oceans absorb more carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, they become more acidic. The acidity makes it more difficult for corals to grow and may even cause them to start to dissolve. And as oceans warm, algae that live in corals, and on which they depend, may be killed.

Another serious disruption is overfishing.

Corals need herbivorous fish to keep unwanted algae under control. When seaweed-eating fish are gone, “you are going to end up with seaweed blooms,” said Nancy Knowlton, director of the Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and a leader in the World Bank effort. “It’s been shown that seaweeds release a lot of sugars into the water,” she said. Because many bacteria need sugars, “you have these bacteria blooms that kill corals.”

Corals also need predators like groupers, snappers, barracudas and even lobsters to prevent the proliferation of coral-eating snails, worms and other organisms.

People interested in helping corals should focus on fixing the things we can fix — climate action or water quality action or stopping overfishing. FAY

New York Times (May 1, 2007)