www.offshoreauqa.net

OATP Project Participants:

Participant 1 The Marine Institute Personnel: Dr David Jackson, Alan Drumm

Participant 2 SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture Ltd Personnel: Dr.Arne Fredheim, Dr.Pål Lader

Participant 3 Centro Technologico del Mar, Fundacion CETMAR Personnel: Rosa Fernández Otero

Report editor: Alan Drumm, Marine Institute, Ireland. Consultative Committee:

Personnel Organisation

Lucy Watson Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, Ireland

Javier Ojeda Asociación Empresarial de Productores de Cultivos Marinos, Spain

Lisac Darko REFA MED S.r.l, Italy

Shane Hunter AquaBioTech Ltd, Malta

Courtney Hough Federation of European Aquaculture Producers, Belgium

Jan Feenstra Marine Harvest, Ireland

John Offord Gael Force Marine,UK

Richie Flynn Irish Salmon Growers Association Ltd

Mark Kilroy Bonnar Engineering Ltd, Ireland

Knut A. Hjelt Norwegian Seafood Federation aquaculture

Trond Lysklaett Aqualine AS, Norway

Larrazabal Gustavo TINAMENOR S.A, Spain

Daniel Toal University of Limerick, Ireland Executive Summary Page1

Introduction...... 2 Evaluation of the promotion of Offshore Aquaculture Through a Technology Platform...... 3

European Aquaculture Sector Page 5

Vision...... 5 Strengths and Gaps...... 6 EATP Vision for European Aquaculture...... 8

Stakeholder Consultation Feedback Page 8

Introduction...... 8 Potential Species...... 12 Regulation and Planning Frameworks...... 13 Safety ...... 16 Environmental Considerations ...... 17 Technology...... 19

Recommendations Page 22

Ethical Issues...... 22 Potential Species...... 22 Regulation and Planning...... 23 Safety...... 23 Environmental Considerations...... 23 Technology...... 25

Sector Overview Page 26 Appendix I Existing aquaculture seawater based research facilities in the EU...... 34 Appendix II Memorandum of Understanding...... 40 Appendix III RTDI Requirements...... 41 Appendix IV Bibliography ...... 46 Executive Summary

The project objective was “To investigate the opportunity and usefulness for the aquaculture in- • There is good vertical integration within the dustry of promoting offshore aquaculture through a industry technological platform”. The general methodology • The industry is organised in nodes or clusters & of the approach was to form a consortium of serv- has a high degree of co-operative use of common ice providers, manufacturers, aquaculture prac- facilities, both within the industry and with related titioners with offshore experience, research and development organisations and agencies from the sub-sectors (fi sheries, food processing) sector which would pool the available knowledge • The industry is highly automated and the and experience by the most effi cient and practi- employees have a high skills base. cal methods available. The goal was to ensure that the stated objective above is addressed accurately, • Remote telemetry is a key to monitoring and the comprehensively and effi ciently. management and control of process within the Promoting the development of Offshore Aquac- industry. ulture through the activities of an initiative group • Health management has been developed and of the European Aquaculture Technology Platform consolidated into a holistic code of practice, which and through representation on the IWG of the is underpinned by effective vaccines for key prob- EATP is considered the most effective, effi cient lem areas. and appropriate method of ensuring a consolidated and coordinated approach to developing a Europe- The major gap areas, which need to be addressed, an strategic research agenda for aquaculture. While can be categorised as follows: there is ambiguity regarding the defi nition there is considerable clarity as to what is required in order 1. Development of customised technology solu- to make the move to offshore. tions across a range of areas particular to operat- ing the harsh offshore environment. In general Offshore Aquaculture may be defi ned as taking place in the open sea with signifi cant ex- 2. Introduction of systems and adopting a systems posure to wind and wave action where there is a analysis approach to solving husbandry and work requirement for equipment and servicing vessels to practice issues in the context of offshore. survive and operate in severe sea conditions from time to time. The issue of distance from the coast 3. The application of remote monitoring technol- or from a safe harbour or shore base is often but not ogy and telemetry to both site management and always a factor. routine activities at offshore installations. The vision of potential for the offshore sector 4. The implementation of an Appropriate Regula- derived from the various stakeholder consultations tory Framework to encourage and underpin the and with inputs from the consultative committee commercial development of a sustainable and is of a vibrant, technologically driven, sustainable “green” aquaculture sector in European coastal industry supplying fi sh and quality fi sh products to seas. an ever-increasing world population. 5. Development of additional sustainable sources The key factors underpinning the unit cost of of oil and protein for feedstuffs for a range of production and ensuring it is competitive with the culture species. international benchmark are: The RTDI priorities particular to Offshore Aqua- culture are outlined in an analysis of the goals, • Production is being carried out at an appropriate objectives and requirements in terms of RTDI to scale underpin the development of offshore aquaculture in Europe (Appendix III). • The strains being cultivated are the best available

Page 1 Introduction

With its 70,000 km of coastline along two oceans As competition for coastal space increases the and four seas, Europe’s maritime regions account fi sh farming industry is looking to move further for around 40% of the European Unions GDP and offshore in the future. Many believe that by mov- provide employment to over fi ve million people ing the aquaculture industry offshore, we can move in the maritime sector. The sector has signifi cant into cleaner, deeper waters, we can reduce confl icts growth potential due to increasing demand for en- with coastal users and we can provide a much bet- ergy, international trade, tourism, seafood produc- ter environment for aquaculture operations to exist. tion, etc (Fisheries and Aquaculture in Europe, Many others feel that we know so little at this point 2008). However, over-exploitation and depletion in time about the consequences and requirements of traditional fi sheries, has led to a consequential that it would be foolhardy to take this next step im- reduction in fi shing quotas and a re-structuring of mediately, at least at a full commercial scale. the fl eet all over Europe, which in turn, has caused a loss of traditional jobs and increased unemploy- However, aquaculture is the fastest growing food ment in many coastal communities. Aquaculture producing sector in the world and as the 2006, FAO meanwhile has diversifi ed signifi cantly, and today Status of World Aquaculture report indicates, it aquaculture constitutes an important and fl ourish- will need to increase from it’s current 45.5 million ing industry with high expectations for the future. tonnes to approximately 80-90 million tonnes by 2030 to continue to supply up to 50% of the world’s Many groups are struggling to defi ne what they total fi sh requirements. mean by Offshore aquaculture. The ‘Farming the Deep Blue’ report (2004) defi nes ‘offshore’ as Although over the past three decades outputs have any site exposed to ocean swell and suggested substantially increased within most EC countries, two classes of offshore site; Class 3 with local the competition for space in the coastal zone is lim- topographical features providing some shelter and iting the increase in production in this area. The de- Class 4 sites exposed to open ocean conditions. velopment towards offshore aquaculture in Europe Muir (1988) identifi es key distinctions of offshore has been variable and largely driven by the practi- aquaculture i.e. 2+ km from shore, generally within cal need to move offshore. Historically, much of the continental shelf zones, possibly open ocean, sig- technology and many of the practical approaches nifi cant wave height (Hs) 5m or more, regularly to aquaculture were developed in Northern Europe 2-3m, oceanic swells, variable wind periods, pos- and transferred to Southern Europe. However, in sibly less localised current effect. Usually > 80% more recent time Southern Europe has become an accessible with remote operations. The Norwegian important player in the development of new tech- Government classifi es offshore sites using signifi - nologies and systems. cant wave heights (Ryan 2004) and offshore is de- fi ned in the US as occurring “from the three mile By investing in research, technological devel- territorial limit of the coast to two hundred miles opment and innovation the European aquaculture offshore”. sector can contribute substantially to achieving the European Union’s goal of becoming “the most While there is ambiguity regarding the defi ni- competitive and dynamic knowledge based econo- tion there is considerable clarity as to what is re- my in the world, capable of sustainable economic quired in order to make the move to offshore. In growth with more and better jobs and greater so- general Offshore Aquaculture may be defi ned as cial cohesion” (Lisbon European Council, March taking place in the open sea with signifi cant expo- 2000). The EU Commission has signalled it’s sure to wind and wave action, and where there is a support for the industry by launching in May 2007 requirement for equipment and servicing vessels to a review of the ‘Strategy for the sustainable de- survive and operate in severe sea conditions from velopment of European aquaculture’, 2002, with a time to time. The issue of distance from the coast view to up-dating the strategy. The Green Paper on or from a safe harbour or shore base is often but not a future Maritime Policy for Europe has also high- always a factor. lighted aquaculture as one of the growth sectors in Europe. Indeed Commissioner Borg committed his Page 2 support by stating that “the development of new technologies like offshore aquaculture and recircu- lation systems are also highly promising avenues to address the lack of space for aquaculture activi- ties and we will continue to support their develop- ment through research and pilot projects”, (Com- missioner J Borg, AQUA2007).

The Commission also identifi ed the potential of European Technology Platforms (ETP) as a means of identifying new research priorities. While the Commission encourages this use of the bottom-up approach through ETPs it points out that it neither owns or is it bound by them. To date approximate- ly 20 ETPs have produced their vision for their sectors. The European Aquaculture Technology Platform was established at a meeting in Brussels November 8-9, 2007. This group observed that in order for the industry to stay ahead and realise its potential, a substantial increase in investment in research, technological development and demon- stration activities would be required. The central aim of the platform will be to promote the transfor- mation from a resource-intensive to a knowledge- OATP Project Participants Rosa Fernandez, Arne Fredheim and intensive industrial basis - knowledge intensive Dave Jackson with Seán O’Neachtain MEP at the OATP products, processes and services. Achieving this International Workshop, Dublin 2007 will both improve the industry’s competitiveness and its economic contribution to society - and thus supporting the Lisbon strategy.

Evaluation of the Promotion of Offshore Aquaculture Through a Technology Platform (OATP)

The project objective was “To investigate the all members of the consortium and additional opportunity and usefulness for the aquaculture in- stakeholders in the EU/EEA regions. dustry of promoting offshore aquaculture through a technological platform”. The general methodology • Hosting of informal seminars in key regions to of the approach was to form a consortium of service identify key areas for future discussions. These providers, manufacturers, aquaculture practitioners provided an interim report for circulation in ad- with offshore experience, research and develop- vance of the international workshop. Hosting of ment organisations and agencies from the sector an International Workshop for partners and stake- which would pool the available knowledge and ex- holders. perience by the most effi cient and practical meth- ods available. The goal was to ensure that the stated • Production of a fi nal report, with recommenda- objective above is addressed accurately, compre- tions and roadmap of way forward. This report hensively and effi ciently. This was achieved by: refl ects the proceedings of the workshop and the considered views of the partners on the functions • A survey by way of a bespoke questionnaire, ad- of a technology platform is achieving goals set out ministered by direct interview. The survey covered above.

Page 3 Potential impact

In the course of carrying out a thorough evalua- The Offshore Aquaculture Technology Platform tion of the objectives, the project achieved a number signed a Memorandum of Understanding with of clearly defi ned goals, which will of themselves the European Aquaculture Technology Platform have a measurable impact beyond the achievement (EATP) in March 2007. This MoU (Appendix II) of the stated objective of the project. These impacts outlines the cooperation in developing RTDI vi- will include the following: sions, research agenda, deployment strategies and projects relevant to the European aquaculture in- • Development of a widely based consensus on dustry under the concept of Technology Platforms. RTDI priorities in the Offshore Aquaculture sector. The outputs from the OATP project will be put at This will inform strategic planning at various levels the disposal of the EATP Interim Working Group including EU, National and Corporate. Feedback (IWG) and will also be disseminated via the EATP will be effi cient, thorough and immediate through web portal. the gateway of the participants & partners in the project. The MoU also sets out how OATP outputs will contribute to an overarching vision for the devel- • An increase in the overall investment in the off- opment of aquaculture in Europe. The EATP has shore aquaculture development sector (in terms of been established as a coordinating organ to facili- EU, member states, private funding and venture tate initiatives and operations within aquaculture capital) by showing a common vision of the poten- and the OATP is one of the fi rst initiative groups of tial and the intermediate steps required to achieve the European Aquaculture Technology Platform. it. The OATP fi ndings and conclusions will form part of the developing EATP visions, strategic research • Strengthen networks and encourage the develop- agenda and deployment strategy. Promoting the ment of clusters and centres of excellence. In par- development of Offshore Aquaculture through the ticular the facilitation of cluster development be- activities of an initiative group of the European tween public and private organisations and across Aquaculture Technology Platform and through disciplines in this sector, which is very much in representation on the IWG of the EATP is consid- the phase of early development and is as yet quite ered the most effective, effi cient and appropriate fragmented in nature, will be of critical benefi t to method of ensuring a consolidated and coordinated realising future potential. approach to developing a European strategic re- search agenda for aquaculture. • Identify areas of current strengths, areas of weak- ness which require strengthening, and gap areas where there is a lack of capability or expertise within the ERA. Promotion of Offshore Aquacul- ture through a Technology • At a regional level, assist regions in identifying Platform and addressing challenges and in particular oppor- tunities in this developing sector. Promoting the development of Offshore Aquaculture through the activities of an • Identify and catalogue the pre-requisites for de- initiative group of the European Aquac- velopment of a consistent and coherent policy and ulture Technology Platform and through regulatory framework for Offshore Aquaculture in representation on the IWG of the EATP the EU and EEA. is considered the most effective, effi cient and appropriate method of ensuring a • An increase in public awareness, understanding consolidated and coordinated approach to and acceptance of the technologies concerned and developing a European strategic research the benefi ts accruing to the wider public through agenda for aquaculture. their appropriate deployment.

Page 4 European Aquaculture Sector in Europe Vision and Gap Analysis Domestic production of marine fi sh suffi cient to meet European market requirements with a growing export market worldwide. In 2004 the EU aquaculture industry produced ap- proximately 1.38 million tonnes with an estimated To make offshore aquaculture attractive to value of € 2.8 billion. This production accounted inward investment with sustained profi tability for 2.3% of the world aquaculture production. EU underpinned by transparent regulation inspir- shellfi sh production represented 5.7% of world ing both consumer and investor confi dence. shellfi sh production by weight, 1.3% of freshwater production and 10.9% for marine production (FAO Security of tenure provided for through ap- Yearbook 2005-2006). Global production rose by propriate licensing, regulations and competi- 10% during the period from 1995 – 2004. European tive production costs maintained through production however, only grew by approximately the application of technology and advanced 4% over the same period and may be considered to husbandry techniques. have stagnated since then. Vision While the EU is very well placed to capitalise on the increased demand for fi sh products, the sector Offshore sites with a moderate to high degree of faces a number of diffi cult challenges. Competi- exposure are being exploited successfully. Produc- tion for space and good quality water along with tion is organised in a small number of operating the need to ensure protection of public health and units producing large volumes. These are either the natural environment through the high standards large offshore units or clusters of smaller units. set by the EU makes it diffi cult to compete with Landings of product are handled through special- developing nations producers. In order to overcome ist processing and packing facilities, with over these challenges the new Intergrated Maritime Pol- 90% of exported product receiving at least primary icy will strive to ensure the aquaculture sector will processing (fi llets or darns). All processing is car- be seen in the broader context of the maritime sec- ried out to EN45011 or ISO65 standards. tor as a whole. Synergies have been developed with the offshore energy industry, the fi sheries industry, bio tourism The majority of European marine fi nfi sh produc- and marine biotech sectors. Close links have been tion is in Norway, Scotland, Ireland and the Faroe developed with the mainstream food processing Islands. Other countries such as Finland, Iceland, industry and seafood is increasingly included in Sweden and Denmark do have some marine cage ready to eat meals and “healthy meals”. Europe’s production and there is a growing industry based industry is a “test bed” for offshore technology de- on sea bass, sea bream and captured tuna in the velopment and for hi-tech recirculation systems for Mediterranean and Canaries. While there are major juvenile production. differences between the countries production en- vironments, the cage systems employed are essen- The sector is competitive producing high qual- tially uniform in terms of the technology used. The ity product in structures shared with offshore wind greatest improvements in recent years have been energy platforms. through the development of genetic programmes and the development of vaccines. There is currently Domestic production of juvenile marine fi sh is great interest in the aquaculture industry with many suffi cient to meet the home market and there is European countries developing strategies for their a growing export market both within Europe and marine sectors. worldwide.

Page 5 The industry is attractive to venture capital and Strengths and Gaps attracts signifi cant inward investment. Key factors are: The maritime sector in Europe is large, well de- veloped and technologically advanced. Further- 1. Profi tability is good and sustained. more, in a global context Europe is viewed as a 2. There is transparent regulation, giving confi world leader in many aspects of the maritime dence to consumer and investor alike. economy, including salmonid fi nfi sh aquaculture. 3. Licenses and regulations combine to ensure The consultation process underlined the existence there is security of tenure and the production of a huge opportunity for technology transfer with- sites are regarded as solid assets. in the European maritime sector to the benefi t of aquaculture in general and offshore aquaculture in particular. There are also major opportunities for Costs of production are competitive. The key fac- product substitution within the seafood industry tors underpinning the unit cost of production and and the food processing industry generally. What ensuring it is competitive with the international is required to unlock this potential is a focused ap- benchmark are: proach on marine food production and related tech- nologies and capabilities. To date this focus has • Production is being carried out at an appropriate been lacking and the offshore aquaculture sector scale in particular has been suffering from both the con- • The strains being cultivated are the best avail- sequences of this lack of focus and the fragmented able nature of the industry itself, both geographically • There is good vertical integration within the and in terms of species and production processes. industry • The industry is organised in nodes or clusters & has a high degree of co-operative use of The RTDI requirements are outlined in the sec- common facilities, both within the industry tion on stakeholder feedback and are summarised and with related sub-sectors (fi sheries, in tabular form in Appendix III. The major gap ar- food processing) eas which need to be addressed, can be categorised • The industry is highly automated & the as follows: employees have a high skills base. • Remote telemetry is a key to monitoring, 1. Development of customised technology managing and controlling of processes solutions across a range of areas particular to within the industry. operating the harsh offshore environment. • Health management has been developed and consolidated into a holistic code of practice, 2. Introduction of systems and adopting a systems which is underpinned by effective vaccines for analysis approach to solving husbandry and key problem areas. work practice issues in the context of offshore.

The outputs from the OATP consultation process 3. The application of remote monitoring technol- have been fed into the EATP via the Interim Working ogy and telemetry to both site management Group and the draft Vision statement of the EATP and routine activities at offshore installations. is very much in line with the OATP stakeholders’ views of a vision for offshore aquaculture. 4. The implementation of an Appropriate Regulatory Framework to encourage and under pin the commercial development of a sustainable and “green” aquaculture sector in European coastal seas.

5. Development of additional sustainable sources of oil and protein for feedstuffs for a range of culture species.

Page 6 This last item is not particular to offshore aqua- Van den Ven (2006) and Lee & O’Bryen (2006). culture, rather it is a common challenge facing the The ability to operate in a predictable safe and cost aquaculture industry as a whole, both in Europe effective manner in the offshore environment will and worldwide. be acutely dependant on the availability of robust relatively low cost technology and operating sys- From a technology perspective, containment sys- tems for the various aspects of food production in- tems such as cages and the associated nets and cluding containment, health monitoring, feeding, moorings were identifi ed as an area in need of great- biomass estimation and harvesting operations. est development. Developments are required both in terms of the ability of the structures to survive The question of developing a mature regulatory and function in the harsh offshore environment and framework, which balances the requirements envi- in terms of their suitability for incorporation in in- ronmental management and monitoring, security of tegrated systems for husbandry and farm manage- tenure for producers and the provision of an appro- ment. Key areas identifi ed were mooring systems priately regulated business environment conducive for supply and service vessels, remote monitoring to the competitive production of quality food came and feeding solutions, harvesting techniques and through very strongly from all sources consulted. suitability in terms of both worker safety and ani- Many of the RTDI requirements identifi ed in Ap- mal welfare. pendix III address various aspects of the defi cits in regard to the regulatory and legislative environ- The need for further investment and research into ment for marine food production in Europe. These the development of remote monitoring technol- cover issues relating to development of monitoring ogy and integrated management systems has been regimes, guidelines and codes of practice and the highlighted both through the consultative proc- requirement to underpin a coherent Coastal Zone ess and in various reports including Molner and Management and MSP framework for European maritime waters.

Required Impacts

In order to ensure that the realisation of the vi- sion for offshore aquaculture in Europe is possi- ble, there are a number of key prerequisites, which must be in place. These will require that the RTDI component is successful to allow their delivery. Thus the required impacts of the RTDI effort have been identifi ed as follows:

1. The development of suitable tools to underpin monitoring, regulation and ICZM/MSP initiatives.

2. Production units have been developed to an appropriate scale.

3. The strains and species available for cultivation are appropriate and the best available.

4. Good vertical integration within the industry.

5. The industry is organised in nodes or clusters & has a high degree of co-operative use of comon Offshore databuoy, Galway Bay, Ireland. facilities, both within the industry and with re lated sub-sectors (fi sheries, food processing & offshore energy) Page 7 6. The industry is highly automated & the transfer and training) and integration in society. The employees have a high skills base. RTDI priorities particular to Offshore Aquaculture are outlined in the following sections. 7. The development of remote telemetry as a basis for monitoring & the management and control Stakeholder Consultation of processes within the industry. Feedback Introduction 8. The development of Animal Welfare and Health management into a holistic code of Consultation with stakeholders was co-ordinated practice, which is underpinned by effective by four project partners and sub-partners, covering: vaccines for key problem areas. Ireland & the UK; Scandinavia; Spain & Portugal; and the Eastern Mediterranean. These participants The EATP Vision for European represented: fi nfi sh and shellfi sh producers; agen- cy representatives with aquaculture, wild fi sheries Aquaculture and conservation remits; specialists involved with the aquaculture and marine technology industries; The vision of the European Aquaculture Tech- veterinarians; representatives of other coastal user nology Platform is that effi cient implementation organisations; non-governmental organisations in- of strategically focused R&D within the European volved with environmental protection and coastal research community is necessary to support the development. Participants were engaged in the sustainable development of European aquaculture. process through the dissemination of question- The innovations and knowledge generated must naires, participation in regional and international be incorporated effectively within all components workshops, or through direct contact and interview of the sector, using appropriate supportive mecha- via phone, email or meetings. nisms. Number of participants Not only will aquaculture’s products provide health benefi ts for European consumers, they will also Workshops Questionnaires complement lifestyle changes in society. Through Ireland & UK 43 44 transparent communication, European aquaculture Scandinavia 26 36 will demonstrate its contributions and role in soci- Spain & Portugal 42 39 ety. These activities will provide the foundations for technical and economic excellence, which will Eastern be the basis of the leadership potential of European Mediterranean n/a 24 aquaculture at the global level. Interviews International There are 3 core priorities within the EATP’s Seminar 79 n/a vision of innovative R&D and its incorporation. participants These are:

• Establishing a strong relationship between aquaculture and the customer.

• The assurance of a sustainable industry.

• Consolidation of the role of aquaculture in society Each of these priorities contains thematic constit- uents. A range of horizontal measures, which apply to each priority, are envisaged and which include the assessment of the environmental interactions of the sector, innovation (including technology Page 8 Figure 1 (a): Breakdown of respondents to the questionnaire in the partner regions

Figure 1 (b) : Breakdown of participants who attended the regional seminars in the partner regions

Page 9 There is broad consensus that growth expecta- ture could go a long way in meeting increased glo- tions for aquaculture on a global level are extreme- bal seafood consumption demands, particularly in ly encouraging. FAO forecasts for the demand for light of the fact that capture fi sheries are thought to fi sh products, based on world population growth remain stagnant at best. In Spain & Portugal 97% estimates and consumption trends for these types of respondents agreed that offshore aquaculture of product (rising from 11.0 kg/per capita in 1970 could provide a solution to meeting the FAO fore- to 16.2 kg/per capita in 2002), together with a ten- cast for global seafood consumption. In Ireland dency towards the stagnation of catches in the ex- and the United Kingdom while the majority agreed tractive sector, indicate that there is a need for a with this, 50% of the NGO’s believed offshore considerable increase in cultured fi sh production. aquaculture would not meet these demands. Figure 3 below shows how the participants in Ireland & In terms of a vision for offshore aquaculture the the UK responded to this issue. majority of participants felt that offshore aquacul-

Figure 3: Views of the respondents to the questionnaire on whether they thought offshore aquaculture could go a long way to meeting global seafood consumption demands into the future

Page 10 Figure 2: Global fi shery and aquaculture production (source FAO).

When it came to the public’s perception of the of eating seafood products needs to be highlighted aquaculture industry, most stakeholders were as a means to improve the public image of the in- concerned with the ethical issue of sustainability. dustry. Bio-security issues, such as farmed-wild in- There must be further research into alternatives to teractions, are even more relevant in the offshore fi sh oils in fi sh feed for aquaculture. Replacing scenario. Industry will need to work closely with fi sh oil with vegetable extracts promotes the pro- fi sh health specialists and equipment designers to tection of wild fi sh resources and promotes sustain- ensure that every effort is made to develop codes ability. Animal welfare issues must continue to be of practice, which promote the protection of wild addressed through stocking standards, fi sh health fi sh species. protocols and improved monitoring capabilities for offshore areas. There was quite a mixed view on what participants considered the greatest challenges to the develop- Overall the greatest area where public confi dence ment of offshore aquaculture. When taken together, needs to be improved, according to respondents, safety issues and weather conditions (exposure) was in the area of environmental impacts. Envi- were of great concern to respondents, particularly ronmental management encompasses the regula- the fi nfi sh and shellfi sh producers. Environmental tory framework, monitoring programmes, industry challenges were of most concern to the NGO’s, as management frameworks (and the development well as the technology challenges and exposed na- of Codes of Best Practice) and improved technol- ture of the sites. ogy to aid remote, real-time monitoring in offshore locations. It is widely accepted, however, that There was quite a mixed view on what par- moving offshore could help mitigate many of the ticipants considered the greatest challenges to environmental impacts and perceived impacts as- the development of offshore aquaculture. When sociated with aquaculture. taken together, safety issues and weather con- ditions (exposure) were of great concern to re- The area of food safety is an area of concern for spondents, particularly the fi nfi sh and shellfi sh producers and consumers alike. This refers to the producers. Environmental challenges were of use of medicines, microbial contamination and most concern to the NGO’s, as well as the tech- toxic algal blooms. Conversely, the health benefi ts nology challenges and exposed nature of the sites. Page 11 When asked more specifi cally what the greatest & emergency concerns increase the more you move safety concerns associated with offshore aquacul- offshore in terms of exposure and response time ture production were, the opinions varied between to emergencies. Other safety issues raised were the actual physical infrastructure, personal training navigation and safe passage, relative experience and navigational safety. All participants strongly of workers on site and actual distance offshore of rated personal training as an important factor in the sites. The issue of danger of collisions was also safety. The producers, policy & professional serv- raised particularly in the Mediterranean area where ice representatives and NGO’s were concerned a number of incidents of ships colliding with cages with cage, equipment and boat design. Accident had occurred.

Figure 4: The areas in relation to safety which participant’s felt needed greatest attention.

Potential species

The development of offshore aquaculture locations Laminaria spp., Alaria spp. and Ulva lattisima will serve predominantly to alleviate space confl ict were also highlighted. in inshore regions. There are regional differences in the types of species, which are suited to culturing There may be certain site characteristics associated in offshore locations, based on water temperature with offshore aquaculture which are more suited to and prevailing climactic characteristics. In gen- culturing of some of these species. For example, eral cooler northern Atlantic regions are suitable to greater current movement and water column mix- culturing of Cod (Gadus morhua), Atlantic Salmon ing could serve to prevent large temperature fl uc- (Salmo salar), blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) and tuations for fi nfi sh culturing. It may provide added rainbow trout (sea trout – Onchorynchus mykiss). benefi ts of dispersing nitrogenous waste and sup- These species are already commercially important plying oxygen rich water to the fi sh. The offshore species in northern European locations. In Spain water body’s generally lower content of nutrients and Portugal sea bream, sea trout, sea bass, tur- might result in lower carrying capacities for shell- bot, halibut, mussels and oysters are species with fi sh culture at certain locations offshore. How- the greatest potential. Some seaweeds such as ever, enrichment in inshore locations can have a

Page 12 negative effect with an increased potential for al- and techniques is vital and knowledge transfer be gal blooms and bacterial loading associated with tween European areas of expertise should promote inshore sites. The main challenge, as highlighted, best practice in rearing and on growing. The poten- is the infrastructural and technology requirements tial for polyculture should be researched and this associated with moving offshore. could lead to the sharing of space and resources. This would have obvious cost cutting benefi ts for- There is a need for increased R&D into novel industry and the positive environmental benefi ts species for culturing in offhsore regions. These should be investigated and promoted. Another ma- include Sea Urchins, Pollack, Tuna, Cod, Hake, jor challenge is the transfer of technology knowl- Halibut, Sea bream and Sea bass. Research into edge between fi nfi sh and shellfi sh producers, inter- improved on-growing techniques is necessary, par- regionally and between other users of offshore sites ticularly the adaptation and development of inshore outside of the food-producing sector (such as the technology and management routines to offshore wind energy industry and oil industries). locations. Detailed knowledge on hatchery design

Figure 5: Potential species for culturing in offshore locations in Europe.

Regulation and Planning While there is ambiguity regarding the defi - Frameworks nition there is considerable clarity as to what is required in order to make the move to off- There was much confusion among participants shore. in the OATP consultation process about whether national or regional regulatory frameworks for off- In general Offshore Aquaculture may be defi ned shore aquaculture existed or not. Some of this may as taking place in the open sea with signifi cant arise from the lack of clear defi nition as to what exposure to wind and wave action where there constitutes ‘offshore’. Does it refer, for example, is a requirement for equipment and servicing to distance from shore or to exposure? It is neces- vessels to survive and operate in severe sea sary to have an agreed defi nition for offshore aqua- conditions from time to time. The issue of dis- culture or at least a clear understanding of what is tance from the coast or from a safe harbour or meant by the term Offshore. The reality is that some current commercial op- MSP was highlighted in the EU Maritime Policy erators are working in ‘offshore’ locations in terms Green Paper as a tool for development of plans for of high-energy sites and the remote nature of the integrated coastal zone management. It is an effec- sites. This is true for Atlantic salmon farming in tive tool aimed at redressing the balance between Northern Europe, sea bream operators in continen- resource exploitation and environmental protec- tal Europe and tuna farming in the Eastern Medi- tion. Spatial planning relies heavily on high-level terranean. knowledge of the potential resource. This means: understanding the assimilative and dispersal The current legislative framework that exists for capacities of potential production locations; hav- aquaculture near shore will probably encompass ing detailed information on the oceanographic offshore aquaculture operations also. The licens- characteristics of the location (currents,waves, etc) ing process is unlikely to alter greatly either, but obtaining suffi cient baseline information on conditions of licensing will need to address the environmental parameters such as temperature, greater safety issues and monitoring requirements oxygen, nutrients. The importance of increased associated with offshore locations. The perceived knowledge of resources was highlighted by respond- problems with the regulatory framework in the off- ents as a major factor in the designation of sites for shore context echo inherent problems with the cur- offshore aquaculture. It is important, in this context rent framework closer in-shore. This includes the that every use is made of key national resources such length of time for license processing and the lack as national seabed surveys, baseline state monitor- of proactive approaches in coastal planning involv- ing datasets as well as habitat mapping involving ing marine spatial planning (MSP) and site desig- nation.

Figure 6: Thoughts of respondents on whether they thought the regulatory framework were in place to deal with offshore aquaculture.

Page 14 input from traditional users of an area. The char- This provides for a holistic approach to coastal acterisation of sites in terms of acquiring oceano- planning, which in turn helps avoid confl ict at a graphic and environmental data at potential offsite later stage and ensures openness and transparency locations will be an important component in pro- in the process. viding policy makers and prospective investors with detailed information on a potential produc- In many European countries, Atlantic Canada, tion location. Other factors critical in the MSP and the United States, industry specifi c manage- process are the socio-economic characteristics of ment initiatives covering defi ned geographic areas the proposed regions. In many peripheral commu- have been established. These provide for informa- nities aquaculture is an important economic activ- tion exchange frameworks between producers and ity and as such would be considered an important policy makers, provide for the development of in- “sustainability indicator” in the wider integrated dustry codes of practice (covering fi sh health, sea coastal zone management context. lice control, harvesting, etc.), and provides for a de- scription of the regions in terms of navigation and Currently public consultation in the aquaculture GIS based interactive databases. Most respondents licensing process is dealt with through the Environ- believed that it is important to extend these initia- mental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Proac- tives to encompass offshore aquaculture. Many of tive approaches such as marine spatial planning the codes of practices covering harvesting, sea lice will need to provide for public participation in the control, fallowing, contingency plans in the event development of local coastal plans. This can be of escapees, etc., apply equally to the offshore achieved through active participation in the collec- area. In fact the establishment of dynamic indus- tion of information (monitoring programmes, hab- try management frameworks could be more im- itat mapping, etc.) through to a public forum for portant when operating in more remote locations. input into the development of the coastal plans.

Figure 8: Opinions of the different representatives in Ireland & the UK on whether they thought Industry Management Frameworks such as Area Management Agreements should encompass offshore operators. Page 15 Safety

Safety issues are an important component in the production to ensure navigation plans are adhered regulation of aquaculture activities, regardless of to and to ensure that containment equipment on site where the activity is located. It becomes an in- is to a satisfactory standard. With regard to person- creasing priority, however, in the offshore context al safety, a number of initiatives including, legisla- both in terms of personal safety and naviga- tion, training, equipment/technology development tional concerns Standardisation of navigational and service boat development will be required. The markings is important to decrease the incidents use of technology to reduce dependence on manual of collision with ships and the potential escap- labour for many labour intensive activities is nec- ing of farmed stock. The use of transponders on essary, particularly in relation to diving activities cages and updating of navigational charts are (cleaning nets, removing fi sh, etc), harvesting ac- measures suggested which will help avoid un- tivities (fi nfi sh & shellfi sh). The design of remote necessary collisions. Zonation of areas for aqua- operating vehicles (for cleaning and inspection ac- culture could potential assist with navigation. tivities) and monitoring equipment (to monitor fi sh Safety inspections may be necessary for offshore behaviour and environmental parameters) could greatly decrease the risks of injury.

Figure 7: Important development areas to ensure safety in offshore aquaculture operations

Page 16 Environmental Considerations mile limits set by the WFD. Utilising off shore lo- cations will require greater participation by indus- The greatest environmental challenges facing try in monitoring programmes and there is a strong aquaculture currently include: sustainability issues, need for improved developments in remote moni- escapees, stock management and enrichment of in- toring technology. Further research into the causes ner coastal water bodies. Some of these issues are and effects of both phytoplankton and zooplankton mitigated when moving offshore but other issues blooms is required. such as escapees and wild stock management will With the potentially more exposed nature of off- remain highly relevant at more exposed/offshore shore sites bio-security issues will need to be ad- locations. dressed. This can be achieved through legislation, codes of practices & international co-operation, The sustainability issue refers largely to the source industry management frameworks, revised moni- of feedstuffs for aquaculture and was highlighted toring, health management plans, development of by many NGO’s as a particular challenge for the containment structures and contingency plans for aquaculture industry into the future. There needs dealing with escapees. Many respondents were to be considerable research into alternatives to wild particularly concerned with interactions between resources for fi sh oils. More investigations need to wild fi sh and escapees from fi sh farms. It is true be carried out into farmed sources, additional ma- that greater exposure increases the risk of damage rine resources and land sourced vegetable oil sub- to cages and nets with storm events and increased stitutes in feedstuffs for aquaculture. wave activity. Accidental collision from ships also poses a risk to the containment of fi sh. License The aquaculture industry in Europe is both regu- conditions must provide for the use of appropri- lated and protected by major European statutes ate equipment by offshore operators and safety such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD), checks must be a part of compulsory monitor- Bathing Waters Directive and statutes covering ing programmes. Standardisation of navigation shellfi sh water classifi cation and placing on the markers around the installations and a regime of market of shellfi sh species. Further inshore, the regular safety checks were seen as key initiatives anthropogenic effect of nutrient enrichment from required. The use, where possible, of indigenous municipal treatment outfl ows and non-point source stock should be promoted to minimise the impact pollution may compound naturally occurring algal of escapees on indigenous wild stocks in sensitive bloom events. This can result in economic losses to areas. Research into fi sh sterilisation techniques the aquaculture industry due to shellfi sh bay clo- and hatchery techniques is necessary to provide sures and mortalities in fi sh. alternative sources or fi sh for stocking purposes. Identifying the technology infrastructure gaps Although the WFD provides a legislative solution is important to alleviate potential escape events, to improving water quality status in European wa- which occur as a result of fi sh behaviour, weather ters, the sensitivities of these inner locations results conditions or operational procedures on farms. in strong competition for limited resources. Animal Health and fi sh disease, this was high- It is likely that moving offshore will help mitigate lighted as another important research area in the many of the nutrient and bacterial contamination consultation exercise. Many initiatives have been problems associated with inshore areas. The ef- taken by the EU Commission on the legislative fects from bacterial and nutrient run off from mu- front to combat disease spread between trading nicipal sewage will be less of a problem the further nations and to maintain good disease free status off shore you go. This doesn’t mean that initia- in European countries. Monitoring programmes tives to prevent the effects of nutrient loading are covering fi sh health, biotoxins, shellfi sh water not required. Improved surveillance techniques are classifi cations and bathing waters are well estab- needed to prevent excess nutrients hitting the sea lished and legislated for in EU countries and in- bed through wasted feed pellets. The Marine Strat- ternationally. Similarly there has been much inter- egy Directive (pending) will set specifi c targets, national co-operation in the development of codes like the WFD, extending clean water targets and of best practice to help combat important diseases monitoring requirements beyond the one nautical such as Pancreas Disease and Infectious Salmon Page 17 Anemia. Area Management Agreements and sim- The majority of respondents felt that these man- ilar management frameworks adopt these guide- agement frameworks should be extended to encom- lines and promote important practices like, biose- pass offshore locations. curity zones, fallowing, single-generation stocking and early harvesting of fi sh. These are recognised Figure 9 below highlights the concerns of the stake- practices in the prevention and control of diseases. holders in relation to environmental effects and off- shore aquaculture.

Figure 9: Views of different participant groups on the major impacts of aquaculture on the marine environment.

Servicing offshore sites Page 18 A document recently published by the IUCN in • Eco-friendly antifouling coatings and products collaboration with the Spanish Ministry for Ag- should be developed. riculture, Fisheries and Food and the FEAP, enti- tled “Guide for the Sustainable Development of • Strategies should be developed to ensure the Mediterranean Aquaculture - Interactions between thorough analysis of possible impacts on the Aquaculture and the Environment”, made the fol- fl ora and fauna of the areas where aquaculture lowing recommendations on environmental pro- facilities are to be deployed (in this regard, tection: offshore aquaculture normally has less impact than other kinds of systems). • Greater progress should be made in the domesti cation of species. Technology

• Prevention of escape events and management A central theme running through all the discus- should be improved to minimising potential sion groups during the stakeholder consultation impact. phase of this project was that of improving our knowledge of our coastal resources. From a tech- • Native species should be cultured wherever nology perspective this involves the development feasible, following the recommendations of of improved remote sensing and transmission of re- organisations such as the IUCN itself or the sults in real time. From the planning perspective it ICES in the case of the culturing of alien involves utilising current datasets, predictive mod- species1. elling capabilities, application of habitat mapping and seabed surveys and fi nally the incorporation • Research (on the closing of life cycles, the func into GIS for use in spatial planning. The ultimate tioning of the ecosystem, etc.) should be encour goal is to select, using the best available tools, for aged in order to guarantee that aquaculture appropriate resource utilisation to ensure activities should not endanger either the stock of wild co-exist and operate in a sustainable manner. populations (e.g. bluefi n tuna) or biodiversity in general. For development of offshore aquaculture, many characteristics of a site could be obtained from • Guidelines are put forward (with particular national datasets relating to seabed mapping and reference to coastal production systems) to national monitoring programmes. Once applied, reduce or eliminate the negative impact associ these datasets can give valuable information on a ated with the organic content of effl uents from specifi c location, including: bathymetry informa- aquaculture farms. In the case of offshore cages, tion; sediment type; substrate type (for anchoring); the dispersion of this organic content is generally wave/current information; carrying/assimilative higher and therefore the impact occurring, al capacity; and various environmental parameters though it cannot be ignored, is, under normal con relating to the water column. ditions, potentially lower. It is important therefore, that methodologies are developed that show how thematic information can • The production of aquafeeds should be a sustain be extracted from these datasets for application to able activity, diversifying the sourcing of raw ma the offshore aquaculture industry. Research into terials for formulated feeds and encouraging the methods for characterising offshore sites in terms development of aquaculture as an integrated of the exposed nature is fundamental in order to activity. test the best available technology in-situ.

• Strategies should be developed to minimise the One of the most fundamental areas where de- transfer of pathogens between farmed species velopment is needed is in the actual containment and wild stock populations in both directions. systems for aquaculture species. This refers to a suite of structures which house the cultured spe- • Strategies should be developed to ensure the cies at sea such as cages, rafts, barrels, nets, ropes, correct management of the use of antibiotics anchors and buoys. Working in more exposed con- and to minimise possible detrimental effects ditions results in greater stresses on the physical on the natural environment. Page 19 structures at sea. New innovative designs for fi sh cages and shellfi sh structures are required to help against economic losses and environmental con- cerns associated with escapees. Navigation and warning systems must be developed as well as an integrated navigational plan involving port authori- ties and seafarers.

Cage types and designs will also vary depend- ing on the species and the stage of development of the fi sh. Larger species like Tuna, for example, require larger volumes and pose a greater challenge in terms of handling. Behavioural aspects of the fi sh also dictate the net structures and farm oper- ating/handling procedures. At offshore sites with greater depth and possibly larger cages special an- choring designs are required. Design and develop- ment of suitable anchoring patterns is important for a number of reasons. The most important require- ment is that they are suffi cient to retain the struc- tures in place but also that systems are in place to allow for moving/changing of cage/barrels, to al- low workboats access around cages and not to in- terfere with the cage area containing the fi sh. Obvi- ously, greater exposure will result in greater loads on these systems. Larger boats will be required to access these sites so R&D is not only required Concept for offshore farm for the containment systems themselves but also necessary in development of new vessels specially designed for fi sh farming in rough conditions at exposed sites. More intelligent automatic feeding systems will be an essential piece of equipment at offshore sites. There is room for improvements in all feed related operations, from delivery of feed, storage, dosing, pumping as well as the technology infrastructure to allow for a reliable and precise re- mote operation. Other important equipment areas in need of development include fi sh handling and operational equipment. Routine operations on site involve grading, treating, harvesting and sam- pling of fi sh. Improved automated techniques for handling fi sh in these situations is required to re- duce escapes, make more effi cient use of suitable Mussel longlines weather conditions and to transfer fi sh from larger cages used in offshore locations. Particularly this requires development of fi sh pumping equipment, automated fi sh feeding systems and stock monito- grading systems and sub-sampling equipment. ring equipment. Reduced access to offshore loca- tions makes these systems a necessity in the day- Monitoring equipment and communication sys- to-day management of offshore sites. Remote tems are another area that will require further de- access to feeding systems allows immediate ma- velopment and application to offshore aquaculture. nipulation of feeding regimes to individual cages Currently, there has been much innovation in auto- and allow for intervention in the case of damage mated systems by the aquaculture industry, including or loss of appetite of the fi sh. This has both health Page 20 Figure 10: Aspects of the physical infrastructure, which most requires development, in the opinion of participants from the OATP regions. and environmental implications for the site, ensur- important that monitoring at offshore locations oc- ing that during times of stress, waste feed doesn’t cur as part of an integrated monitoring programme contribute to organic loading of the benthos. Vid- for the region, with the offshore structures acting eo cameras and sensors, which shut off feed sup- as a platform for monitoring equipment where ply at critical levels, contribute to an integrated possible. Considerable R&D into the monitoring feed management system improving feed conver- and identifi cation of causes and effects of marine sion ratios or FCR’s and environmental manage- events (such as phytoplankton blooms) is required. ment of the site. Development of integrated en- The graphic (Figure 11) highlights the variety of vironmental monitoring equipment is also crucial. technology development requirement for offshore From a farm management perspective, real-time aquaculture production. The fact that none of the access to temperature and oxygen data is impor- technology areas listed below particularly stands tant. Many parameters are also required as part out, emphasises the fact that there are development of national monitoring programmes. As such, it is requirements in each area. Page 21 Figure 11: The important equipment and technology systems, which need development for operating in offshore locations

Recommendations Ethical Issues

Offshore aquaculture can go a long way towards Conversely, the health benefi ts of eating seafood meeting increased global seafood consumption de- products needs to be highlighted as a means to im- mands, particularly in light of the fact that future prove the public image of the industry. output from capture fi sheries is predicted to remain stagnant at best. Bio-security issues, such as farmed-wild inter- actions, are even more relevant in the offshore Further research into alternatives to fi sh oils in fi sh scenario. Industry will need to work closely with feed for aquaculture is required. Replacing fi sh oil fi sh health specialists and equipment designers to with vegetable extracts promotes the protection of ensure that every effort is made to develop codes wild fi sh resources and promotes sustainability. of practice on containment and biosecurity, which Animal welfare issues must continue to be addressed through stocking standards, fi sh health protocols and promote the protection of wild fi sh species. improved monitoring capabilities for offshore are- as. Potential Species

Overall the greatest area where public confi dence There is a need for increased R&D into novel spe- needs to be improved, according to respondents, was cies for culturing in offshore regions. Priority spe- in the area of environmental impacts. It is widely cies include sea urchins, pollack, tuna, cod, hake, accepted that moving offshore could help mitigate halibut, sea-bream and sea-bass. Research into im- many of the environmental impacts associated with proved ongrowing techniques is necessary, particu- aquaculture. larly the adaptation of inshore culture to offshore locations. Page 22 Detailed knowledge on hatchery design and tech- tential offsite locations will be an important com- niques is vital and knowledge transfer between ponent in providing policy makers and prospective European areas of expertise should promote best investors with detailed information on a particular practice in rearing and ongrowing in order to en- location. sure an adequate supply of suitable quality juve- niles. The principles/components of current area man- agement agreements (aquaculture management ini- The potential for polyculture should be researched tiatives) should be extended to encompass offshore and this could lead to the sharing of space and re- aquaculture with the purpose of developing codes sources. This will have obvious cost cutting ben- of practice for the industry and to ensure good en- efi ts for industry and the positive environmental vironmental practice. benefi ts should be investigated and promoted.

A major challenge is the transfer of knowledge Safety on the technology side between fi nfi sh and shell- fi sh producers, inter-regionally and between other The personal training of site staff is an important users of offshore sites (such as the wind energy factor in safety for the offshore aquaculture indus- industry and oil industries). try. Accident & emergency concerns increase the more you move offshore in terms of exposure and response time to emergencies. Regulation & Planning Navigational planning needs to be a fundamental Offshore aquaculture needs to be properly defi ned part of the licensing process, to provide for the in- in terms of exposure or distance offshore. This is creased potential of collisions in the offshore sce- necessary in the context of regulation, planning nario. and development requirements for an Offshore Aquaculture industry. Environmental considerations The current legislative framework that exists for aquaculture near shore will probably encompass The greatest environmental challenges facing offshore aquaculture operations also. aquaculture currently include: sustainability is- sues; escapees; stock management; and enrichment The perceived problems with the regulatory of inner coastal water bodies. framework in the offshore context really echo inherent problems with the current framework There is a requirement for considerable research closer in-shore. This includes the length of time into alternatives to wild fi sh resources for fi sh oils for license processing and the lack of proactive in aquaculture feed. More investigations need to be approaches in coastal planning involving marine carried out into farmed sources, additional marine spatial planning (MSP) and site designation. resources and land sourced vegetable oil substi- tutes in feedstuffs. MSP was highlighted in the EU Maritime Policy Green Paper as a tool for delivering integrated Improved surveillance techniques are needed to coastal zone management. Improving the knowl- prevent excess nutrients hitting the seabed through edge gap on potential resources is an important wasted feed pellets. factor in the process of designating sites for off- shore aquaculture. It is important, in this context The Marine Strategy Directive (pending) will set that use is made of key national resources such as specifi c targets extending clean water targets and national seabed surveys, baseline state monitoring monitoring requirements beyond the one nautical datasets as well as habitat mapping involving in- mile limits set by the WFD. Utilising offshore lo- put from traditional users of an area. cations will require greater participation by indus- try in monitoring programmes and there is a strong The characterisation of sites in terms of acquir- need for improved developments in remote moni- ing oceanographic and environmental data at po- toring technology. Page 23 Further research into the causes and effects of The use, where possible, of indigenous stock both phytoplankton and zooplankton blooms is re- should be promoted to minimise the impact of es- quired. capees on indigenous wild stocks.

With the potentially more exposed nature of off- Research into fi sh sterilisation techniques and shore sites, bio-security issues will need to be ad- dressed. hatchery techniques is necessary to provide alter- native sources or fi sh for stocking purposes. This can be achieved through: legislation; codes of practice & international co-operation; indus- Identifying the technology infrastructure gaps try management frameworks; revised monitoring; is important to alleviate potential escape events, health management plans; development of contain- which occur as a result of fi sh behaviour, climactic ment structures; and contingency plans for dealing conditions or operational procedures on farms. with escapees. Improved R&D into causes and effects of fi sh License conditions must provide for the use of diseases is required and recommendations should appropriate equipment by offshore operators and safety checks must be a part of compulsory moni- feed into policy, industry codes of practice and toring programmes. farm management practices.

Navigation markers around the installations should be standardised and also be part of regular safety checks.

“Guide for the Sustainable Development of Mediterranean Aquaculture - In- teractions between Aquaculture and the Environment”, made the following recommendations on environmental protection:

• Greater progress should be made in the domestication of species. • Escapement prevention and management should be improved with a view to minimising potential impact. • Native species should be cultured wherever feasible, following the recommendations of organisations such as the IUCN itself or the ICES in the case of the culturing of alien species1. • Research (on the closing of life-cycles, the functioning of the ecosystem, etc.) should be encouraged in or- der to guarantee that aquaculture should not endanger either the stock of wild populations (e.g. bluefi n tuna) or biodiversity in general. • Guidelines are put forward (with particular reference to coastal production systems) to reduce or eliminate the negative impact associated with the organic content of effl uents from aquaculture farms. In the case of offshore cages, the dispersion of this organic content is generally higher and therefore the impact occurring, although it cannot be ignored, is, under normal conditions, potentially lower. • The production of aquafeeds should be a sustainable activity, diversifying the sourcing of raw materials for formulated feeds and encouraging the development of aquaculture as an integrated activity. • Strategies should be developed to minimise the transfer of pathogens between farmed species and wild stock populations in both directions. • Strategies should be developed to ensure the correct management of the use of antibiotics and to minimise possible detrimental effects on the natural environment. • Eco-friendly antifouling coatings and products should be developed. • Strategies should be developed to ensure the thorough analysis of possible impacts on the fl ora and fauna of the areas where aquaculture facilities are to be deployed (in this regard, offshore aquaculture normally has less impact than other kinds of systems). Technology

A central theme running through all the discussion birthing areas for vessels and work platforms to groups during the stakeholder consultation phase provide for access to the fi sh. of this project was that of improving our knowl- edge of our coastal resources. From a technology Development of automated feeding systems both perspective this involves the development of im- from the point of view of the barges and pumping proved remote sensing and transmission of results systems as well as the technology infrastructure to in real time. allow remote operation is a key requirement. Other important equipment areas in need of de- From the planning perspective it involves utilising velopment include fi sh handling and operational current datasets, predictive modelling capabilities, equipment. application of habitat mapping and seabed surveys and fi nally the incorporation into GIS for use in Improved automated techniques for handling fi sh spatial planning. in these situations is required to reduce escapes, make more effi cient use of suitable weather condi- The ultimate goal is to select, using the best avail- tions and to transfer fi sh from larger cages used in able tools, for appropriate resource utilisation to offshore locations. Particularly this requires devel- ensure activities co-exist and operate in a sustain- opment of fi sh pumping equipment, grading sys- able manner. tems and sub-sampling equipment.

Research into methods for characterising offshore Monitoring equipment and communication sys- sites in terms of the exposed nature is fundamental tems require further development and applica- in order to test the best available technology in-situ. tion to offshore aquaculture. Currently, there has Characteristics of a site could be obtained from na- been much innovation in automated systems by tional datasets from seabed mapping programmes the aquaculture industry including automated fi sh and national monitoring programmes. feeding systems and stock monitoring equipment. Video cameras and sensors, which shut off feed It is important that methodologies are devel- supply at critical levels, contribute to an integrated oped that show how thematic information can be feed management system improving FCR’s and extracted from national datasets (such as seabed environmental management of the site. survey information and core national datasets) for From a farm management perspective, a real-time application to the offshore aquaculture industry. capability for access to temperature and oxygen data is important. One of the most fundamental areas where de- velopment is needed is in the actual containment It is important that monitoring at offshore loca- systems for aquaculture species. This refers to a tions occur as part of an integrated monitoring pro- suite of structures which house the cultured spe- gramme for the region, with the offshore structures cies at sea such as cages, rafts, barrels, nets, ropes, acting as a platform for monitoring equipment anchors and buoys. where possible.

New innovative designs for fi sh cages and shell- Considerable R&D into the monitoring and iden- fi sh structures are required to help against econom- tifi cation of causes and effects of marine events ic losses and environmental concerns associated (such as phytoplankton blooms) is required. with escapees.

Navigation and warning systems must be devel- oped as well as an integrated navigational plan, in- volving port authorities and seafarers.

R&D is not only required for the containment sys- tems themselves, but also necessary in designing Page 25 to be the norm, well into the foreseeable future. Sector Overview Offshore cage farming is unlikely to become wide- Current marine cage aquaculture spread in Asia, as its development is likely to be hampered by availability of capital and the hydrog- Norway’s development of salmon farming in the raphy of the surrounding seas, which does not al- 1970’s pioneered the commercial marine farm- low for the technology available elsewhere to be ing of aquatic organisms in caged enclosures. So easily transferred” (De Silva 2007). Marine cage this development can be considered relatively culture in Asia is small scale and carried out in new. Since then the technology has developed and the inshore area. Due to the shallowness and sur- spread to many nations across the globe. face and bottom currents experienced in the South China Sea a different cage technology to what is currently employed in Norway, Ireland and Chile Africa would be required.

While Egypt is one of the most productive coun- The number of traditional marine fi sh cages in tries in terms of aquaculture in Africa it is almost China in 2004 was estimated to be in the region entirely from fresh water production. Libya Arab of 1 million (Guan and Wang 2005). However, the Jamahiriya has had various marine cage experi- majority of these are small structures measuring 3 ments undertaken since the 1990’s. A number of x 3 m to 5 x 5 m. They are often constructed from open sea cages are currently in use producing Eu- locally available materials such as bamboo, timber ropean seabass and gilthead seabream. The offi cial or steel pipes which could not withstand signifi cant production for seabass and seabream in 2004 was winds or waves and are therefore sited in sheltered 170 and 61 tonnes respectively. In Tunisia the cage inshore sites. Most inshore sites have now reached production of seabass and seabream in 2004 ac- capacity and if the expected increase in farmed counted for 14 percent of the whole national pro- marine fi sh output is to increase to 1 million tonnes duction for these species (678 tonnes of seabream (Wang 2000) then the only option left available is and 466 tonnes of seabass). The production of to move offshore. Atlantic bluefi n tuna has also expanded in recent years. In 2004 Morocco’s cage production of sea- During the 1990s local governments initiated bass and seabream was approximately 720 tonnes projects looking at offshore cages. Cages were im- divided equally between the species. Cage produc- ported from Norway, Japan, Denmark and the US. tion accounted for 42% of the total production of In 2007, Chen et al reported that there were about 1,718 tonnes. Spain is the main export market for six models of offshore cages being manufactured these species. by local companies and research institutes. More than 3,000 sets of offshore cages were being in- While there is potential for marine and brackish stalled along the coastal provinces. The Central cage culture in sub- Saharan Africa as yet there has government and provincial authorities are strongly been no sustained commercial development of this supporting the development of offshore aquacul- sector (Blow and Leonard 2007). ture through the funding of R&D projects and the purchase of offshore cages (Chen et al, 2007). Asia Australia While it is estimated that over 95 percent of ma- rine fi nfi sh farming in Asia is in cages, offshore aquaculture is not common. It is also suggested Aquaculture is the fastest growing primary in- that “the large-scale, capital-intensive, vertically dustry in Australia. It is almost entirely a regional integrated marine cage-farming practices seen in industry and is a key growth area for regional em- northern Europe (e.g. Norway) and South Amer- ployment. Imports from China, Vietnam and Thai- ica (e.g. Chile) are unlikely to occur in Asia. In- land and the strengthening of the Australian dol- stead of large-scale farms, clusters of small farms lar have recently put the Australian industry under generating synergies, acting in unison and there- pressure. In 2005-06, aquaculture production rose by attaining a high level of effi cacy are likely by 16 per cent (7500 tonnes) to 54,076 tonnes of Page 26 which fi nfi sh production account for 32,812 tonnes There is a need to address the public concerns (ABARE, Australian Fisheries Statistics, 2006.) regarding cage aquaculture in Australia if there is More than 95 percent of Australian aquaculture to be signifi cant development in offshore aquac- production is from marine waters. Marine produc- ulture. However, the recent ‘Sustainable Aqua- tion for the most part focuses on four species, At- culture: Australian Aquaculture Industry Devel- lantic salmon (Salmo salar), Southern bluefi n tuna opment Strategy’, targets the Development of (Thunnus maccoyii), Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) Offshore Aquaculture. It has recommended a fea- and Yellowtail kingfi sh (Seriola lalandi). Over the sibility study of offshore production systems for decade to 2006-07, aquaculture production almost Australian conditions and an assessment of what is doubled from 29,300 tonnes to 57,800 tonnes. required at both State and Federal level to support Although there were 19 licences for marine pro- its development. duction of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in 2006, the Atlantic salmon makes up the bulk of sal- monid cage culture. Salmon and trout production, Canada together accounted for 44 per cent of total aquacul- ture production in 2006-07. There were 44 licensed Surrounded by the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacifi c marine cage producers in 2006, which have sites in Oceans and home to the Great Lakes, Canada Tasmania and South Australia. In 2006-07, aquac- boasts the world’s longest coastline (244,000 km), ulture farmed salmon from Tasmania emerged as representing 25 per cent of the entire coastline in Australia’s most valuable single species fi shery, the world. With more than 755,000 square kilome- overtaking Western Australia’s rock lobster fi sh- tres of fresh water, Canada has 16 per cent of the ery, “This follows four years of rapid growth, dur- world’s area of fresh water and four of the larg- ing which the value of Tasmania’s farmed salmon est lakes in the world. (Agriculture and Agri-food more than doubled. Based on preliminary esti- Canada). mates, over 23,600 tonnes of Atlantic salmon was produced in 2006-07, worth an estimated AU$272 Salmon aquaculture is now a major industry in million,” (ABARE 2008). Other major aquacul- Canada, operating year round and creating wealth ture species in Australia include southern bluefi n and jobs in coastal communities. Salmon farming tuna (17 per cent of value in 2006-07), pearls (15 is one of New Brunswick’s largest food industries per cent), oysters (11 per cent) and prawns (6 per while farmed salmon has become British Colum- cent)(Newton 2008). bia’s most signifi cant agricultural export.

In 2004 there were only 3 marine cage sites pro- After two years of successive decline in 2003 and ducing barramundi, this has since risen to 6 li- 2004, the value of the total Canadian farmed-raised cences in 2006, all in the Northern Territory. There production of fi nfi sh and shellfi sh now shows are also 37 licences for marine cage production of signs of recovery. Total aquaculture production in Yellowtail kingfi sh (ABARE, Australian Fisheries 2005 reached 153,995 tonnes, up more than 6% Statistics, 2006.). This is only a recent develop- from the year earlier refl ecting a moderate increase ment and has arisen due to the need for the Bluefi n in total fi nfi sh output. Salmon production rose to tuna operators to diversify. 98,441 tonnes, 2% above 96,774 tonnes a year ear- lier. Farm-raised shellfi sh production during 2005 The Southern bluefi n tuna are caught under a quota reached 38,195 tonnes, up 1% from 37,925 tonnes system. The caught fi sh are transferred into ‘tow- tons during 2004. ing cages’, which can measure from 30 to 50 me- ters diameter. In 2005 there were fi fteen tuna farms Canadian aquaculture production is dominated on eighteen sites. In 2006, 35 licences accounted by the production of farmed-raised salmon, mus- for the production of 8,806 tonne of tuna. sels and oysters, which combined, accounted for 87% of total farmed-raised production in 2005. On Because of Australia’s traditional links with the a regional basis, British Columbia, New Bruns- United Kingdom and Europe most of the cage sys- wick and Prince Edward Island accounted for 48%, tem technology is similar to those used in these re- 24%, and 12% respectively of total farmed-raised gions. output.

Page 27 Despite many innovative concepts in marine cag- (Chile’s number 1 salmon producer) and 1 to Aguas es the vast majority of cages employed in Canada Claras (owned by AquaChile). The list of ‘suspect- can be classed as “gravity” type cages generally ed’ cases is 17 with an expected increase (Seafood- constructed of steel or high-density polyethylene intelligence.com, March 2008). The situation has (HDPE). These cages have proved suitable for the led to a signifi cant downsizing of its salmon pro- intricate Canadian coastline of bays, inlets and duction operations. As a consequence of this situ- fjords. The use of increased technological devel- ation it is unlikely that the Chilean industry will opment has enabled the Canadian producers to in- look to move offshore in the near future. crease the scale of their operations. However, the industry trend in both Canada and the US is for expansion to more exposed open ocean conditions Croatia where they experience fewer human confl icts. Near shore technologies and operational management Research into new technologies for the culture of cannot simply be transferred to these new high-en- European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax ) and gilt- ergy environments (Masser 2007). head seabream (Sparus aurata ) began at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the Currently, Canada is leading the way in North twentieth century. In the late 1960s, state-owned America in expansion of commercial cage aqua- institutes started research projects to develop these culture and in developing policies, regulations highly profi table marine species; as a result, sever- and public perceptions that accept and promote al new commercial companies were founded, set- the future growth and sustainability of its industry ting up production of fi sh fry and ongrowing them (Masser 2007). With its extensive coastline given to commercial size in fl oating cage farms. Since an appropriate regulatory policy framework cou- that time, a major innovation has been the ability pled with increased environmental stewardship to control spawning of seabass and seabream (FAO and consumer confi dence, conservative projec- Fisheries and Aquaculture Department). Croatia tions for anticipated growth expects an increase in produced 1,600 tonnes of farmed Seabass and aquaculture products value from Can$0.5 billion in 1,000 tonnes of farmed Seabream in 2005. 2000 to Can$ 2.8 billion by 2010 – 2015 (OCAD 2003). The rearing (fattening) of bluefi n tuna (Thunnus thynus ) only began recently in Croatia and is still Chile growing. The cages in this rearing process are large structures usually 30 to 50 m in circumference, al- The world’s second largest supplier of farmed At- though sometimes up to 150 m, with a fi sh density lantic salmon (Salmo salar), Chile is estimated to of 2-4 kg/m3. have suffered a decreased in production of 2.7% in 2007 (down to 358,900t), compared to 368,700t in Croatia has huge potential for aquaculture thanks 2006) This decline is mainly a result of the severe to its 5,800km long coastline and its 1,100 islands. impact of the Infectious Salmon Anaemia (ISA) Its objective is to produce annually some 10,000 fi sh disease that continues to plague the Chilean tonnes by 2015 (Monfort, FAO 2007). industry. Due to this situation some experts predict a further drop of 8% in 2008. Cyprus Most salmon development in Chile has occurred in relatively sheltered inshore waters, and there- The main type of aquaculture carried out in Cy- fore, there is a high proportion of metal cages in prus is marine aquaculture and the outlook for its use. This may change as the industry may look to expansion is positive. In 2004, the total aquacul- move to more exposed sites. ture production reached 3,174 tonnes, comprising mainly of 1,863 tons seabream and seabass and However, Chile is now offi cially recognized as 1,242 tonnes bluefi n tuna. Mariculture is currently positive for the ISA virus. In February 2008 there carried out exclusively on the southern coasts of were 19 sites impacted – 13 of which belonging to the country and the culture method utilized is open Marine Harvest; 4 to Mainstream, 1 to Aqua Chile sea cage culture. In 2004 the main marine species commercially cultured were the gilthead seabream Page 28 (Sparus aurata ), European seabass (Dicentrachus d’Azur and Corsica). The Atlantic coast has seen labrax ), and Northern bluefi n tuna (Thunnus thyn- the establishment of turbot farms and salmon nus thynnus ). In the framework of diversifi cation farming is found mainly in Normandie and the of aquaculture, a license for the culture/fattening Bretagne regions. European seabass (Dicentra- of bluefi n tuna was given in 2004. rchus labrax ), gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) and turbot (Psetta maxima ) dominate the marine The ongrowing units in marine fi sh produc- aquaculture sector in France. Today the best po- tion operate on an intensive basis, using offshore tential for development of Mediterranean species cages. In 2004 there were 6 commercial offshore exists in Eastern “PACA” (Provence Alpes Côtes cage farms in operation. These units have licences d’Azur) and Corsica but these regions are also sub- from the Department of Fisheries and Marine Re- ject to strong pressures from the tourism sector. In search for production that ranges from 120 – 300 addition to this competition for space, production tonnes/year/unit. The production units are located capacity for marine fi nfi sh continues to increase in at a distance of 1-3 kilometres from the shore at the countries of the Eastern Mediterranean, caus- water depths ranging from 20-45 metres and 3 ing a levelling out of the price on European whole- kilometres apart. The strong competition for using sale markets. coastal land and sea areas is the main reason for adopting this culture method but also the fact that this system is considered to have the least impact Greece on the environment and provide the best possible conditions for the fi sh in terms of animal welfare. Greek aquaculture consists mainly of the pro- The lack of closed bays and the open sea condi- duction of European seabass (Dicentrarchus la- tions, characterized mainly by strong currents and brax) and gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata). The great depth, contribute to better dispersion of the industry has seen a rapid development as seabass released nutrients that are produced during grow- and seabream, have only been farmed since the be- out activities. The impact is limited to the bottom ginning of the 1980s. Approximately 80 percent of below the cages and to a lesser extent up to 50-100 Greek aquaculture production is exported, mainly metres from the farms. Almost all existing types of to Italy and Spain. The third largest agricultural open sea cages are used by the private sector and export after olive oil and tobacco is fi sh, princi- the farms are gradually employing mechanized pally farmed seabass and bream, and is seen as a systems for feeding and harvesting. They are also strategic product by the Greek Government. The adopting new cage technology in an effort to cut farming of these species is mostly conducted in down production costs and become more effi cient marine cages and the production costs are among and competitive nationally and internationally. Be- the lowest in Europe. Production sites are located ing a predominantly tourist destination, Cyprus is all around the Greek coast, although most preva- very conscious of all environmental issues. Thus, lent in the central regions close to good infrastruc- the State policy has focused on a gradual develop- ture and export routes. ment (precautionary approach) of aquaculture and the use of open sea cage farming technology. Greece currently holds the position of main sup- Source: (Aquaculture Annual Report. 2004 . De- plier of seabass and seabream to Italy and the EU partment of Fisheries and Marine Research, Re- in general. Approximately 340 Greek farms pro- duced a total 100 000 tonnes of fi sh in 2006, equiv- public of Cyprus). alent to a turnover of €760 million. Greek produc- tion thus accounted for over half (53 percent) of the Mediterranean farmed seabass and seabream. The output is expected to grow in the coming years France (Camillo Catarci, 2007 FAO Globefi sh).

Marine fi sh production in France is well distrib- Most of the Greek seabass and seabream pro- uted among the different regions. Seabass and sea- duction is carried out in sea cages, large square or bream are reared close to the North Sea (utilising circular fl oating plastic structures from which a net heated water from a nuclear power plant), along bag is suspended. In the last few years there has the Atlantic coast and in the Mediterranean (Côte been a trend towards large, round cages that can Page 29 reach 120 meters circumference and hold 250–300 accounted for around 70 percent whilst the marine tonnes of fi sh. Many fi sh farms have now acquired fi nfi sh production represented around 9 percent in automated feeding systems and there is a trend for volume. larger cages, mimicking the trends in the salmon and trout industries. However, most small compa- Since 2003 Italy has also developed the fattening nies, (producing <500 tonnes/year) have not in- of northern bluefi n tuna (Thunnus thynnus) using vested in new technologies and are based on man- cages in coastline areas, located in the southern re- ual labour for most of the farm operations. Also, gions (Sicily, Calabria, Puglia, Campania). In 2006, and compared with the salmon or trout industries, nine active tuna farming plants were monitored in the seabass and seabream farms use very little tech- Italy by ICCAT (the International Commission for nology for biomass management, feeding optimi- the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas). Until recently sation, grading, etc. Source:(FAO Fisheries and Italy’s marine fi nfi sh sector has undergone rapid Aquaculture Department). expansion thanks to reliable reproduction proce- dures for seabass and seabream. However, efforts Ireland to improve production have partly been met by competition from other Mediterranean countries, Because of its gently sloping continental shelf, which, thanks to better environmental factors and most of Ireland’s sheltered inshore water is too lower labour costs, are able to produce at lower shallow for fi nfi sh cage farming and nearly all of costs than the Italians. the farming companies operate a mixture of in- shore and offshore sites. Irish farmers are only too Malta familiar with the unsuitability of inshore technolo- gies for offshore use, and were amongst the ear- Aquaculture in Malta is primarily marine-based. liest to test cages specifi cally designed for use in It consists of the culture of European seabass exposed sites. Expansion in the salmon farming (Dicentrarchus labrax) and gilthead seabream sector in Ireland has been signifi cantly curtailed in (Sparus aurata) and the fattening of wild-caught recent years. Farmed salmon output increased from Atlantic bluefi n tuna (Thunnus thynnus). The 18,000 tonnes in 1999 to reach a peak production Atlantic bluefi n tuna is mainly exported to Japan, of 23,312 tonnes in 2001. Thereafter production whereas the European seabass and gilthead sea- has steadily declined to 11,174 tonnes in 2006. On bream are exported to Europe, mainly Italy. In this basis, it is estimated that the salmon-farming 2005 total production of European seabass and gilt- sector is currently operating at less that half of its head seabream was 772 tonnes. Gilthead seabream production capacity (Offshore aquaculture devel- production was 567 tonnes, of which 529 tonnes opment in Ireland, Next Steps 2007). were exported. European seabass production was 205 tonnes. Of which 174 tonnes were exported. In the case of Atlantic bluefi n tuna, production is Italy currently around 3,000 tonnes, with an estimated value of € 46,000,000 (MCFS, 2006). The majority of Italian fi sh farming production consists of freshwater species (e.g. trout, catfi sh All aquaculture takes place in fl oating cages, ap- and sturgeon) and of marine species of seabass and proximately one kilometre offshore. Various types gilthead seabream, followed by eel and sharpsnout of ongrowing cages are used, namely Dunlop, seabream. The aquaculture of European seabass Corelsa and Farmocean cages for offshore sites and gilthead seabream only started at the end of and Floatex and Kames cages for inshore nursery the 1980s. In Italy, private and independent sea- sites. bass and seabream farms were established at the beginning of the 1990s. These companies were Due to the small size of the island of Malta (ap- initially oriented towards the development of land- proximately 320 sq/km) there is strong competi- based units located along coastal areas; the fi rst tion for space and resources and the Government offshore farms were established in the second half has become very conscious of environmental is- of the 1990s. In 2004 total aquaculture production sues. The Fisheries Conservation and Control Di- was 232,800 tonnes of which the mussel segment vision within the Ministry for Rural Affairs and the Page 30 Environment (MRAE) regulates and administers 60,000 m3 and can potentially hold 1100 tonnes of the capture fi sheries and aquaculture industries fi sh. There is a tendency towards the use of steel and is directly responsible for issuing aquaculture cages in the southern parts of Norway where one permits. Due to the confl ict between tourism and might fi nd sites at more sheltered locations, further aquaculture, the MRAE is creating an aquaculture north we see more use of plastic cages. Though zone, six kilometres off the east coast of Malta, so Norway fi nds itself blessed with a vast and shel- that tuna farming operations will move further off- tered coastline the industry might soon see a short- shore. age of possible new locations. Offshore sites, as they normally come with stable and favorable water conditions, may present an eligible option for the New Zealand continued growth of Norwegian aquaculture.

The aquaculture of king or chinook salmon devel- In 2006, salmon and sea trout production reached oped in the 1980s from fi sh introduced from Sac- 598,000 tonnes and 57,000 tonnes, respectively, ramento, California in the late 1890s for initiating representing an increase of approximately 4% from a sport fi shery in New Zealand (Jeffs, 2003). The 2005 for salmon. Cod production is expanding New Zealand industry has since grown into one of rapidly; 9,500 tonnes was produced in 2006 with the largest producers of farmed king salmon in the 15,000 tonnes forecast for 2007 (Torrissen 2007). world (FAO, 2007). The majority of fi sh are grown out in marine sea cages in coastal waters, with a Scotland small proportion grown out in freshwater. The pro- duction of farmed salmon was 7,450 tonnes in 2004 rising to approximately 10,000 tonnes in 2005. In Marine cage production in the UK is almost exclu- 2005 the salmon farming industry consisted of 14 sively carried out in the coastal waters of Scotland. on growing sites and 12 hatcheries (Gillard and The two main species in production are Atlantic Boustead, 2005). As is the case in Australia there salmon and rainbow trout, with increasing interest is a need for the fi nfi sh industry in New Zealand in cod production. The salmon production tonnage to establish its credentials with the environmental in marine sites increased from 129,588 tonnes in groups and the general public in order to develop 2005 to 131,847 tonnes in 2006. While the number of production sites decreased from 277 in 2005 to confi dence in the industry. There are currently 251 in 2006. The trend towards increasing the size widespread concerns regarding the sustainability of producing sites continued. The estimated harvest of aquaculture. for 2007 is 142,566 tonnes. Sea reared rainbow trout production also increased from 1,242 tonnes Norway in 2005 to 2,341 tonnes in 2006. The number of sites had also doubled from 5 in 2005 to 10 in 2006. The aquaculture industry in Norway is in a phase In their report entitled “Appraisal of the opportu- of steady expansion. In 2005, 1137 farm installa- nity for offshore aquaculture in UK waters,” Mark tions existed in the sea for Atlantic salmon and sea James and Richard Slaski suggest that while “ off- trout, 415 sites produced other species such as cod, shore aquaculture is fundamentally appealing and halibut and arctic char (Norwegian Fisheries Di- could be strategically important in the UK in the future, the evidence provided suggests that careful rectorate 2007a). consideration of properly justifi ed calls for R&D is merited in support of aquaculture development in All concessions used ‘gravity’ nets, which re- more exposed locations with a view to better defi n- tain their shape based on gravity with a series of ing the prospect for full offshore operations in the weights, suspended from plastic rings or steel future.” platforms. Net cage volumes are most typically 10,000 to 20,000 m3 and each individual cage may Spain contain from 10,000 to 200,000 fi sh (Sunde et al. 2003). The recent years has shown a develop- Spain is the fi rst aquaculture producer in the EU ment towards the use of even bigger units, plastic context, with a production level which is more than rings with circumference 157 m are growing more three times the European average. However, it is popular. Cages of this size have a volume of up to Page 31 important to take into account that 90% of the total overloaded with farms and confl icts exist with the Spanish aquaculture production is mussel produc- tourism sector and other resource users. tion. According to data provided by JACUMAR (Advisory Board of Marine Culture, Spanish Min- The most widely employed intensive system for istry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food), Spain seabream and seabass is fl oating cages, these can produced 308,682 tonnes of mussels in 2006 and be squares measuring from 5x5x5 m or circular, 37,737 of fi nfi sh, out of a total of 346,630 tonnes, hexagonal or octagon shaped cages up to 12–50 including molluscs, crustaceans and fi nfi sh. m in diameter. More recently marine farms have been relocating towards more exposed areas or Data from the same source shows that the em- secondary bays and thus types and sizes of the ployment level in aquaculture is also signifi cant, cage systems employed are changing. There are with almost 1,900 jobs in 2006, of which more than also seabass and seabream farms, which utilize 1,600 were permanent, representing an increment earthen ponds and only one high-tech (recircula- of 12.4% on employment levels the year before. tion) land-based farm. Semi-intensive culture has Employment in the sector is also characterized as also been practiced in some lagoons using large being highly specialized and stable. sized earth ponds. Large 50–75 m diameter cages are used for tuna fattening. The number of aquaculture installations keeps growing every year, although in a slower rate than The lack of coastal zone management plans and production. In 2006 there were 14 hatcheries and subsequent aquaculture site allocation has led to 109 fi nfi sh farms were operating in Spain, as well confl icts of interest and competition between the as 3,720 rafts, of which 3,537 are mussel rafts lo- tourism and aquaculture sectors. The Government cated in Galicia. of Turkey has gone to great effort since 2000 to resolve these confl icts; site and area allocation Offshore aquaculture is seen as a complement plans have been prepared along the Mediterranean for the development of aquaculture production in and Aegean coasts involving various stakeholders. Spain. Currently almost 60% of total fi sh produc- Most of the marine farms have already left the well tion takes place in cages. Growth expectations are protected, near shore shallow waters and moved to considered to be extremely encouraging for this relatively exposed offshore areas in order to imple- kind of farming system, although there is a need to ment a governmental regulation of January 2007. understand that a change of scenario towards one This has lead to a shift in technology towards larger in which the majority of production comes from HDPE (High Density Polyethylene) circular cages truly exposed areas should be gradual, since there (10-24 m in diameter) rather than the smaller lo- are still a multitude of issues to be addressed which cally made wooden cages. Source: Ministry of Ag- could affect the viability of the activity, not only in riculture and Rural Affairs (Gozogozoglu, 2004). relation to new technologies but also to issues af- fecting the market, company size, the value chain (the supply of fry, feedstuffs, etc.) and planning and U.S. of America. regulation, amongst others. The United States of America currently has a great deal of opposition to the development of Turkey marine cage aquaculture. Continuous anti aquac- ulture protests in Maine and Washington have un- Turkish aquaculture is dominated by fi nfi sh dermined the development of marine cage produc- production, mostly seabream and seabass farms tion. Due to the continuous confl ict and the lack located on the southern Aegean coast. This area of suitable sheltered sites the USA has invested in provides many sheltered sites suitable for mooring the development of open ocean production tech- conventional fl oating cages. Approximately 95 per- nology. Interest in open ocean production began in cent of the total seabass and seabream production the late 80’s, which lead to the emergence of de- currently come from the Aegean region account- signs and prototypes for open ocean culture. In the ing for 45 percent of the total Turkish aquaculture early to mid 90’s pilot projects commenced in the production. Some areas along the Aegean coast are Northeast (University of New Hampshire) and the Gulf of Mexico. The fi rst commercial open ocean Page 32 farm was established in Hawaii in 2001. Current- ly there is no clear authority for the permitting of aquaculture in federal waters i.e. waters three to 200 miles off shore. The National Oceanic and At- mospheric Administration (NOAA) has proposed the establishment of the National Offshore Aqua- culture Act 2007. It is hoped that this Act will es- tablish the legal framework regarding permits, en- forcement, and monitoring of offshore aquaculture. However, to date the process has met with strong opposition from NGO’s and fi shermen’s organisa- tions.

Recently the Ocean Stewards Institute was es- Break out discussions during the regional Workshop in tablished in the USA. This is a trade organization Galway, Ireland in 2007 advocating for the emerging open ocean aquacul- ture industry.

Flyer for the OATP International Workshop in Dublin, Ireland in 2007

Page 33 EXPERTISE mariculture, environmental impact, physiology, population impact, physiology, genetics, reproduction shellfi sh, production shellfi optimisation diversifi cation, fi sh biology, sh biology, cation, fi diversifi benthic ecology, pollution benthic ecology,

nutrition physiology of fi sh nutrition physiology of fi larvae, use of live feed, health and welfare, nutrition, growth (advice to Ministry) fi shing technology fi

broodstock management, hatchery technology, nutrition, hatchery technology, control of fi sh development, fi sh sh development, fi control of fi diseases optimisation of culture systems, diversifi cation of species (fi sh, cation of species (fi diversifi moluscs, cephalopods), genomics, reproduction and larval breeding

production optimisation of fi sh production optimisation of fi and molluscs, new species, pathology and parasitology, pathology and parasitology, identifi cation of mussel larvae identifi abundance; coastal

oceanography

pathology, feeding, Artemia, feeding, pathology, automation, effl uent treatment, automation, effl new species

TYPE INFRASTRUCTURE specialised laboratories

shellfi sh hatchery, ongrowing sh hatchery, shellfi fi elds, fi sh culture unit elds, fi fi land based marine aquaculture research station for conducting applied research on-land experimental facilities with recirculation systems, laboratories for digestibility, laboratories for digestibility, physiology on-land experimental facility for testing models of fi shing gear testing models of fi land based indoor and outdoor (Faros fi eld station) facilities: (Faros fi larval rearing, nursery, weaning, larval rearing, nursery, pre-growing and broodstock land based facilities, specialised laboratories, pilot plants for fl at laboratories, pilot plants for fl fi sh production fi

land based facilities, experimental hatchery facilities

aquaculture pilot plant: land based facilities for larval prod, growout and reproduction; specialised laboratories

WEB SITE www.izor.hr www.izor.hr

www.unidu.hr www.unidu.hr www.moa.gov.cy

www.difres.dk www.difres.dk

www.sintef.dk www.sintef.dk

www.hcmr.gr www.hcmr.gr

www.juntadeandalu www.juntadeandalu cia.es

www.cimacoron.org www.cimacoron.org

www.cetga.org www.cetga.org institute; COMP: company) COMP: institute;

ns

ó

as. Xunta de Galicia

ñ

NAME INFRASTRUCTURE Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries

University of Dubrovnik, Department of Aquaculture Department of Department of Fisheries and Marine Research (DFMR)

Danish Institute for Fisheries Research (DIFRES)

SINTEF North Sea Centre Flume Tank Tank Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR), Institute of Aquaculture

Centro de Investigacion y Formacion Pesquera y AcuicolaFormacion Pesquera y (CIFPA), Regional Goverment of (CIFPA), Andalusia

Centro De Investigaci Mari

Centro tecnologico Gallego de Acuicultura -CETGA, Cluster de la Acuicultura de Galicia la

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PRIV RI

OWNER

PRIV RI

U

o

ñ

a

í

o,

ñ

diz), Agua diz),

á

CITY CITY Split

Dubrovnik Nicosia

Charlottenlund

Hirtshals

Heraklion; Faros

El Toru El Puerto de Santa Mar (C del Pino (Huelva)

Vilanova deVilanova Arousa

Punta do Couso, Agui Couso,

CYP CYP

CRO

CRO

DK

DK

EL EL

ES

ES

ES Table 1: Existing aquaculture sea water based research facilities in the EU (U: University; PUB RI: public research institute; PRIV RI: private research research private RI: PRIV institute; research public RI: PUB University; (U: EU the in facilities research based water sea aquaculture Existing 1: Table

Appendix I

1

1 2

3

4

5

6

7

8 Page 34

fi sh parasitology parasitology sh fi

marine mammals; turtles and and turtles mammals; marine

species species

production systems, new new systems, production

nutrition, environmental impact, impact, environmental nutrition,

educational purposes purposes educational

reproduction, genetics genetics reproduction,

algae), larval rearing, rearing, larval algae),

new species (fi sh, bivalves, bivalves, sh, (fi species new

nutrition; culture techniques for for techniques culture nutrition;

techniques; genetics genetics techniques;

species; new hatchery hatchery new species;

culture techniques for new new for techniques culture

fi sh nutrition and feeding; feeding; and nutrition sh fi

ecotoxicology, marine ecology ecology marine ecotoxicology,

nutrition, mussel culture, culture, mussel nutrition,

physiology, genetics and and genetics physiology,

fi sh pathology, reproduction, reproduction, pathology, sh fi

fi sh larval biology and nutrition, nutrition, and biology larval sh fi

techniques for new species species new for techniques

nutrition, reproduction, culture culture reproduction, nutrition,

and specialised labs labs specialised and

land based facilities, pilot plant plant pilot facilities, based land

land based facilities facilities based land

intertidal production area area area production production intertidal intertidal

science applications and a a and applications science

and fi sh cages, computer computer cages, sh fi and

facilities: sea rafts for molluscs molluscs for rafts sea facilities:

experimental sea based based sea experimental

algae; specialised labs labs specialised algae;

large-scale) for fi sh, bivalves, bivalves, sh, fi for large-scale)

(incl. (incl.

land based rearing facilities facilities facilities rearing rearing based based land land

and training training and

research; experimental activities activities experimental research;

land and sea based facilities for for facilities based sea and land

and specialised laboratories laboratories specialised and

fi sh, molluscs and crustaceans crustaceans and molluscs sh, fi

land based rearing facilities for for facilities rearing based land

specialised laboratories laboratories specialised

growing and broodstock; broodstock; and growing

facilities for larvae, juveniles, on on juveniles, larvae, for facilities

indoor land based rearing rearing based land indoor

wsiam.carm.es

www.uv.es www.

acionacuicultura.org www.xunta.es

www.ieo.es www.ieo.es

www.grupoinvestig www.grupoinvestig

es es

www.iccm.rcanaria. www.iccm.rcanaria.

www.csic.es

www.mu.ieo.es

n n

ó

n en en n

ó

ncies del del ncies

è

fi cas (CSIC) (CSIC) cas fi

í

fi co de Murcia Murcia de co fi

á

ol de de ol

ñ

ol de de ol

ñ

a a

a a

í

í

a; Institut de Ci de Institut a;

í

a Marina. Instituto Instituto Marina. a

a Evolutiva Evolutiva a

í

í

Andaluc

Biolog Biolog

Cavanilles de Biodiversidad y y Biodiversidad de Cavanilles

Zoolog

University of Valencia, Unidad de de Unidad Valencia, of University

y Desarrollo Agrario y Alimentario. Alimentario. y Agrario Desarrollo y

Instituto Murciano de Investigaci de Murciano Instituto

Acuicultura. Xunta de Galicia Galicia de Xunta Acuicultura.

Instituto Galego de Formaci de Galego Instituto

Oceanograf

Instituto Espa Instituto

Marinas Marinas

Instituto Canario de Ciencias Ciencias de Canario Instituto

Mar. Mar.

Ciencias Marinas de de Marinas Ciencias

Torre de la Sal; Instituto de de Instituto Sal; la de Torre

Marinas; Instituto de Acuicultura Acuicultura de Instituto Marinas;

- Instituto de Investigaciones Investigaciones de Instituto -

Investigaciones Cient Investigaciones

Consejo Superior de de Superior Consejo

Oceanograf

- Instituto Espa Instituto -

Centro Oceanogr Centro

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

U U

n, n,

ó

n n

ó

a a

ñ

diz, diz,

á

Las Palmas Palmas Las

Murcia, Vigo, Vigo, Murcia,

Valencia Valencia

Pinatar. Murcia Murcia Pinatar.

San Pedro del del Pedro San

Arousa Arousa

Vilanova de de Vilanova

Illa de Arousa. Arousa. de Illa

Coru

Tenerife, A A Tenerife,

Cantabria, Cantabria,

Monte Monte

Barcelona Barcelona

-C

Puerto Real Real Puerto

Vigo, Castell Vigo,

Mazarr

ES ES

ES ES

ES ES

ES ES

ES ES

ES ES

ES ES

9 9

11 11

15 15

14 14

13 13

12 12 10 10 Page 35 physiology, immunology- physiology, pathology, genetics, technology pathology, of recirculation systems adaptation, reproduction, nutrition of marine fi sh nutrition of marine fi behaviour in marine environment of materials, equipment, sub-marine vehicles, instrumentation, physical sensors aquaculture nutrition and metabolism

fi sh nutrition and feeding, fi sh sh nutrition and feeding, fi fi quality, physiology quality,

environmental studies, fi sh environmental studies, fi farming environments, monitoring food safety and quality control, water treatment, physiology, water treatment, physiology, genetics, feeding and nutrition reproduction, larval rearing, genetics, feed development, rearing systems, integrated systems growth, feeding regimes, disease, genetics, recirculation, environmental impact;

coldwater fi sh and shellfi sh sh and shellfi coldwater fi

salmon and trout research, feeding, vaccines, broodstock, design of facilities in commercial situation

land based tanks for fi sh and land based tanks for fi mollusc culture, recirculation systems land based rearing facilities and specialised laboratories deep wave basin, water circultation basin, laboratories for testing materials and sensors

laboratory facilities

experimental sea cages with monitoring and feeding control systems; land based recirculation fi sh rearing facilities fi land based rearing installations

land based rearing facilities (hatchery, raceway tanks), (hatchery, specialised laboratories land based systems for rearing fi sh in seawater ponds fi

Land based freshwater and marine fi sh rearing facilities, marine fi laboratories

freshwater hatchery and salmon rearing facilities

siba2.unile.it

www.ifremer.fr

www.ifremer.fr

www.ifremer.fr www.ifremer.fr

www.inra.fr www.inra.fr

www.rktl.fi www.rktl.fi

www.ist.me.cnr.it www.ist.me.cnr.it

www.

www.ocean.org.il

www.ucc.ie

www.marine.ie

di Lecce

à

rimentale d’Aquaculture

é

IFREMER - Station Exp

IFREMER, Laboratoire ARN IFREMER, Laboratoire

IFREMER, METRI

INRA INRA

Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute (FGFRI)

Istituto Sperimentale Talassografi co Talassografi

Marine Aquaculture and fi sheries Aquaculturefi and Marine Research Centre - DiSTeBA - Research Centre - DiSTeBA Universit Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research, National Center for Mariculture

Aquaculture and Fisheries Development Centre (AFDC), University College Cork

Marine Institute

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

U

U

ä

é

é

ttyl

ä

Lees-Athas

Palavas-sur-

mer

Plouzan

Plouzan

St-Pee, Donzacq,

Rym

Messina

Lecce

Eilat

Cork

Newport

FIN

F

F

F

F

I

I

IL IL

IRL IRL

IRL IRL

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 36 production of ornamental fi sh, production of ornamental fi invertebrates, shellfi sh, marine invertebrates, shellfi fi nfi sh, recirculation technology, nfi fi hatchery and system design, phycodepuration selective breeding, feed and nutrition, water quality, environmental effects, fi sh environmental effects, fi ecology, evolution, physiology, evolution, physiology, ecology, behaviour juvenile production, broodstock, selective breeding, cultivation of new species selective breeding and genetics, nutrition, welfare and the environment, product quality, molecular biology, molecular biology, marine species selective breeding, production of brood fi sh and fertilized eggs, brood fi fi sh health fi fi sh health, feed production and fi use, food safety, feed and use,sensor food safety, technology, production economy, production economy, technology, documentation fi sh feeding and feed fi development

feed development and technology, environmentaltechnology, impact of feed biology and technology related to e.g. feed, sea cage experimental studies breeding, fi rst feeding, welfare, breeding, fi ethology, cod larvae production,ethology, new species, fi sh health, new species, fi physiology

y: experimental

ø

ra: land based

ø

land based small, medium and

large-scale fl ow through rearing large-scale fl facilities, fi nfi sh hatchery, shellfi sh shellfi sh hatchery, nfi facilities, fi rearing and broodstock facilities, seaweed hatcheries

freshwater and seawater land based facilities with variable salinity and temperature

Land based rearing facilities for halibut, cod, turbot, abalone and new species Sunndals facilities; Aver facilities; pens at sea, laboratories

facilities for breeding of salmon and rainbow trout

commercial size salmon grow out sea based facilities

salmon grow out sea based trial farms; monitoring, control and recording of water conditions and fi sh growth fi commercial sea based facilities, cranes for collection of feed losses salmon and cod grow out sea based facilities land based experimental facilities for broodstock, spawning, hatcheries for salmon and marine cold water sp.; sea-basedfacilities

.ie

mri.nuigalwa

www.

www.holar.is

www.hafro.is www.hafro.is

www.akvaforsk.no www.akvaforsk.no

www.aquagen.no www.aquagen.no

www.skretting.no www.skretting.no

www.ewos.com www.ewos.com

www.fjordseafood.com

www.gifas.no

www.imr.no www.imr.no

l

å

ksstasjonHelgeland

ø

National University of Ireland - Galway (NUI/UCG), Martin Ryan Institute Carna

Holar University College

Marine Research Institute

AKVAFORSK AKVAFORSK

Aqua Gen AS Aqua Gen

Center for AquacultureCenter for Competence AS (CAC)Competence (Skretting, Marine Harvest, AKVAsmart) AKVAsmart) Ewos Innovation ASEwos Innovation

FjordFors AS

GIFAS - Gildesk GIFAS Forskningsstasjon ASForskningsstasjon Institute for Marine Research

RI

U

PRIV

PUB RI

PUB RI

U

COMP

PUB RI COMP

COMP

COMP

ra,

ø

l

å

y

ø

nna

nningdal

Saudarkrokur

Sunndals

ø

ø

Carna

Reykjavik

Aver

Hemne,Tingvol l

Hjelmeland

Dirdal, L

D

Gildesk

Austevoll, Matre

IRL IRL

ISL ISL

ISL ISL

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Page 37 marine ecology and evolution in marine ecosystems

production of new fi sh species, production of new fi nutrition, recirculation technology, bio-economical technology, modelling

bacteriology, parasitology, parasitology, bacteriology, hematology, analyses of water hematology, quality measuring, weighing, marking, vaccination of fi sh vaccination of fi

marine, coastal and freshwater ecology, environmental and ecology, impact assessments water quality, water treatment, water quality, monitoring of algae, effects ofmonitoring of algae, effects aquaculture physiology, nutrition, cultivation physiology, systems for marine species, shellfi sh shellfi fi sh health management fi aquaculture engineering, marine resources and processing technology fi sh nutrition and feed fi development broodstock management, larval rearing, feeding, nutrition, fi sh rearing, feeding, nutrition, fi diseases

educational purposes

fi sh health fi

development of production methods for cod and for salmon

using wrasse as treatment against sea-lice

salmon grow out sea based facilities

land based broodstock and larval facilities, sea cages for cod production large-scale land based aquarium land based facilities for smolt facilities, acclimatised with rearing running seawater and variable temperature and salinity salmon grow out sea based land based seawater tanks and aquaria facilities, water quality database

land based seawater facilities for larval rearing

salmon grow out sea based facilities land based marine hatchery, land based marine hatchery, environmental impact laboratory

salmon grow out sea based facilities land based plant, fi sh health land based plant, fi laboratory, full-scale marine farm full-scale marine farm laboratory,

grow out unit for salmon and trout salmon grow out sea based facilities cod farm and salmon grow out sea based facilities

www.nvfh.no www.nvfh.no

http://en.norut.no/

www.nina.no www.nina.no

www.niva.no www.niva.no

www.ntnu.no www.ntnu.no

www.pharmaq.no www.sintef.no www.sintef.no

www.skretting.no www.skretting.no

www.havbruksstasj www.havbruksstasj onen.no

www.val.vgs.no www.val.vgs.no

www.veso.no www.veso.no

www.leppefi sk.no www.leppefi

www.nioz.nl

www.rivo.wageningen www.rivo.wageningen -ur.nl -ur.nl

laks)

ø

ø

Nordvest Fiskehelse AS Nordvest Fiskehelse

Norwegian Cod Breeding Centre

Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA)

Norwegian Institute for Water Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA) Research (NIVA)

Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Technology and

Pharmaq AS Pharmaq SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture AS - SEALAB Aquaculture

Skretting Aquaculture Research Skretting Centre (ARC) The Aquaculture Research The Station in Troms Station in

Val Akva Val

VESO Vikan Akvavet VESO Vikan

Villa AS Villa (Cod Farm and Milj

Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research (NIOZ)

Wageningen IMARES b.v. IMARES b.v. Wageningen Institute for Marine Resources & Ecosystem Studies

COMP COMP

COMP COMP

COMP COMP

COMP COMP

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PUB RI

PRIV RI

PRIV RI

PRIV RI

U

y

ø

y

ø

sneshamn

r

rvika

ø

Stavanger

Trondheim Trondheim

Trondheim Trondheim

Texel Texel

IJmuiden

æ

å

R

Solbergstrand

Gursk

Kraknes,

Sandnes

N

K

Val Val

Namsos

Vikebukt Vikebukt

N

N

N

N

N

N N

N

N

N

N

N

NL NL

NL NL

36

37

38

39

40

41 42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

Page 38

environmental impact, impact, impact, environmental environmental

treatment, food safety, safety, food treatment,

fi sh health and medical medical medical and and health health sh sh fi fi

farm planning planning planning farm farm

on the marine environment, fi sh sh fi environment, marine the on

structures, aquaculture impact impact aquaculture structures,

design of offshore fi sh farm farm sh fi offshore of design

biology biology biology

nutrition, physiology, molecular molecular physiology, nutrition,

fi sh behaviour, feeding and and feeding behaviour, sh fi

bivalves bivalves

freshwater rearing of fi sh and and sh fi of rearing freshwater

managing; marine and and marine managing;

environmental monitoring and and monitoring environmental

marine ecology and and ecology marine

histology, nutrition nutrition nutrition histology, histology,

mussel culture, pathology, pathology, culture, mussel

physiology, anguiliculture, anguiliculture, physiology,

mariculture mariculture

offshore offshore

impacts, integrated aquaculture, aquaculture, integrated impacts,

and pathology, environmental environmental pathology, and

aquaculture biology, nutrition nutrition biology, aquaculture

coastal morphodynamics morphodynamics coastal

phenomena: waves, currents, currents, waves, phenomena:

research on coastal coastal on research

regimes regimes regimes

production systems, feeding feeding systems, production

broodstock management, management, broodstock

new species, physiology, physiology, species, new

algae algae algae

antifouling, harmful harmful antifouling,

rearing, on growing production, production, growing on rearing,

brood stock management, larval larval management, stock brood

behaviour behaviour

epidemiology, immunology, fi sh sh fi immunology, epidemiology,

molecular genetics, genetics, molecular

fi sh health, pathology, virology, virology, pathology, health, sh fi

management tools tools tools management management

and specialised laboratories laboratories specialised and

fl exible on-land rearing facilities facilities rearing on-land exible fl

of Istanbul Istanbul of

basin at the Technical University University Technical the at basin

no sea based facilities, model model facilities, based sea no

and equipment equipment equipment and and

facilities, specialised laboratories laboratories specialised facilities,

rearing rearing

land based brackish water water brackish based land

facilities facilities

small-scale land based rearing rearing based land small-scale

breeding, research vessel, vessel, research breeding,

long-line systems for mussel mussel for systems long-line

station) station)

specialised laboratories (fi eld eld (fi laboratories specialised

circuits circuits

land based facilities with closed closed with facilities based land

measuring structures structures measuring

marine station with permanent permanent with station marine

station of Ramalhete Ramalhete of station

land based marine aquaculture aquaculture marine based land

marine fi nfi sh, shellfi sh sh shellfi sh, nfi fi marine

based facilities for salmonids, salmonids, for facilities based

land-based marine hatchery, sea- hatchery, marine land-based

behavioural units units behavioural

facilities, challenge units and and units challenge facilities,

land based facilities: rearing rearing facilities: based land

www.nafc.ac.uk

.gov.uk .gov.uk

www.frs-scotland

www.cefas.co.uk www.cefas.co.uk

www.deu.edu.tr

www.vabr.slu.se www.vabr.slu.se

www.rmri.ro www.rmri.ro

agricultura.pt agricultura.pt

www.iniap.min-

www.cimar.org www.cimar.org

www.ibwpan.gda.pl www.ibwpan.gda.pl

www.ualg.pt

l University, Institute of of Institute University, l

ü

(NAFC) Marine Centre Centre Marine (NAFC)

North Atlantic Fisheries College College Fisheries Atlantic North

(FRS) Marine Laboratory Laboratory Marine (FRS)

Fisheries Research Services Services Research Fisheries

and Fisheries Research (IPIMAR) (IPIMAR) Research Fisheries and

Interdisciplinary Centre for Marine Marine for Centre Interdisciplinary

and Aquaculture Scienc (CEFAS) (CEFAS) Scienc Aquaculture and

Centre for Environment, Fisheries Fisheries Environment, for Centre

Marine Sciences and Technology Technology and Sciences Marine

Dokuz Eyl Dokuz

Sciences Sciences

Swedish University of Agricultural Agricultural of University Swedish

“Grigore Antipa” Antipa” “Grigore

Research and Development Development and Research

National Institute for Marine Marine for Institute National

National Institute of Agronomy Agronomy of Institute National

(CIIMAR) (CIIMAR)

and Environmental Research Research Environmental and

Coastal Research Station Station Research Coastal

Algarve Algarve

(CCMAR), University of of University (CCMAR),

Algarve Center of Marine Sciences Sciences Marine of Center Algarve

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

PUB RI RI PUB

U U

U U

U U

Aberdeen, Aberdeen,

Weymouth Weymouth

Lowestoft, Lowestoft,

Izmir Izmir

Norrbyn Norrbyn

Constanta Constanta

Lisboa Lisboa

Porto Porto

Lubiatowo Lubiatowo

Faro Faro

(Shetland) (Shetland)

Scalloway Scalloway

Aultbea Aultbea

TUR TUR

ROM ROM

UK UK

UK UK

UK UK

SE SE

PT PT

PT PT

PL PL PL PL

Source: Deliverable DesignACT 1. Inventory of infrastructure and knowledge gaps in aquaculture technology.

59 59

58 58

57 57

56 56

55 55

54 54

53 53

52 52

51 51 50 50

Page 39 Appendix II 2. The Parties shall, to the extent it is relevant and to MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING mutual benefi t, cooperate on creating and conduct- ing operations. The objective is to strengthen the Between the projects: relevance and scientifi c basis for research within European aquaculture, and to consolidate the basis Towards enhanced and sustainable use of genet- for coordinated operations. This infers developing ics and breeding in the European aquaculture coordinated visions, strategic research agenda industry (AquaBreeding) deployment strategies and projects and conducting represented by Instituto Sperimentale Italiano Laz- transfers and exchanges of information, fi ndings zaro Spallanzani, Milan, Italy and knowledge. Evaluation of the Promotion of Offshore Aquac- ulture Through a Technology Platform (OATP) 3. At the outset the following tasks are selected for represented by The Marine Institute, Galway, direct cooperation between the Parties: Ireland a. In cooperation with the Federation of European and Aquaculture Producers (FEAP) to organize a Pro- European Aquaculture Technology Platform fet Policy Workshop with key representatives of all (EATP) stakeholders in a future EATP to develop and adopt represented by SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture a management plan and its terms of reference Ltd, Trondheim, Norway b. A presentation will be made by the EATP to the projects OATP and AquaBreeding during their fi rst regarding cooperation in developing RTDI vi- kick-off meetings sions, research agenda, deployment strategies and c. Participation of one EATP, AquaBreeding and projects relevant to the European aquaculture OATP representative at manage¬ment and themat- industry under the concept of Technology Plat- ic meetings of each project as appropriate. forms. d. Facilitate the information fl ow between initia- The Instituto Sperimentale Italiano Lazzaro Spal- tives (access to the intranet website, newsletters, lanzani, coordinator of the project Towards en- vision papers, address book of project participants, hanced and sustainable use of genetics and breeding a.o.). in the European aqua¬culture industry (hereafter e. Joint meetings during the coming years. referred to as ISILS), The Marine Institute, coordi- nator of the project Evaluation of the Promotion of 4. AquaBreeding, OATP and EATP will estab- Offshore Aquaculture Through a Technology Plat- lish cooperation with other relevant Technology form (hereafter referred to as MI) and the SINTEF Platforms including the new pillars (or initiative Fisheries and Aquaculture Ltd, coordinator of the groups) established under the EATP umbrella. project European Aquaculture Technology Platform (hereafter referred to as SINTEF) having mutual in- 5. The EATP will take on board the fi ndings and terest in advancing European aquaculture recognize conclusions of the AquaBreeding and OATP to that there is a need to operate in consort hence a form part of the EATP visions, strategic research coordinating organ would be useful, have agreed to agenda and deployment strategy. foster cooperation as defi ned in this Memorandum. To this end all Parties agree to undertake the activi- 6. It is agreed that the intention of this cooperation ties and procedures as set forth below. is not to restrict or otherwise detract from the rela- tionships which already exist between the Parties The Parties have agreed as follows: and their clients or partners. 7. This Memorandum of Understanding is valid 1. To establish EATP as a coordinating organ that from the date of signing. Any Party wishing to ter- will facilitate coordination of technology platform minate this Understanding must notify the other initiatives and operations within aquaculture. Un- Parties in writing at least three months in advance. der this umbrella the offshore and breeding initia- This Memorandum of Understanding is signed in tives (AquaBreeding and OATP) are considered the Brussels on March 22nd 2007, in three originals, fi rst initiative groups of the European Aquaculture each being authentic. Technology Platform. Page 40 Appendix III RTDI Requirements

Goals Objectives RTDI Requirements

1. To address the issue of > The production of aqua feeds should be a > There needs to be considerable research into sustainability of food sources for sustainable activity, diversifying the alternatives to wild fi sh resources for fi sh oils in aquaculture particularly in terms of sourcing of raw materials for formulated aquaculture feed. alternative sources for fi sh oils and to feeds and encouraging the ensure best environmental practices development of aquaculture as an integrated > More investigations need to be carried out into in order to ensure the viability of activity. farmed sources, additional marine resources and the industry and promote public land sourced vegetable oil substitutes in feedstuffs. confi dence > Replacing fi sh oil with vegetable extracts promotes the protection of wild fi sh resources and promotes sustainability.

2. Ensure Offshore Aquaculture > Offshore aquaculture must provide > Research into improved on-growing techniques plays a substantial role in helping suitable alternatives to inshore culture is necessary, particularly the adaptation of inshore meet increased global seafood to provide for increased production and culture to offshore locations. consumption demands, particularly utilisation of alternative sites. in light of the fact that capture > Detailed knowledge on hatchery design and fi sheries are likely to remain stagnant > The potential for polyculture should be techniques is vital and knowledge transfer between at best. researched and this could lead to the sharing European areas of expertise should promote best of space and resources. This will have practice in rearing and on growing. obvious cost cutting benefi ts for industry and the positive environmental benefi ts > Increased R&D into novel species for culturing should be investigated and promoted. in offshore regions. These include sea urchins, pollack, tuna, cod, hake, halibut, seabream and seabass.

3. Improved public perception of the > Relevant information must be easily > Development of improved methods of aquaculture industry in the areas of accessible to help in the area of openness & information dissemination to stakeholders environmental management and the transparency health benefi ts of eating seafood > Research into effective media campaigns > Participation by industry in monitoring programmes is essential > Development of real time monitoring reporting

> Health benefi ts of eating sea foods should > Aquaculture installations developed as suitable be promoted platforms for monitoring equipment

> Initiatives in aquaculture CZM should be publicised

4. Harmonisation of Licensing > The perceived problems with the > The current legislative framework that exists for Procedures and a more proactive regulatory framework in the offshore aquaculture near shore should encompass offshore approach to licensing context echo inherent problems with the aquaculture operations also, with certain license current framework closer in-shore. This conditions applying to offshore locations. includes the length of time for license processing and the lack of proactive >A defi nition of Offshore Aquaculture needs to be approaches in coastal planning involving adopted marine spatial planning (MSP) and site designation. > License applications processing must be streamlined and involve more proactive approaches such as site designations and improved agency co-ordination

> Site designations should occur in the wider ICZM context and utilise available technology to inform the decision making process.

> The principles/components of current area management agreements (aquaculture management initiatives) should be extended to encompass

Page 41 Goals Objectives RTDI Requirements offshore aquaculture with the purpose of developing codes of practice for the industry and to ensure good environmental practice. 5. The regulatory and monitoring > The Marine Strategy Directive (pending) > The development and implementation of a framework for offshore aquaculture will set specifi c targets extending clean consultation process with the aquaculture industry should be harmonised with key water targets and monitoring requirements for the purpose of informing the drafting of the EU environmental and biodiversity beyond the one nautical mile limits set by Marine Strategy Directive (MSD) directives. the WFD. Utilising offshore locations will require greater participation by industry >Legislative monitoring requirements for fi sh in monitoring programmes and there is a farms must be integrated with requirements under strong need for improved developments in the MSD. remote monitoring technology. > Biosecurity improvements must be put in > With the potentially more exposed nature place through: legislation; codes of practices & of offshore sites bio-security issues will international co-operation; industry management need to be addressed. frameworks; revised monitoring; health management plans; development of containment structures; and contingency plans for dealing with escapees. This will require relevant R & D support

6. Insure Navigational Planning is > License conditions must provide for the > Develop protocols for standardisation of a fundamental part of the licensing use of appropriate equipment by offshore navigational markers process, to reduce the potential of operators and safety checks must be a part collisions in the offshore scenario. of compulsory monitoring programmes. > Design integrated aquaculture navigation plans on a local basis > Navigation markers around the installations should be standardised and also > Navigation and warning systems must be be part of regular safety checks. developed as well as an integrated navigational plan, involving port authorities and seafarers.

> Carry out audits of installations and navigational markers

7. Enhancement of Personal Safety > Legislative requirements are necessary > The personal training of site staff is an important of workers in offshore aquaculture placing the onus on offshore operators to factor in safety for the offshore aquaculture locations through a variety of provide suitable equipment and training. industry. Accident and emergency concerns legislative and management increase the more you move offshore in terms approaches. > R&D into safe fi sh containment systems, of exposure and response time to emergencies. work platforms and personal safety devices Evaluation of the requirements to offset potential is necessary. increases in risk are required

> Industry training programmes are necessary to train staff in safe work practices in offshore locations these will require careful development and evaluation

> Development of suitable cages, anchoring systems, navigational systems and fi sh handling equipment is necessary.

> Technology development in the area of remote communications is crucial in emergency situations

8. To minimise the release > Requirements under the WFD and MSD > Guidelines must be developed and implemented of nutrients from aquaculture (pending) should be strictly adhered to. (with particular reference to coastal production installations systems) to reduce or eliminate the negative impact > Monitoring programmes covering associated with the organic content of effl uents aquaculture industry should deal suffi ciently from aquaculture farms. with these requirements > Permitted parameter levels should fall within EU > Developments in remote sensing requirements and monitoring protocols to provide technology and real time reporting is for adequate monitoring in this context will be necessary required

> Advantages of polyculture should be investigated in terms of the benefi ts to nutrient loading of co- location fi nfi sh and shellfi sh units

Page 42 Goals Objectives RTDI Requirements > Utilising offshore locations will require greater participation by industry in monitoring programmes

> Industry Codes of Practice (COPs) to deal with environmental management concerns will be required.

> Technology development is required in the area of remote monitoring and real time reporting

> Development of farm surveillance technology is required to help supplement farm environmental management plans and provide for greater access to data from remote locations

9. The effects of organic loading > Adequate processes for siting of > Proactive designation (through Marine Spatial on the benthos from fi sh feed aquaculture units must be adopted Planning) will help select suitable areas for and nitrogenous waste should be culturing. minimised. > Statutory requirements for fallowing & monitoring is necessary > Statutory monitoring programmes at various stages of production will be necessary to validate > Integrated farm environmental the site designation process. management plans must deal with the conservation of biodiversity. > Fallowing requirements should be provided for through license conditions and through the provision of suffi cient space or sites for separation of generations

> Strategies should be developed to ensure the thorough analysis of possible impacts on the fl ora and fauna of the areas where aquaculture facilities are to be deployed (in this regard, offshore aquaculture normally has less impact than other kinds of systems).

> Development of remote surveillance technology (such as cameras and sensors) is required, to mitigate the possibility of feed or other sources of organic inputs falling to the seafl oor.

> Eco-friendly antifouling coatings and products should be developed.

10. Development of Best Practice in > Industry will need to work closely with > Native species should be cultured wherever biosecurity to promote stock health administrations, fi sh health specialists and feasible, following the recommendations of and to minimise wild – farmed equipment designers to ensure that every organisations such as the IUCN or ICES in the interactions effort is made to develop codes of practice, case of the culturing of alien species. which promote stock health, and the protection of wild fi sh species. > Research (on the closing of life cycles, the functioning of the ecosystem, etc.) should be encouraged in order to guarantee that aquaculture should not endanger stocks (e.g. bluefi n tuna) or biodiversity in general.

> Research into fi sh sterilisation techniques and hatchery techniques is necessary to provide alternative sources of fi sh for stocking purposes.

> Contingency plans must be developed (as part of COPs) in the event of accidental escape of fi sh.

Page 43 Goals Objectives RTDI Requirements

11. Maintaining a good health status > EU & National legislative requirements > Certifi cation for transfer of all live species must and disease free status for aquatic should be strictly adhered to and be a fundamental requirement species requires added incentives for certifi cation for fi sh transfers must be an offshore aquaculture compulsory. > Strategies should be developed to minimise the transfer of pathogens between farmed species and > Research into causes, spread, effects and wild stock populations in both directions. treatments of disease is required through the establishment of expert groups on national > Strategies should be developed to ensure the and inter-regional level. correct management of the use of antibiotics and to minimise possible detrimental effects on the natural > The rational licensing of treatment environment. products is necessary in terms of proactive approaches to deal with aquatic diseases/ > Inter-regional liaisons are necessary in the parasites in a timely fashion. development of global COPs dealing with the health management and containment of the spread of economically important diseases.

> Further research into the causes, threats, treatment and containment of such diseases as Pancreas Disease, Infection Salmon Anaemia, Infection Pancreas Necrosis (IPN) Gyrodactulus, (and parasites such as sea lice) is important for a viable aquaculture industry.

> Industry COPs should be developed to ensure maximum effi cacy of treatments in the event of aquatic diseases and parasites.

12. Promotion of Inter-regional co- > International co-ordination of R&D > Identifying the technology infrastructure gaps operation on R&D to help narrow into containment systems, fi sh handling is important to alleviate potential escape events, the wide technology gaps that exist equipment, remote monitoring and which occur as a result of fi sh behaviour, climactic for the commercial realisation of surveillance equipment and MSP tools is conditions or operational procedures on farms. offshore aquaculture required to help develop practical solutions in each of these areas. > The practicalities of various containment systems used around the globe must be assessed for different geographic locations

> Technology transfer and application of designs to different potential species must be assessed

> Knowledge transfer between different users of offshore locations (e.g. oil and wind energy industries) would help provide practical solutions for offshore aquaculture

> Experiences in the application of MSP tools for site designation s should be assessed and applied for the planning of offshore aquaculture.

13. The development of a mature > The characterisation of sites in terms of > Research into methods for characterising offshore process of ICZM with a strong acquiring oceanographic and environmental sites in terms of the exposed nature is fundamental MSP component to underpin the data at potential offsite locations will be in order to test the best available technology in- rational development of Offshore an important component in providing situ. Characteristics of a site could be obtained Aquaculture as was highlighted in policy makers and prospective investors from national datasets from seabed mapping the EU Maritime Policy Green Paper with detailed information on a particular programmes and national monitoring programmes. location. Categorisation of these characteristics will be a very important step in their utilisation for planning. > Integration of datasets into GIS is crucial for a better understanding of resource use > It is important that methodologies are developed that show how thematic information can be extracted from national datasets (such as seabed survey information and core national datasets) for application to the offshore aquaculture industry.

Page 44 Goals Objectives RTDI Requirements > Knowledge transfer on the technology side between fi nfi sh and shellfi sh producers, inter- regionally and between other users of offshore sites (such as the wind energy industry and oil industries).

> The development of data collection through integrated monitoring programmes and layered GIS based databases

14. By 2020 innovative cage and > Escapement prevention and management > One of the most fundamental areas where equipment designs must provide should be improved with a view to development is needed is in the actual containment for the expansion of aquaculture to minimising potential impact. systems for aquaculture species. This refers to a offshore locations and provide for the suite of structures which house the cultured species diversifi cation of farmed species. at sea such as cages, rafts, barrels, nets, ropes, anchors and buoys.

> New innovative designs for fi sh cages and shellfi sh structures are required to mitigate economic losses and environmental concerns associated with escapees.

15. Support for continued > Improved automated techniques for > R&D is not only required for the containment technological innovation is required handling fi sh in exposed locations is systems themselves, but also necessary in in the wider infrastructure areas, required to reduce escapes, improve the designing birthing areas for vessels and work which are necessary to provide safe safety of workers and to compensate for platforms to provide for access to the fi sh. working platforms, improved access access issues in exposed locations to more exposed locations and which > Designing of automated feeding systems is minimise manual labour in more > Sustained national and European essential from the point of view of the barges treacherous locations support, including funding mechanisms for and pumping systems as well as the technology such R&D will be required to due to the infrastructure to allow remote operation. high costs associated with the prototype technology. > Other important equipment areas in need of development include fi sh handling and operational equipment.

> Public private partnership may be the most appropriate mechanisms to design and test the technology and to bring it through to commercial realisation.

16. To develop a focus on the > Monitoring equipment and > From a farm management perspective, a real- innovation and development of communication systems require further time capability for access to temperature and environmental and farm monitoring development and application to offshore oxygen data is important. equipment to meet statutory aquaculture locations. environmental requirements and to > An improvement to the durability of physical enhance farm management practices. > Remote access to data and information sensors and the number of parameters that they can is important due to access issues in more measure is required. exposed locations. > IT systems, which provide for remote intervention in feed administration, oxygen supply and control of the height of containment systems, require development.

> Monitoring at offshore locations must occur as part of an integrated monitoring plan for the region, with the offshore structures acting as platforms for monitoring equipment where possible.

> Considerable R&D into the monitoring and identifi cation of causes and effects of marine events (such as phytoplankton blooms) is required.

> Development of video cameras and sensors, which shut off feed supply, is critical and contributes to an integrated feed management system, improving FCR’s and environmental management of the site.

Page 45 Appendix IV – Regional reviews and global overview, pp. 50–68. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 498. Bibliography Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. De Silva, S.S. and Phillips, M.J., 2007. A review ABARE 2008, Australian Bureau of Agricultural of cage aquaculture: Asia (excluding China). In and Resource Economics, Australian Fisheries M. Halwart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage Statistics 2006. aquaculture – Regional reviews and global over- view, pp. 18–48. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. ABARE 2007, Australian Bureau of Agricultural No. 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. and Resource Economics, Australian Fisheries Statistics 2006. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit, FAO 2007. Aquaculture Annual Report 2004. Department Fishstat Plus: Universal software for fi shery statis- of Fisheries and Marine Research, Republic of tical time series. Aquaculture production: quanti- Cyprus. ties 1950-2005, Aquaculture production: values 1984-2005; Capture production: 1950-2005; Com- Aquaculture 2020. Transcending the Barriers – as modities production and trade: 1950-2005; Total long as.... Research Council of Norway, 2005. production: 1970-2005, Vers. 2.30.

An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Fisheries and Aquculture in Europe. No.37 Union. European Commission, COM (2007) 574 Feb 2008 fi nal. FAO, Statistical Yearbook, A strategy for the sustainable development of Eu- Aquaculture Production 2005-6 ropean Aquaculture. European Commission, 2002. COM (2002) 511 fi nal. FAO Statistical Database, FAOSTAT, 2006b. (Available at http://faostat.fao.org). Australian Aquaculture Industry, Sustainable Aquaculture: Development Strategy, July 2007. Gillard, M & Boustead, N., 2005. Salmon Aqua- culture in New Zealand. New Zealand Salmon Blow, P. and Leonard, S., 2007. A review of cage Farmers’ Association Inc. (available at http:// aquaculture: sub-Saharan Africa. In M. Halwart, www.salmon.org.nz/aboutsalmon.shtml). D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture – Regional reviews and global overview, pp. Grøttum, J.A. and Beveridge, M., 2007. A review 188–207. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. of cage aquaculture: northern Europe. In M. Hal- 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. wart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aqua- culture – Regional reviews and global overview, Cardia, F. and Lovatelli, A., 2007. A review of pp. 126–154. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. cage aquaculture: Mediterranean Sea. In M. Hal- 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. wart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aqua- culture – Regional reviews and global overview, James, M.A and Slaski, R. (2006) Appraisal of the pp. 156–187. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. opportunity for offshore aquaculture in UK wa- 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. ters. Report of Project FC0934, commissioned by DEFRA and Seafi sh from FRM Ltd., 119 pp. Catarci, C., 2007. Salmon Market Report. FAO Globefi sh. Masser, M.P. and Bridger, C.J., 2007. A review of cage aquaculture: North America. In M. Halwart, Chen, J., Guang, C., Xu, H., Chen, Z., Xu, P., Yan, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture X., Wang, Y. and Liu, J., 2007. A review of cage – Regional reviews and global overview, pp. and pen aquaculture: China. In M. Halwart, D. 102–125. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp. Page 46 Molnar, Dr. L., and van de Ven, P.W.J., 2006. Scottish Fish Farms, Annual Production Survey, Aquaculture Technologies for High-Energy Sites 2006. Report completed by the Fisheries Research – A Technology Review. University of Limerick, Services for the Scottish Government. Mobile & Marine robotics Research Centre. Tech- nical Report. Tacon, A.G.J. and Halwart, M., 2007. Cage aquaculture: a global overview. In M. Halwart, Lee, C.S. & O’Bryen, P.F., 2006. Open Ocean D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture Aquaculture – Moving Forward Workshop, Hono- – Regional reviews andglobal overview, pp. 1–16. lulu, Hawaii, Oct 2006. Oceanic Institute. An FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 498. Rome, affi liate of Hawaii’s Pacifi c University. FAO. 2007. 241 pp.

“The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture Neyts, A. and Sunde, LM., 2007. DesignACT 2006”, FAO, Roma (Italy), 2007. Inventory of infrastructure and knowledge gaps in aquaculture technology. Norwegian University of Watson, L. & Drumm, A., 2007. Offshore Aquac- Science & Technology and SINTEF. Deliverable ulture Development in Ireland – Next Step. Tech- of both Framework Programme Design Study & nical Report jointly commissioned by B.I.M. and DesignACT. the Marine Institute, 35 pp.

Newton, P., 2008. Trends in production and trade and outlook to 2012-2013. Australion Commodi- ties March Quarter 08.1. ISSN 132-7844

Ryan. J. Farming the Deep Blue report, Westport, Ireland, 2004.

Review of the state of world marine fi shery resources. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 457. Rome, FAO. 235 pp.

Rimmer, M.A. and Ponia, B., 2007. A review of cage aquaculture: Oceania. In M. Halwart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture – Re- gional reviews and global overview, pp. 208–231. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp.

Rojas, A. and Wadsworth, S., 2007. A review of cage aquaculture: Latin America and the Carib- bean. In M. Halwart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture – Regional reviews and global overview, pp. 70–100. FAO Fisheries Tech- nical Paper. No. 498. Rome, FAO. 2007. 241 pp.

Page 47