Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming in Tasmania

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming in Tasmania View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Tasmania Open Access Repository Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming INTERNAL REPORT Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming in Tasmania C. Crawford June 2001 TAFI Internal Report Page i Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming TAFI Marine Research Laboratories, Nubeena Crescent, Taroona, Tasmania 7053. E-mail: [email protected]. Ph (03) 6227 7224, Fax. (03) 6227 8035 Published by the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, University of Tasmania 2000. TAFI Internal Report Page ii Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming in Tasmania SUMMARY The Terms of Reference for this report were to undertake a qualitative analysis of the likelihood and significance of identified impacts associated with shellfish culture on the Tasmanian marine environment. This included a study of the available national and international scientific literature, and relating the environmental effects observed overseas with Tasmanian shellfish production, farming practices and marine environment. The main shellfish species cultured in Tasmania are the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas, which was introduced into Tasmania from Japan during the period 1948-1952, and the blue mussell, Mytilus edulis. Important differences between shellfish culture in Tasmania and overseas were noted. These included much lower levels of total shellfish production from Tasmania, and also lower levels of production per area farmed. Densities of shellfish on Tasmanian farms are generally at least an order of magnitude lower than in major shellfish producing countries overseas, largely because of the relatively low nutrient levels, and hence phytoplankton production, in Tasmanian coastal waters. There is also a lack of traditional shellfish culture in Tasmania compared with many overseas countries where practices of restocking shellfish beds and harvesting by dredging have changed little since the 1800’s. By contrast, farm management protocols in Tasmania have developed since the 1970’s with an emphasis on efficiency and a greater awareness of environmental management. Legislative-based Management Controls, which limit the production of shellfish per hectare in Tasmania, also serve to minimise environmental impacts. However, there appear to be few effective controls on shellfish stocking densities in other countries. Beneficial effects of shellfish farming on the Tasmanian marine environment were identified, and included increased monitoring of estuarine and coastal waters and the potential for scallop aquaculture to enhance wild scallop stocks. Improved water clarity and reduced nutrients and phytoplankton concentrations may also occur in some shellfish growing areas due to the increased filtration by cultured shellfish. Potential detrimental effects in Tasmania include the spread of introduced pests and diseases by movement of stock around the State. Alteration to the habitat may also occur but generally with minor ecological effect, and restricted to within the lease area. A qualitative assessment of the risks of ecological impact occurring as a result of shellfish farming activities in Tasmania was conducted based on Australian/New Zealand Standards for Risk Management, 1999. This involved identifying the likelihood and consequence of each area of risk, and developing a qualitative risk analysis matrix from which the levels of risk were identified. These risk levels were based on information available from Tasmanian studies and by comparison with effects observed overseas, taking into account total production and density of shellfish. They were also based on shellfish farming only occurring at suitable locations and with industry standard management practices. Outcomes of the qualitative risk assessment were: A high risk of spread of pests and pathogens due to movements of shellfish stock around the State, ( however, it was also noted that a high risk exists from other anthropogenic activities such as commercial and recreational fishing and sea transport). TAFI Internal Report Page iii Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming A moderate risk within the lease area of changes to the environment resulting from habitat disturbance due to shellfish farming. Low risk of ecological impact due to organic enrichment. Low risk of reduced food resources for other filter feeders. TAFI Internal Report Page iv Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1 2. CURRENT STATUS OF SHELLFISH FARMING WORLDWIDE AND IN TASMANIA................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 WORLDWIDE SHELLFISH AQUACULTURE PRODUCTION ....................................................... 2 2.2 CURRENT STATUS OF SHELLFISH FARMING IN TASMANIA................................................... 3 3. DEVELOPMENT OF SHELLFISH HARVESTING AND FARMING IN TASMANIA. 5 3.1 NATIVE OYSTER (OSTREA ANGASI)WILD HARVESTING AND FARMING.............................. 5 3.2 DEVELOPMENT OF PACIFIC OYSTER (CRASSOSTREA GIGAS)FARMING................................ 6 3.3 MUSSEL (MYTILUS EDULIS)CULTURE ............................................................................... 7 3.4 SCALLOP (PECTEN FUMATUS)FARMING............................................................................ 7 4. THE TASMANIAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT......................................................... 8 5. LITERATURE REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.................................. 10 5.1 IMPACTS ON THE SEABED................................................................................................ 11 5.1.1 Organic enrichment of the seabed.......................................................................... 11 5.1.2 Effects on the physical environment ....................................................................... 14 5.2 IMPACTS ON THE WATER COLUMN................................................................................... 15 5.3 EFFECTS ON WILDLIFE ................................................................................................... 18 5.4 INTRODUCTION AND TRANSLOCATION OF NEW SPECIES..................................................... 18 5.5 CHEMICAL USAGE.......................................................................................................... 20 6. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN THE TASMANIAN CONTEXT ......................... 20 6.1 PRODUCTION LEVELS IN TASMANIA COMPARED WITH OTHER COUNTRIES ......................... 20 6.2 DENSITIES OF CULTURED SHELLFISH .............................................................................. 20 6.3 LACK OF TRADITIONAL CULTURE.................................................................................... 22 6.4 MANAGEMENT OF MARINE FARMS ................................................................................... 22 6.5 IMPACTS ON THE SEABED............................................................................................... 23 8. QUALITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF SHELLFISH AQUACULTURE IN TASMANIA................................................................................ 29 8.1 ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ........................................................... 29 8.2 RISK DEFINITION AND CLASSIFICATION ............................................................................ 32 8.3 LEVEL OF RISK OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM SHELLFISH FARMING IN TASMANIA ... 33 8.4 RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS........................................................................................ 35 9. REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 36 TAFI Internal Report Page v Environmental Risk Assessment of Shellfish Farming 1. Introduction The Terms of Reference for this study were determined by the Marine Farming Branch, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment (DPIWE) and the Tasmanian Aquaculture Council. They were : 1. To undertake a study of the available national and international scientific literature with particular reference to the relevance of the studies to the Tasmanian marine environment. 2. To undertake a qualitative analysis of the likelihood and significance of identified impacts associated with shellfish culture on the Tasmanian marine environment. This should include a study of the available national and international scientific literature, and should identify beneficial and detrimental effects of shellfish aquaculture, with particular reference to the relevance of the studies to the Tasmanian environment. It was further clarified by Darby Ross, Manager of the Marine Farming Branch, DPIWE, that this study involved only the ecological effects of shellfish farming on the marine environment. Social and economic aspects generally were not to be considered. This review concentrates on shellfish species currently cultured on a commercial scale in Tasmania - the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas (Thunburg 1793) and the blue mussel Mytilus edulis (Linnaeus 1758). Other shellfish species which are farmed in small quantities, such as the commercial scallop Pecten fumatus (Reeve 1852), and the native or flat oyster Ostrea angasi (Sowerby 1871), are discussed in less detail. Species which
Recommended publications
  • Fishing Today Tasmanian Seafood Industry News
    FISHING TODAY TASMANIAN SEAFOOD INDUSTRY NEWS Volume 26 No 4 August/September 2013 The 4th Tasmanian SeafoodAwards Industry INSIDE: > New seal protection pens P 3 > 2013 Commercial Scallop Season P 9 > Hobart research hub P 26 Domain Slipway The Domain Slipway is Tasmania’s best located and The Domain Slipway oers: rst environmentally compliant slipway. The No. 1 • competitive rates Slipway supports large shing boats, mega (super) yachts and tug boats up to 2000 tonnes with multiple • equipment hire slipping potential. • water and grit equipment The No. 2 and 3 slips cater for a maximum of 180 tonne and 50 tonne vessels respectively. • highly experienced Marine Engineers For bookings and enquiries: The Domain Slipway also provides 24 hour, seven Phone 0428 903 149 days a week access to a marine fuelling facility. • assistance with vessel docking and labour sourcing Email [email protected] > AUSTRALIAN PUMP INDUSTRIES Safe under pressure Aussie Pumps, Australia’s leading times stronger than steel on a weight- Aussie Pumps’ Product Safety Manager, manufacturer of high pressure water for-weight basis. Martine Musumeci said: ‘Considering blasting equipment, has released a The range of Aussie “Safe Operator” that ninety per cent of all professional new range of high pressure protection clothing includes overalls, jackets, pressure cleaning is carried out in the clothing. Designed for use with pressure trousers and aprons, and the gear is range of under 500 bar (that’s 7300psi), cleaners up to 7300 psi (500 bar), much thinner and more flexible than operators using machines in the 2000 psi Aussie’s new “Safe Operator” range traditional materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquaculture and Marketing of the Florida Bay Scallop in Crystal River, Florida
    Aquaculture and marketing of the Florida Bay Scallop in Crystal River, Florida Item Type monograph Authors Blake, Norman J.; Adams, Charles; Degner, Robert; Sweat, Don; Moss, Susan D.; Sturmer, Leslie Publisher Florida Sea Grant College Program Download date 10/10/2021 07:29:03 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/20351 FLORIDA SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM FLSGP-T-00-002 C2 R/LRcAc20 Aquaculture and Marketing of the Florida Bay Scallop in Crystal River, Florida by Norman J. Blake, Charles Adams, Robert Degner, and Don Sweat with special reports on Marketing Analysis by Susan D. Moss, Robert Degner, and Charles Adams and Economic Analysis by Charles Adams and Leslie Sturmer TP-106 October 2000 l_ UNIVERSITY OF ~.·JFLORID·A Sm~ "..:',..!.!!!.;/ ~ EXTENSION Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences This technical paper was supported by the National Sea Grant College Program of the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanicand Atmosheric Administration under NOAA Grant # NA 76RG-0120. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of any of these organizations. Aquaculture and Marketing ofthe ~lorida Bay Scallop in Crystal River, Florida By Norman 1. Blake, Department ofMarine Sciences, University ofSouth Florida, St. Petersburg Charles Adams, Food & Resource Economics, University ofFlorida, Gainesville Robert Degner, Florida Agricultural Market Research Center, University ofFlorida, Gainesville Don Sweat Florida Sea Grant Marine Agent University of Florida St. Petersburg Submitted to·Florida Sea Grant Final
    [Show full text]
  • Overcoming Barriers in the Scallop Aquaculture Industry a First Nations Perspective Spring 2013
    Fall 08 0 OVERCOMING BARRIERS IN THE SCALLOP AQUACULTURE INDUSTRY A FIRST NATIONS PERSPECTIVE SPRING 2013 Photo Credit: Jeff Svanhill JEFF SVANHILL ISIS, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia Published in partnership with the Nanwakolas Council ISIS | Overcoming Barriers in the Scallop Aquaculture Industry | Jeff Svanhill | 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 INTRODUCTION 5 Layout of this Report 5 1.0 WHY SCALLOPS? 6 2.0 COLLABORATION 8 2.1 Collaboration 8 2.1.1 Why Collaborate? 8 2.1.2 Notes on Collaboration 9 3.0 FUNDING OPTIONS 10 3.1 Funding and Financing options 10 3.1.1 Funding 10 3.1.2 Financing 11 4.0 SCALLOP SEED SUPPLY OPTIONS 12 4.1 Scallop Seed Procurement Overview 12 4.1.1 Domestic Procurement 12 4.1.2 International Procurement 13 4.2 Local Supply Options 14 4.2.1 Island Scallops 14 4.2.2 Wenlian Aquaculture Company 15 4.3 Future Supply Options 15 4.3.1 Coastal Shellfish Corporation 15 ISIS | Overcoming Barriers in the Scallop Aquaculture Industry | Jeff Svanhill | 2 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 – MAJOR SHELLFISH SPECIES HARVESTED IN BRITISH COLUMBIA (2011) 6 FIGURE 2 – CHANGE IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2, SEAWATER PCO2 AND SEAWATER PH OVER TIME IN THE NORTH PACIFIC 7 FIGURE 3 – FUNDING FOR SKILLS DEVELOPMENT 10 FIGURE 4 – FUNDING FOR BUSINESS PLANNING 10 FIGURE 9 – VANCITY FINANCING PROGRAMS 11 FIGURE 10 – LOCATION OF SCALLOP AQUACULTURE INDUSTRY IN CHINA 13 ISIS | Overcoming Barriers in the Scallop Aquaculture Industry | Jeff Svanhill | 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared by Jeff Svanhill at the ISIS Research Centre, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • Olympia Oyster (Ostrea Lurida)
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Olympia Oyster Ostrea lurida in Canada SPECIAL CONCERN 2011 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2011. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Olympia Oyster Ostrea lurida in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xi + 56 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous report(s): COSEWIC. 2000. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Olympia Oyster Ostrea conchaphila in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 30 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm) Gillespie, G.E. 2000. COSEWIC status report on the Olympia Oyster Ostrea conchaphila in Canada in COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Olympia Oyster Ostrea conchaphila in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-30 pp. Production note: COSEWIC acknowledges Graham E. Gillespie for writing the provisional status report on the Olympia Oyster, Ostrea lurida, prepared under contract with Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The contractor’s involvement with the writing of the status report ended with the acceptance of the provisional report. Any modifications to the status report during the subsequent preparation of the 6-month interim and 2-month interim status reports were overseen by Robert Forsyth and Dr. Gerald Mackie, COSEWIC Molluscs Specialist Subcommittee Co-Chair. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur l’huître plate du Pacifique (Ostrea lurida) au Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • New TRLPA Board Tasmanian Gould's Squid Fishery Investigating
    FISHINGTasmanian seafood TODAYindusTry news New TRLPA Board Page 3 Tasmanian Gould’s Squid Fishery Page 8 Investigating areas for sevengill sharks Page 27 Volume 27 Volume No 4 August/September 2014 Seafood Directions 2015 Selling Our Story Australian Seafood Industry National Conference 2015 The seafood industry has an important story to sell Crown Perth • Perth, WA • 25th - 27th October and the next chapter will be written at Seafood Directions 2015. insight and make invaluable connections. So book your berth in Perth and we look forward to seeing Our future depends on new ways of marketing, you at Seafood Directions 2015. gaining social licence to operate and increased collaboration and communication with government, For information, sponsorship and exhibition regulators, customers and community. opportunities contact: With keynote presentations on the industry’s T: (+61) 7 4031 2345 future and practical workshops to make that future E: [email protected] happen, seafood professionals will gain valuable W: www.seafooddirections.net.au FishingTODAY_120x186_2014June_1.indd 1 13/05/14 11:45 AM Domain Slipway The Domain Slipway is Tasmania’s best located and The Domain Slipway oers: rst environmentally compliant slipway. The No. 1 • competitive rates Slipway supports large shing boats, mega (super) yachts and tug boats up to 2000 tonnes with multiple • equipment hire slipping potential. • water and grit equipment The No. 2 and 3 slips cater for a maximum of 180 tonne and 50 tonne vessels respectively. • highly experienced Marine Engineers For bookings and enquiries: The Domain Slipway also provides 24 hour, seven Phone 0428 903 149 days a week access to a marine fuelling facility.
    [Show full text]
  • Pierce County Nearshore Species List Compiled from the Pt
    Pierce County Nearshore Species List Compiled from the Pt. Defiance Park Bioblitz 2011 ID COMMON NAME √ ID COMMON NAME √ 31 Acorn barnacle X 34 Hermit crab sp. X 43 Aggregate green anemone X 35 Isopod sp. X 30 Amphipod sp. X 36 Jellyfish sp. X 95 Anemone sp. 73 Large leaf worm X 60 Barnacle nudibranch X 12 Leafy hornmouth X 48 Barnacle sp. X 74 Leather limpet 68 Bent-nose macoma 13 Leather star X 69 Black and white brittle star 14 Lewis's moonsnail X 92 Black turban X 37 Limpet sp. 63 Blood star X 75 Lined chiton X 56 Butter clam X 76 Lined ribbon worm 65 Calcareous tube worm X 108 Mask limpet X 103 California mussel X 67 Moon jellyfish X 1 California sea cucumber 32 Mossy chiton X 53 Checkered periwinkle X 61 Mottled star X 32 Chiton sp. 38 Mussel sp. X 33 Clam sp. X 77 Northern feather duster w X 70 Coonstripe shrimp 15 Northern kelp crab 59 Crab sp. X 39 Nudibranch sp. X 96 Dog welk sp. X 78 Nuttall's cockle 93 Dogwinkle sp. X 62 Ochre star X 3 Dungeness crab X 16 Opalescent (aeolid) nudib X 57 Eccentric sand dollar X 17 Orange sea cucumber X 112 Fat gaper X 18 Orange sea pen 4 Feathery shipworm X 19 Oregon triton 5 Fish-eating anemone 40 Oyster sp. 101 Flat porcelain crab 79 Pacific blue mussel X 6 Fringed tube worm 110 Pacific gaper 8 Giant (nudibranch) dendronotid 99 Pacific geoduck clam X 7 Giant barnacle X 80 Pacific oyster 9 Giant pacific octopus 97 Periwinkle sp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pacific Oyster – a New Nordic Food Resource and a Basis for Tourism
    Policy Brief The Pacific oyster – a new Nordic food resource and a basis for tourism 1 Policy Brief: The Pacific oyster – a new nordic food resource and a basis for tourism Stein Mortensen, Per Dolmer, Åsa Strand, Lars-Johan Naustvoll and Ane Timenes Laugen Nord 2019:015 ISBN 978-92-893-6121-7 (PRINT) ISBN 978-92-893-6122-4 (PDF) ISBN 978-92-893-6123-1 (EPUB) http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/Nord2019-015 © Nordic Council of Ministers 2019 Layout: Mette Agger Tang Cover photo: Øystein Klakegg Print: Rosendahls Printed in Denmark Nordic co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, the economy, and culture. It plays an important role in European and international collaboration, and aims at creating a strong Nordic community in a strong Europe. Nordic co-operation seeks to safeguard Nordic and regional interests and principles in the global community. Shared Nordic values help the region solidify its position as one of the world’s most innovative and competitive. Nordic Council of Ministers Nordens Hus Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen www.norden.org Download and order Nordic publications from www.norden.org/nordpub 2 Policy Brief The Pacific oyster – a new Nordic food resource and a basis for tourism Content 05 The Pacific oyster – friend or foe? 07 The dispersal of oysters and their environmental effects 08 Mitigation of invasive aquatic species 09 Commercial exploitation of Pacific oysters in Scandinavia 11 Regional oysters – or the meaning of merroir 12 Challenges 14 Conclusions and recommendations 15 Selected literature 4 The Pacific oyster – friend or foe? Since 2007, the Pacific oyster has established self-sustaining po- pulations in Scandinavian coastal waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproduction and Larval Development of the New Zealand Scallop, Pecten Novaezelandiae
    Reproduction and larval development of the New Zealand scallop, Pecten novaezelandiae. Neil E. de Jong A thesis submitted to Auckland University of Technology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (MSc) 2013 School of Applied Science Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... I TABLE OF FIGURES ....................................................................................... IV TABLE OF TABLES ......................................................................................... VI ATTESTATION OF AUTHORSHIP ................................................................. VII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................. VIII ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................... X 1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW .............. 1 1.1 Scallop Biology and Ecology ........................................................................................ 2 1.1.1 Diet ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Fisheries and Aquaculture ............................................................................................ 5 1.2.1 Scallop Enhancement .................................................................................................. 8 1.2.2 Hatcheries .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drakes Bay Oyster Company 17171 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Inverness, CA 94937 (415) 669-1149 [email protected] [email protected]
    DOC180 Drakes Bay Oyster Company 17171 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Inverness, CA 94937 (415) 669-1149 [email protected] [email protected] March 4, 2011 Natalie Gates DBOC SUP EIS Re: New cultured species request Dear Natalie, On January 26, 2011 Cicely Muldoon requested additional scoping information about the native Olympia oysters and the native Purple Hinged Rock Scallops. DBOC has been given a deadline of March 4, 2011 to provide all additional scoping information. This letter will provide additional information regarding native shellfish culture in Drakes Estero. The NPS has already been provided significant information regarding the request to culture native species. Some background regarding this request is necessary. DBOC, following procedures set forth in its special use permit, initiated the process to add native species to its State Fish and Game lease. Section 4(b)(vi) of the DBOC SUP says, in full: “Permittee will not introduce species of shellfish beyond those described in the existing leases from the CDFG. Permittee may seek to conform and/or modify these leases with the CDFG. Any modifications approved by CDFG will be considered by Permitter on a case- by-case basis, and Permittee may not implement any such modifications without the prior written approval of the Permitter.” (emphasis added) Pursuant to this section, DBOC sought to modify the lease with CDFG, understanding that NPS approval would be required before implementation of such modification. On April 27, 2010, before the DBOC SUP EIS was contemplated, DBOC made a request (attachment a) to the California Fish and Game Commission. On June 28, 2010, the NPS wrote a letter (attachment b) to Jim McCamman, Director, California Department of Fish and Game, opposing the DBOC request.
    [Show full text]
  • SWANSEA: the Hub of the East Coast Unpack Once and Explore the East Coast
    SWANSEA: The Hub of the East Coast Unpack once and explore the East Coast P a g e | 1 A Leisurely Day in Swansea Locals love coming home to Swansea – we crest the hill near Kelvedon Beach and can feel the tension start to leave us. We want you to do the same – enjoy the slower pace, allowing yourself the time to relax and recharge! If you’re an early riser, this might mean catching a beautiful sunrise whilst walking along one of our many beaches all of which look out across Great Oyster Bay toward the Hazards at Coles Bay; soak up the peace and quiet and stop to take in the beauty. Swansea was settled in the 1820’s as Waterloo Point, and is one of Tasmania’s oldest towns. In fact many families living in Swansea today are descedants of these original settlers. Pop into the Visitor Information Centre and get a copy of the Heritage Walk booklet and you’ll be able to take a self-directed walk around town to learn about historical businesses, homes and iconic landmarks. You might even come across one of our older locals who’s willing to have a chat. You could also visit the East Coast Heritage Museum; there’s always a great display and passionate staff to share their knowledge. Stroll along Franklin Street (the main street) to find your perfect breakfast spot: - Barkmill Bakery, Artifakt Café & Gallery, Saltshaker. After breakfast, why not take a gentle walk right in the heart of Swansea; a walk that offers stunning coastal scenery.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Cage Culture and the Environment: Effects on Water Quality and Primary Production
    Vol. 6: 151–174, 2015 AQUACULTURE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTIONS Published online February 4 doi: 10.3354/aei00122 Aquacult Environ Interact OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS REVIEW Marine cage culture and the environment: effects on water quality and primary production Carol Price1,*, Kenneth D. Black2, Barry T. Hargrave3, James A. Morris Jr.1 1Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, National Ocean Service, NOAA, 101 Pivers Island Rd., Beaufort, North Carolina 28516, USA 2SAMS, Scottish Marine Institute, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA, UK 3561 Balmy Beach Road, Owen Sound, Ontario N4K 5N4, Canada ABSTRACT: Increasing human population and reliance on aquaculture for seafood will lead to expansion of the industry in the open ocean. To guide environmentally sustainable expansion, coastal stakeholders require tools to evaluate the risks that marine aquaculture poses and to craft science-based policies and practices which safeguard marine ecosystems. We summarized cur- rent knowledge regarding dissolved nutrient loading from marine fish farms around the world, direct impacts on water quality and secondary impacts on primary production, including forma- tion of harmful algal blooms. We found that modern operating conditions have minimized impacts of individual fish farms on marine water quality. Effects on dissolved oxygen and turbidity are largely eliminated through better management. Nutrient enrichment of the near-field water col- umn is not detectable beyond 100 m of a farm when formulated feeds are used, and feed waste is minimized. We highlight the role of siting fish farms in deep waters with sufficient current to dis- perse nutrients and prevent water quality impacts. We extensively discuss the potential for advances in integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) to assimilate waste nutrients.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquaculture Notes
    AKU-L-87-002 C2 aquaculture notes WHERE TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON SCALLOP AQUACULTURE Curt Kerns Aquaculture Specialist Marine Advisory Program University of Alaska Juneau, AK 99801 University of Alaska AlaskaSea Grant College Program January 1987 Aquaculture Note ¹10 Alaska Sea Grant College Program 590 University Avenue, Suite 102 Fairbanks, AK 99709-1046 WHERE TO GET NORE INFORMATION ON SCALLOP AQUACULTURE Curt Kerns Aquaculture Specialist, Marine Advisory Program University of Alaska Juneau, AK 99801 University of Alaska Alaska Sea Grant January 1987 Aquaculture Note f10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This publication is the result of work sponsored by the Alaska Sea Grant College Program, which is cooperatively sponsored by the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Office of Sea Grant and Extra-Mural Programs, under grant number NA86AA-D-SG041, project numbers A/71-01 and A/75-01; and by the University of Alaska with funds appropriated by the state. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS ntroduction...............................................l Regulations................................................l Fish Transport Permit.............. ~ ~. ~ .,............ ~ 1 Paralytic Shellfish Poison... ~ ......... ~ ~.............1 Research Assistance...... ~ ........... ~ .....................l Interlibrary loan.....................................l Computer Searches' ........ ~ ....................... ~ ...l Organizations... ~ ............ ~ ........................2 P eriodicals................................................3 General References.........................................4
    [Show full text]