W RLD aquaculture March 2012 Volume 43 No. 1 WORLD AQUACULTURE •Mangrove Forest • Brazilian Cubera snapper • Deepwater Horizon Impact • March 2012 Start planning for Melbourne in May
World Aquaculture 1 WORLD AQUACULTURE Magazine World Aquaculture magazine is published by the World Aquaculture Society. The home office address is: World Aquaculture Society, 143 J.M. Parker Coliseum, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803, USA. Tel: +1-225-578-3137; Fax: +1-225-578-3493; e-mail: carolm@was.org. World Aquaculture Society Home Page: http://www.was.org WORLD AQUACULTURE SOCIETY OFFICERS, 2011-2012 President, Dr. Ricardo Martino President-elect, Dr. Kevan Main Past President, Dr. Jay Parsons Secretary, Dr. Rebecca Lochmann Treasurer, Dr. William Daniels DIRECTORS Dr. Michael Schwarz Dr. Jeong Yeol Lee Dr. David Little Dr. Yoram Avnimelech Dr. Juan Pablo Lazo Dr. Jimmy Avery CHAPTER REPRESENTATIVES Lucas Manomaitis (Asian Pacific) Gary Fornshell (USAS) Maria Celia Portello (Latin America and Caribbean) Dr. Ik Kyo Chung (Korea) Hiroshi Fushimi (Japan) HOME OFFICE STAFF Carol Mendoza, Director, carolm@was.org Judy E. Andrasko, Assistant Director, JudyA@was.org WORLD AQUACULTURE EDITORIAL STAFF John Hargreaves, Editor-in-Chief Mary Nickum, Editor Amy Broussard, Layout Editor WAS CONFERENCES AND SALES John Cooksey, Director of Conferences and Sales World Aquaculture Conference Management P.O. Box 2302 Valley Center, CA 92082 Tel: +1-760-751-5005; Fax: +1-760-751-5003 e-mail: worldaqua@aol.com Manuscripts and Correspondence: Submit two (2) copies of all manuscripts and one (1) copy of correspondence to Mary Nickum, Editor, World Aquaculture Magazine, 16201 E. Keymar Drive, Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 USA. E-mail: mjnickum@ gmail.com. Letters to the Editor or other comments should be addressed to Editor-in-Chief John Hargreaves, 6950 Boone Drive, Bayton Rouge, LA 70808 USA. World Aquaculture (ISSN Number 1041-5602) is published quarterly by the World Aquaculture Society, 143 J.M. Parker Coliseum, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803 USA. Library subscriptions are $50 annually for United States addresses, and $65 annually for addresses outside the United States. Individual subscriptions are a benefit of membership in the World Aquaculture Society. Annual membership dues: Students, $45; Individuals, $65; Corporations (for-profit), $255; Sustaining, $105 (individuals or non-profits); Lifetime (individuals), $1,100; E-Membership, $10 (no publications, meeting discounts and not an active member in last five years). Periodicals Postage paid at Baton Rouge, Louisiana and additional mailing offices. Twenty-five percent of dues is designated for a subscription to World Aquaculture magazine. Postmaster: Send address changes to the World Aquaculture Society, 143 J.M. Parker Coliseum, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803 USA. ©2012, The World Aquaculture Society. ■ W RLD AQUACULTURE Vol. 43 No. 1 March 2012 Cover: The Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre is the site of AUSTRALASIAN AQUACULTURE 2012. See page 18. (Continued on page 2) 8 Bioeconomic analysis of the area impacted by a sea bream farm in Gran Canaria, Spain Rabassó-Krohnert, Miguel and Hernández, Juan M. 12 Mangrove forests and aquaculture farmers: Aspects of climate change adaptation on the central coast of Bangladesh M. Mizanur Rahman and M. Shahadat Hossain 18 AUSTRALASIAN AQUACULTURE 2012: The next ten years Roy Palmer and Graham Mair 22 The first record of cubera snapper Lutjanus cyanopterus culture in Brazil Eduardo Gomes Sanches, Wanessa de Melo Costa, Felipe Gomes Vilani, Daniel Medeiros Krueger, Gabriel Passini and Vinicius Ronzani Cerqueira 26 Aquaculture status and potential in the northeastern region of India Debtanu Barman, Sagar C. Mandal and Vikash Kumar 32 Impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on the Auburn University Shellfish Laboratory aquaculture program Scott Rikard and William C. Walton 36 Drought in Urmia Lake, the largest natural habitat of brine shrimp Artemia Alireza Asem and Fereidun Mohebbi, Reza Ahmadi 39 Developments in selective breeding for resistance to Aeromonas hydrophila in fish S. Das and P.K. Sahoo 46 An economic analysis of oyster aquaculture on the Patuxent River, Maryland using AQUASIM David Farkas, Kelton Clarkand Asif Dowla 48 Natural spawning and larviculture of southern flounder Paralichthys lethostigma Jeffery B. Kaiser, Cynthia K. Faulk, Emily A. Williamson and G. Joan Holt 57 Evaluation of various hatchery-nursery procedures to maximize survival and growth of juvenile Australian redclaw crayfish (Cherax quadricarinatus) Antonio Garza de Yta, Lidia G. Fournue Guerrer, Joly Ghanawi, I. Patrick Saoud and David B. Rouse
2 March 2012 Editor’s note — Freezing the footprint of aquafood Jason Clay is well-known to many in WAS. He was the plenary speaker at the triennial conference in 2007 and has been actively engaged with the Society and a broad spectrum of stakeholders to improve the environmental performance of aquaculture. Jason has been involved with the development of aquaculture Best Management Practices (although he prefers the adjective “better”) and environmental certification programs, especially with his long-term employer, the World Wildlife Federation, where he is now a Vice-President of Market Transformation. Last year, Jason authored an article published in Science (475:287-289) titled “Freezing the Footprint of Food,” which is premised on the necessity of doing more with less as an approach to feed 2-3 billion more people (than the 9 billion already here) by 2050. Jason calls for a freeze on inputs to agriculture and offers a suggestions ranging from low-hanging fruit to long-term structural change. In his article, Jason identifies eight strategies—what he calls “food wedges”—to achieve the freeze. The strategies are discussed broadly with respect to global agriculture and he does not single out aquaculture. Nonetheless, some strategies have relevance to aquaculture and these are discussed here. At the top of the list is genetic improvement. The combination of traditional selection techniques, aided by molecular markers, and a range of modern biotechnologies offers the promise of improved performance, particularly in growth rate, feed conversion, and disease resistance. Broadly speaking and with some notable exceptions, aquaculture lags far behind other forms of animal agriculture when it comes to genetic improvement. Given the generally superior growth performance in terms of nutrient and energy conversion of feeds by aquatic animals as compared to terrestrial livestock, freezing the footprint of food can be aided by shifting resources for breeding programs from poultry, swine, and cattle to fish and shrimp. Better practices are identified as another food wedge in Jason’s article. He argues for raising the level of the lowest-performing producers because the scope for increasing their productivity and income is greatest and they make a disproportionately large contribution to environmental impacts. He calls for new thinking about ways to transmit information to farmers. Weak governments, especially in lesser developed countries, means that traditional extension services are ineffective. Using master farmers or hatchery owners to deliver better practices to low-performing producers might be a more effective approach. Ecolabeling programs that have better practices at their core could also provide an incentive for more producers to improve practices and performance. The proliferation of such programs (Continued on page 5) 64 Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus growth in single and multiple-batch production William A. Wurts 67 Specific pathogen free shrimps: Their scope in aquaculture Debtanu Barman, Vikash Kumar, Suvra Roy and Sagar C Mandal Society 2 Editor’s Note — Freezing the footprint of aquafood 3 President’s column 3 Aquaculture and Fisheries Biotechnology: Genetics Approaches, 2nd Edition 4 WAS Board adopts and operationalizes a new strategic plan Graham C. Mair 6 U.S. Aquaculture Society Chapter Update 7 Asian Pacific Chapter Update 7 Korean Chapter Update 66 Calendar 68 Advertisers’ Index 72 Membership Application Contents (continued) Dr. Stickney takes full responsibility for the misspelling of Nepal on the cover and photo credit in the December 2010 issue of World Aquaculture and expresses his regret for missing the error during review of the proof.” Erratum
World Aquaculture 3 President’s column The World Aquaculture Society has a well-organized and decentralized system to promote and achieve the goals of the Society. This system consists of and is operationalized by committees, working groups, and chapters. I would like to take this opportunity to have a short discussion about the chapters of WAS. The idea of chapter formation was launched about three decades ago with the main goal of increasing global participation in WAS. At present there are five chapters within the Society: the United States Chapter (USAS), the Asian Pacific Chapter (APC), the Latin American and Caribbean Chapter (LACC), the Korean Chapter, and the Japan Chapter. Each represents a specific geographic area of influence and is an essential mechanism to promote WAS in that area. Chapters with more than 200 members are entitled to send one voting delegate to the meeting of the Board of Directors of the World Aquaculture Society (Bylaw 10, Section 2). It is expected that chapters become administratively and independently self-sustaining within a short time of their establishment. It is also expected that chapters organize scientific meetings for their members and actively participate in the development of aquaculture in their geographic area. Since their establishment, chapters have been supporting the goals of the parent society in various ways. Most have been very active in editing and publishing books, organizing scientific meetings, and organizing sessions at WAS annual conferences. As evidence of this, the two major upcoming events are WAS chapter conferences. The first one is the Annual Conference and Exhibition of the US Chapter that will be held in Las Vegas, Nevada from February 29 to March 2. The mid-year meeting of the WAS Board of Directors will be held immediately after that conference. I will provide my impressions about the US Chapter conference in the next issue of World Aquaculture magazine. Another upcoming conference will be held in Melbourne, Australia from May 1-4. The conference and trade exposition has been organized by the Asian Pacific Chapter and a large audience is being expected. There were more than 1,500 participants at the APC meeting held in Kochi, India last year. Any individual can join a chapter; however, it is a pre-requisite to be an active member of WAS. To join a chapter it is also necessary to pay an additional modest membership fee of US$ 5.00 per year. Society members can join as many chapters as they like, as long as they are willing to pay for the privilege. I encourage all members to join at least one chapter. During the meeting of the WAS Board of Directors in Natal, Brazil last June, there was some discussion about the current situation with some chapters. Over the years the Board of Directors has been very careful to approve a petition for establishment of a new chapter. The Board must judge that the chapter has a reasonably good probability that it will achieve administrative and financial independence. This is to prevent the undesirable situation that a chapter would have to be closed because of the lack of activities, which could cause losses to WAS and its members. Therefore, despite the decentralized organization of the Society, chapters are governed by the WAS Bylaws and rules for the establishment of a chapter are provided in Bylaw 10 (www.was.org). Chapters must submit reports to the WAS Board of Directors, which in turn will support the chapters and ensure that their activities will continue to promote benefits to WAS members and to the development of aquaculture in each chapter’s geographic area. — Ricardo C. Martino President Book Review Aquaculture and Fisheries Biotechnology: Genetics Approaches, 2nd edition by Rex Dunham Christopher C. Green1 Integration of genetics with aquaculture and fisheries, specifically through the application of technology, and an understanding of recent advances in genetics are critical for the development of high-performance culture species. There is often difficulty understanding how new genetic approaches and advances will benefit or be integrated in an aquaculture framework and this book attempts to address that issue. Rex A. Dunham is an Alumni Professor in the Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures at Auburn University and is uniquely poised to relate his own work in aquaculture and genetics as well as draw from other research in this rapidly developing field. Channel catfish are featured to a perhaps excessive degree as the example organism for the wide array of topics covered in this volume as the author (Continued on page 66)
4 March 2012 WAS Board adopts and operationalizes a new strategic plan Graham C. Mair I recently completed a three-year term as a Director on the WAS Board, an enjoyable and rewarding experience. I believe it is important when in such a position to actively contribute to the Society by taking responsibility or ownership of one or more specific activities focused on delivering a concrete and achievable output within the time frame of the directorship. Through my membership on the Finance and Long Range Planning Committee, I found myself driving a process, fully supported by the Board, to upgrade the WAS Strategic Plan. From the outset I was keen that this be more than simply updating a document that will then sit on a shelf in the WAS Home Office until a future board member gets the task to update it again. The goal from the beginning was to produce and operationalize the Strategic Plan as a management tool that would be used routinely by the Board as a living and evolving document, guiding its actions and providing continuity over time. In developing this Strategic Plan the Board has gone through a systematic process, first by streamlining its strategies (from a previous list of nine to a new list of six - see Box 1). Under each of these strategies we then identified a number of key target outcomes we would like to achieve for the Society over the five-year life span of the Plan. Under each outcome we then identified a series of key outputs that the Board could achieve within a defined timetable that would deliver or contribute to the delivery of outcomes in the longer term. Lastly, under each output, we identified activities, the measure by which achievement of the output would be determined, and the committee that would be primarily responsible for delivering each output. This was no trivial exercise, with the plan being developed over three Board meetings with active participation of the whole Board. The key principle underlying the plan is that the Board should be working towards the achievement of tangible outputs. We followed the SMART maxim for our outputs, ensuring that each was specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and timely. The measurable achievement of these outputs will move the Society forward in an agreed direction as defined by strategies and target outcomes within each Strategy. However, it was not sufficient merely to produce a comprehensive Strategic Plan, and there is no doubt that the developed plan is comprehensive! It was vital that the plan be operationalized, that it becomes central to the functioning of the Board and that it evolves during the five-year term of the plan to take into account changes in priorities and contributions of new Board members. At its post-conference Board meeting in Natal, Brazil, the Board agreed not only to adopt the Strategic Plan but to operationalize it through each Board committee being assigned responsibility for delivering a series of outputs within the plan and reporting against progress towards these outputs at each Board meeting. During its review of progress at each Board meeting any changes or updates to the Strategic Plan can be identified and an updated version of the plan produced after the meeting such that the plan will evolve. The plan would then be more comprehensively reviewed after five years prior to issuing a new five-year plan. A copy of the Strategic Plan can be found on the WAS website. The Board found the Strategic Plan development process to be a worthwhile exercise that focused the Board on the key strategies, outputs and associated activities that will move the Society forward in the right direction. Effective operationalization of the plan should ensure that current and future Boards, including the Executive Director, have a common and clear vision of the development of the society and a continuity in the progress toward key targets over time, even as the composition and membership of the Board changes. Key strategies in the WAS strategic plan 1. Deliver quality services that meet the needs of our membership within the global aquaculture community. 2. Improve global representation within the society (membership and leadership), especially from underrepresented groups. 3. Improve the visibility, recognition and outreach of WAS in the global community. 4. Develop linkages and alliances with aquaculture and related organizations. 5. Recognize and reward excellence in aquaculture service, technology and innovation. 6. Ensure commitment to excellence in management and a sustainable business model.
World Aquaculture 5 in aquaculture is a testimony to the now widespread interest in the role of better practices. Jason calls for an across-the-board doubling of efficiency in the use of every production input, including water, feed, fertilizer, and energy. This is a very high bar. Certainly the scope for doubling the efficiency of some inputs is better than others, but there is always room for improvement. Aquaculture faces limiting factors everywhere it is practiced. Once explicitly identified, producers have strong economic incentives to develop creative approaches to increase efficiency of limiting inputs. Occasionally policies such as subsidies can distort or mask the limitation, so policy reform may be necessary to enable improvement in input efficiency. Jason also calls for more use of degraded lands. Certainly aquaculture ponds can be built using saline soils and on marginal or unproductive land and managed effectively, assuming water is available, thereby reserving land with good soils for staple grains or other terrestrial crops. Aquaculture can also make increased use of degraded water, such as irrigation drainage, wastewater, or high-salinity groundwater. I am not convinced that using degraded lands is the best approach. One can also argue that degraded or unproductive land should be allowed to revert to nature and that more effort should be dedicated toward the responsible and ethical intensification of agriculture where production potential is greatest. Jason also included consideration of a social factor, the need for clear property rights and land tenure, especially in Africa. He sees this as a huge impediment to freezing the footprint of food. Landless or tenant farmers have little incentive to invest in improvements of their land. These investments could improve environmental performance, reduce waste, increase the efficiency of inputs, and improve farm income. This is clearly true with respect to converting land to fish ponds, which requires a substantial capital investment. Improving title to land would open the door for more potential fish farmers and improving practices on those farms that already exist. Jason identifies the huge losses that occur after crops are harvested as an area that needs attention. Obviously the products of aquaculture are highly perishable and maintaining product quality (and safety) has always been a primary concern in marketing. Given that most fish in aquaculture are low-value species marketed within the countries where they are produced, attention to preserving freshness after harvest will increase the availability of fish to low-income consumers. Although the focus of Jason’s article is on the major cereal crops, his suggestions have specific application to aquaculture. In the context of global agriculture, aquaculture production is a minor player. Nonetheless, the kinds of changes he suggests are relevant and will allow farmers to be more productive and less wasteful and will allow aquaculture to make a contribution to freezing the footprint of food. Before resources become limiting, we can slowly and deliberately work towards doing more with what we have now, while the broadest range of options remains open to us. — John Hargreaves Editor-in-Chief (Continued from page 2) Editor’s Note
6 March 2012 U.S. Aquaculture Society Chapter Update In my final column as president of the United States Aquaculture Society, I want to reinforce the subject of WAS President Dr. Ricardo Martino’s column in this same issue on the importance of chapters to the WAS parent society. As aquaculture continues its expansion in the USA and globally, the potential role and importance of WAS and its chapters increases as well. With regards to the USAS, our mission is to provide a national forum for the timely exchange of information among aquaculture researchers, students and industry members in the United States. The USAS serves this mission through sponsoring workshops and meetings, fostering educational opportunities, and publishing aquaculture-related materials important to U.S. aquaculture development. Our membership fluctuates between 800 and 900 members per year, representing the broad spectrum of public and private organizations such as academia, government, industry, education, and other individuals either engaged or interested in aquaculture. While we have a mandate to advance aquaculture, our effectiveness is only as good as our leadership is strong. In that regard, I wish to review briefly the organization of the USAS and opportunities for members to serve the society either in an official or unofficial capacity. Within the elected leadership of the society are the officers and the Executive Board. Officers are represented by the President, President-Elect, Vice President, and Secretary/Treasurer. The Executive Board consists of the officers, along with four Members-at-Large who are elected to 2-year terms, the Immediate Past-President, and the Student Liaison (a 2-year ex-officio member of the Executive Board). The activities of the USAS are conducted through Committees, which are chaired by officers and executive board members, but may be comprised of members of the society in good standing. Standing committees include the Election Committee, Finance Committee, Conference Committee, Awards Committee, Publication Committee, Student Activities Committee, Student Subunit Committee, Strategic Planning Committee, Rules and Regulations Committee, Promotion and Membership Committee, and Presidents Committee. There are also ad hoc committees that are established and dissolved as needed to address specific activities or agendas as deemed appropriate to achieve society initiatives. There are numerous opportunities for members of the USAS to engage in leadership and service to the society. I urge each of you to consider service to the society at some point during your career and engagement with USAS. An engaged membership makes a strong society. I’m extremely fortunate and appreciative of our membership and the opportunity to serve you as President in 2011 and look forward to continued service as Immediate Past-President and beyond. I am further appreciative of all the service and support towards advancement of the society by the 2011 USAS Officers, Executive Board, committee members, and of course our Home Office staff and Executive Director and thankful for their hard work and diligence as they balance service to the society with their daily jobs, family, and other commitments in life. Hoping everyone has a wonderful meeting this year in Las Vegas at “Bringing All Players to the Table” Aquaculture America 2012 and I look forward to seeing all of you there. — Michael H. Schwarz U.S. Aquaculture Society President New FAO Technical Report A new FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper (564) on “Demand and supply of feed ingredients for farmed fish and crustaceans: trends and prospects” has been released. The authors are internationally renowned nutritionists Albert Tacon, Mohammad Hasan, and Marc Metian. Some of the findings highlighted in the Executive Summary include: • About 46 percent of total global aquaculture production is dependent on the supply of feeds. • Compound aquafeed production grew three-fold from 1995 to 2008 or about 11% per year. • Aquafeeds represent only 4 percent of global animal feed production. • About 29 million tons of compound aquafeeds are produced annually, along with 19 to 31 million tons of farmmade aquafeeds, and more than 8 tons of low-value fish used directly as feed. • The aquaculture sector uses more than 68 percent of global fishmeal supplies and 81 percent of global fish oil supplies. • The total use of fishmeal has been declining and is expected to decline further. • In contrast, the use of fish oil is expected to increase slowly. • There is considerable scope to increase the use of meals and oils from terrestrial animal by-products in compound aquafeeds. • On average, compound aquafeeds contain 25 percent soybeans by weight. • The sustainability of the aquaculture sector is more likely linked to the sustainability of terrestrial animals and plants for feed resources than to that of marine products.
World Aquaculture 7 Asian Pacific Chapter Update It has been about a year since the last WASAPC event, the Asian-Pacific Aquaculture Conference held in Kochi, India. We are now gearing up for the next big event, Australasian Aquaculture 2012, which will take place from May 1-4 in Melbourne, Australia. Here are some quick updates on the state of the Chapter since the last meeting. After discussions between representatives of Asian Pacific and Japan Chapters, a decision was made to begin to merge these two chapters together to strengthen the Asian region overall. We hope to complete this process later in 2012. We have a new president elect, Dr. Amrit Bart, who is currently Director of the Asian Institute of Technology Center in Vietnam. He has already been taking part in Chapter activities, including helping to plan the next APA meeting. Plans have been moving forward to hold the next AsianPacific Aquaculture meeting in 2013 in Ho Chi Minh City and to support this effort John Cooksey and Mario Stael visited Vietnam in December 2011. It is expected that this event will occur in the last quarter of 2013. This location was chosen because of Vietnam’s strong aquaculture sector, third in the world after China and India, and Ho Chi Minh City in particular because of its close proximity to prominent aquaculture production areas. This event will be held in conjunction with the International Oyster Symposium (IOS5). The Asian-Pacific Chapter Executive Committee has been working on some ideas for regional symposia, as outlined in the Kochi meeting. The goal is to have smaller, targeted events to bring knowledge to areas that need more focused attention. Some possible targets are arid aquaculture in the Middle East, post-tsunami/high value aquaculture in Japan, and national aquaculture development in Myanmar. As president, I have been giving presentations about WAS in various venues, including Myanmar, Philippines, and Indonesia. I will be moderating at the 3rd Annual AquaTech Conference in the Philippines in April 2012 where the Asian-Pacific Chapter is a named supporter of the event. We continue to work on the idea of an expanded role for others in our Chapter through an Executive Advisory Council and Country Ambassadors Program. If you are a member of the WAS-APC we encourage you to contact the Board member in charge of this effort, Dr. Ram Bhujel, by emailing the WAS-APC (apcwas@was.org). This is only a short update of our Chapter activities. If you are in the Asian region and not yet a member of the WAS or APC, please feel free to contact us via our email above. We are looking forward to an eventful and exciting 2012 for WAS and the Asian-Pacific Chapter! —Lukas Manomaitis Asian Pacific Chapter President Korean Chapter Update A technical seminar on recirculating aquaculture systems was held on May 12, 2011 in Seoul, Korea. This international seminar was co-organized by the Korean Chapter of the World Aquaculture Society (KC-WAS) and the Aquaculture Chapter of Korean Society of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (AqC-KOSFAS), and supported by the Organizing Committee of the International Exposition Yeosu Korea 2012 (EXPO 2012 Yeosu). EXPO 2012 Yeosu will be open on May 12 and run for three months in Yeosu, Korea (eng.expo2012.kr). The main theme is “The Living Ocean and Coast,” conceptualizing the most desirable future for the ocean whose sound preservation and well-being is essentially linked with the survival of humankind. As the KC-WAS and AqC-KOSFAS have been supporting this event since its inception in 2007, we enthusiastically welcome all WAS members. We expect to see all of you in Yeosu soon. On June 24-25, 2012, the KC-WAS and the AqCKOSFAS will join together at the annual conference in Kangnung, Korea. At the last joint meeting, about 100 members registered and delivered oral and poster presentations. During the last AqC-KOSFAS annual business meeting the election committee identified the new chapter president, Seok-Joong Kang, professor at Gyeongsang National University. Ik Kyo Chung, President-Elect of the KC-WAS, professor at Pusan National University acceded to his presidency for the 2012-13 term. New members of the Board of Directors are Gun Wook Baeck of Gyeongsang National University as Secretary and Joo Myun Park of Chonnam National University as Treasurer. — Ik Kyo Chung Korean Chapter President
8 March 2012 Bioeconomic analysis of the area impacted by a sea bream farm in Gran Canaria, Spain Rabassó-Krohnert1, Miguel and Hernández, Juan M. In last decades, global aquaculture production has increased, diversified, intensified and technologically improved. Current and forecast production figures (FAO 2010) show its huge potential as an income-generating activity and its essential role in food security and poverty mitigation. Nevertheless, aquaculture production includes some negative effects on the surrounding area where the farm is located, such as effluents (e.g., food discards, nutrients, metals, other chemical products), escapes or attraction of foreign species, competition with other activities, and visual impact to the local population. In some instances, the combined effects— exacerbated by inadequate farm management— may result in serious ecological and socioeconomic consequences (e.g., destruction of natural habitats or disease epidemics). These externalities or undesirable effects have led to increased concern or distrust about the sustainability of marine aquaculture in net pens in technologically advanced societies. Enrichment of organic matter in the environment derived from emissions from marine net-pens has attracted the interest of researchers. Many such studies use models to quantify biophysical mechanisms regulating material releases, such as metabolic processes related to the emissions of organic matter and other nutrients, dispersion of these materials, and impacts on the natural environment. The farm is normally considered to be a static system. Proposed models do not consider changes in management strategies that may influence the ecological impact of emissions. Fish Production and Material Emissions Model The research team of aquaculture economics and management of the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain) has developed a bioeconomic model based on simple biological and physical relationships. The model estimates the mass of emissions from a marine fish farm, the dispersion of those emissions, and their effect on the surrounding area. Annual production, harvesting size, Fig. 1. A bioeconomic model for a marine net-pen system. and other management factors are included as variables in the model. This methodology allows estimation of the economic results and environmental impacts derived from alternative management decisions on the farm and may help farm owners, government regulators, and local citizens consider the economic and environmental effects of production. The bioeconomic model is assembled from separate modules that integrate biological, physical, economic, and managerial elements in the production and environmental impact from a marine aquaculture farm (Fig. 1). Biophysical components of the model are represented in modules located on the right side of Figure 1. The biomass growth module provides information on fish size throughout the culture period, depending on fish weight and water temperature. The amount of food supplied during the growth period is estimated in the food supplied module, which is also determined by fish size and water temperature. The nutrient balance module estimates the flow of nitrogen, phosphorus, and organic
World Aquaculture 9 matter produced during fish culture. This is the input for the dispersion module, which calculates the impacted area depending on particle settling velocity, water depth, velocity and direction of current. Finally, interaction between discharges and the seabed are analyzed in the benthic effect module. Formal relationships among variables (i.e., model coefficients) in modules were extracted from published theoretical and empirical studies. If specific information on commercial growth of the species and physical conditions of the environment is available, functional expressions and parameters included in the model can be adapted to particular species and production strategies. Economic and management components of the model are represented on the left side of Figure 1. Specifically the economic results module calculates the financial results of the farm (profits, net present value, and internal rate of return) obtained from the commercial activity. Production is planned in the management strategy module, which includes some management choices in the farm, e.g. annual production, harvest size, or time span for the investment. Thus, economic and environmental consequences of different production alternatives can be estimated. Case Study: Sea Bream Net Pens in Melenara Bay The model was fitted to sea bream (Sparus aurata) culture conditions in Melenara Bay (Gran Canaria Island, Spain) (Fig. 2). Water temperature in this region ranges between 17.3 ºC in summer and 18-22 ºC in winter. The seagrass Cymodocea nodosa is the predominant plant in the soft sediment of the bay. It exerts an important ecological and physical role in the coastal ecosystem (stabilization of marine substrates, detritus generation, and nutrient provision). Accordingly this species is considered a bioindicator of human activities on the seabed. There are currently 12 net pens in Melenara Bay for sea bream and sea bass culture, each ranging from 13.2 to 16 m in diameter, 8 m high, and bound with a steel cable enclosing a surface area of 4848 m2. The annual production is around 1200 t, monthly production fluctuates between 25 and 225 t, and harvest size ranges between 450 and 1000 g. Extruded commercial feed is commonly provided Fig. 2. Location of the case study farm site on Gran Canaria, Spain. Fig. 3. Simulation of the impacted area in Melenara Bay derived from a facility with annual sea bream production of 600 t and harvest size of 450 g. to fish, although sometimes pelleted feed is used. To fit the bioeconomic model, a data set of sea bream growth in 12 separate cages was considered. The monthly number of individuals in a cage and the amount and composition of feed supplied were used to calculate the feed conversion ratio for the culture period. Other information needed to fit the model (metabolic parameters, settling velocity of particles, current direction and velocity, depth, degradation coefficients, and economic data) were collected from technical reports and specialized bibliographies. A daily organic matter sedimentation rate of 5 g/ m2 was used to indicate complete degradation of the seabed (Díaz-Almela et al. 2008).
10 March 2012 Figure 3 illustrates the impacted area from the sea bream farm, assuming an annual production of 600 t and a harvest size of 450 g. The surface occupied by net pens is concentrated in a central circular area of the represented spot. Emitted particles fall to the seabed at a certain distance from this central area, depending on particle settling velocity, depth, and direction of currents, which is mainly determined by tide in Melanara Bay. Thus, solids accumulate on the seabed in an ellipsoidal pattern (Fig. 3). To find the best management strategy that integrates economic and environmental perspectives, 18 production scenarios of sea bream farming were analyzed: three harvest sizes (350, 800 and 1200 g) and six annual production levels (from 500 to 1500 t), divided into four lots annually. Figure 4 shows changes in the impacted area resulting from emissions from net pens for different annual production levels and harvest sizes. As expected, the area of environmental impact increases with scale of production and harvest size, although the impact area increases substantially when production exceeds 700 t/year. Figure 5 shows the economic performance (net present value in 20 years) resulting from different management strategies. Economic returns increase with annual production. However, the influence of harvest size is not straightforward. The most profitable harvest size is 800 g and the final size of 1200 g is suboptimal. Managers have economic and environmental information (Figs. 4 and 5) on the effects of different management strategies. Fig. 4. Degraded area as a function of annual production of sea bream harvested at three sizes. Fig. 5. Net present value as a function of annual production of sea bream harvested at three sizes. The Value of a Broad Modeling Approach Recently, marine aquaculture in net pens has been facing an image problem because of real or perceived negative environmental effects, which calls into question the sustainability of fish farming in net pens. With the purpose of centering this debate on reasonable terms, it is useful to apply methodologies that rigorously assess the net social benefits of the activity, including monetary returns and ecological costs. In addition, these methodologies should be dynamic, that is, alternative management strategies and their effect on obtained social benefits should be included in their hypotheses. The bioeconomic model described here points the way because it provides producers and managers a simple quantitative tool for decision making on farm management, taking into account financial returns and environmental impacts derived from marine aquaculture. Notes 1University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain. References Díaz-Almela, E., N. Marbà, E. Álvarez, R. Santiago, M. Holmer, A. Grau, S. Mirto, R. Danovaro, A. Petrou, M. Argyrou, I. Karakassis and C. M. Duarte. 2008. Benthic input rates predict seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) fish farm-induced decline. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56:1332-1342. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2010. The State of Fisheries and Aquaculture 2010. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
World Aquaculture 11
12 March 2012 Mangrove forests and aquaculture farmers: Aspects of climate change adaptation on the central coast of Bangladesh M. Mizanur Rahman*1 and M. Shahadat Hossain1 Aquaculture production and its share of the seafood market are predicted to expand and play an increasingly important role in meeting global fish demands. The success of the sector, therefore, has important implications for food security and as a source of income for a growing number of producers. Consequently, any potential direct or indirect effects of climate change on aquaculture must be taken seriously. The major consequences of climate change include ice melting, sea-level rise, irregular drought and rain, cyclonic storms, coastal erosion, inundation of low-lying areas, salinity intrusion and groundwater contamination. Sea-level rise will have gradual impacts because of the loss of land from inundation and erosion. Salinization of groundwater may reduce the availability of freshwater for aquaculture, agriculture, domestic and industrial uses. Similar problems may arise with increasing the frequency of droughts. Severe droughts may lead to water shortages and massive forest fires. Forest fires release millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere, creating a dangerous feedback loop that further accelerates global warming. The severity and frequency of storm surges increase from the effects of mean sea-level rise and the loss of natural defenses, such as mangrove forests. High winds and waves destroy structures used for coastal aquaculture such as embankments, pond dikes, sluice gates, hatcheries, electricity poles and cage materials, resulting in loss of stock and damage to equipment and facilities. Damage to farm infrastructure can also cause saline water intrusion in the culture pond (FAO 2008). The financial impacts of cyclonic storms on aquaculture may be severe because coastal aquaculture species are often of high value. Climate change can also increase physiological stress on cultured stock. This would reduce productivity and increase vulnerability to diseases and consequently impose higher risks and reduce returns to farmers. Bangladesh, a very low-lying country with a substantial aquaculture industry, typically experiences storm surges between 3 and 6 m, with theoretical predictions up to 7.5 m (Salam and Beveridge 2003). Future predictions for Bangladesh, in association with increased sea surface temperature of 2 °C and 4 °C, suggest maximum storm surge heights of 9.2 and 11.3 m, depending on the extent of sea level rise (Ali 1996). Annual total rainfall over Bangladesh is predicted to increase 296 mm by 2050 and 543 mm by 2100 (Karmakar and Shrestha 2000). Singh et al. (2000) showed that mean tidal level at Hiron Point (21° 48/ N, 89° 28/ E), Hatyia (22°08/ N, 91°06/ E) and Cox’s Bazar (21° 26/ N, 91° 59/ E) increased 4.0, 6.0 and 7.8 mm/year, respectively. Torrential rainfall leads to flooding and paralyzes the affected area, inundating houses, displacing and killing people, destroying infrastructure, and damaging crops, causing massive economic loss. A study was conducted in the Feni-Noakhali area, which is a centrally exposed part of coastal Bangladesh. The geographical location and geomorphological conditions of this region have made it one of the most vulnerable areas in the world to natural disasters (Fig. 1). The objectives of the study were to measure the area in aquaculture, measure the spatial distribution of mangrove forest, identify the causes and impacts of climate change on coastal aquaculture, and analyze the role of mangrove forests in mitigating climate change vulnerability. Fig. 1. Geographical location of the study area.
World Aquaculture 13 The region is a flat, low-lying delta, mostly comprising the floodplain of three large and converging rivers. The Big Feni River flows on the southeast and the Meghna River flows on the western side of the study area. The study area was divided into three zones under three thana (sub-districts) on the basis of a road network and availability of water sources, khas land (i.e., government-owned accreted coastal land), aquaculture farms, mangrove forest, cyclone-affected area, embankment, culture species, and fry sources. Aquaculture in the Study Area The area in aquaculture ponds was assessed using GIS. The topographic map published by the survey of Bangladesh in 1999 at a scale of 1:10,000 and the 2006 topographic map of Noler Char and Char Langulia were used to develop thematic maps. The base map with the union boundary of Noakhali Sadar, Com panigonj and Sonagazi thana were demarcated using ArcView GIS software. Thematic maps were marked as union boundaries, water areas, road network, embankments, and land use. Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) imagery of the study area acquired in 2007 was used to identify geographical features. The image processing software for the analysis was ENVI. ArcView software was used to digitize all classified and other necessary maps. Aquaculture activities were identified in 1694 ha of the study area (Fig. 2), similar to previous observations (Shahid et al. 1992, Venkataratnam et al. 1997).Water bodies that support aquaculture production, such as rivers, canals, and tributaries of the study area are shown in Figure 3. Greater aquaculture production from every water body type (such as pond, gheer, khal, and waterlogged areas) came from Noakhali Sadar region than from the two other zones in the study (Table 2). Aquaculture has increased rapidly since 1990 in the Feni-Noakhali coastal region as a result of government khas land leasing. Availability of land and water resources—such as rivers, canals, and tributaries—make this area suitable for aquaculture. There are also various value chain facilities, including fry sources, hatchery, labor, and market, that are located in this zone to support aquaculture development. The large areas of intertidal land in Bangladesh are especially suitable for prawn production (Fleming 2003) and growth in the industry is being encouraged through a number of aid programs and government initiatives. Carp species, native and exotic, represent Fig. 2. Aquaculture areas of the Feni-Noakhali coastal region. Table 1. Significance ratings and weights of the relevant criteria in connection to perceived value of mangrove forest. Parameter Ranking Temporary weight Final weight Wi House building materials 1.4 0.571 0.106 Fuel wood 1.0 0.800 0.148 Grazing land 1.2 0.667 0.123 Foot bridge 1.0 0.800 0.148 Fishing pole 1.5 0.533 0.099 Fencing 1.5 0.533 0.099 Furniture 0.8 1.000 0.185 Cyclone protector 1.6 0.500 0.093 Sum 5.405 Table 2. Total fishery production from aquaculture and contribution in local demand at the study area. Production Noakhali Sadar Companigonj Sonagazi Fish (mt) 7927 2610 3480 Indian carp (%) 40 Chinese carp (%) 25 Tilapia (%) 20 Pangus (%) 10 Other (%) 5 Prawn (mt) 233 41 1020 Total production (mt) 8160 2651 4500 Total fish demand (mt) 13177 3851 9420
14 March 2012 Fig. 3. Water areas of the Feni-Noakhali coast. a large portion of total production, although tilapia, snakeheads, Clarias and Pangasius catfish, and small indigenous species are also cultured. Extensive and semi-intensive culture systems are used. Bangladesh is undergoing a gradual intensification of aquaculture but, while more sophisticated techniques are being employed, production per unit area is similar to that of many Asian countries (Salam 2000). Mangrove Forest There are 3,455 ha of mangrove forest in the FeniNoakahali coastal area. Most of the mangrove forest in the study area is in Noakhali Sadar zone and the least is in Companigonj zone (Fig. 4). A similar estimate of the extent of mangrove forest was made by Syed et al. (2001). Local people provided reasons for what is seen as a degraded mangrove forest. Sixty percent of respondents indicated that timber banditry was the responsible factor for mangrove destruction. Criminals form gangs and become timber bandits later. They either sold forest resources or burned them to damage the land. Afterwards, forest lands were sold and handed over to others. The cycle of transferring land from one owner to another was the main source of their income. This was identified as the most severe problem by most of the respondents of the study area. River erosion is a common phenomenon in coastal areas. Many people become landless because of river erosion. These people encroach on comparatively raised forest land with the help of bandits. During field visits, respondents identified the lack of guidelines as a cause of mangrove forest destruction. Local community respondents reported forest resources were destroyed because of the lack of proper action taken by law enforcement agencies from 1997 to 2000. The Forest Department filed cases to the court against forest offences, but these cases were not decided which encouraged further forest offences. Different stakeholders, such as rickshaw pullers and agricultural farmers, complain that corrupt forest officials and staff at the territory level were responsible for forest resource destruction. Fifty-eight percent responded that the fuel wood crisis was a serious problem causing mangrove destruction and 60 percent responded that they use mangrove as fuel wood. A similar observation was made by Sajjaduzzaman et al. (2005). Stakeholder perceptions of climate change Perceptions regarding climate change and effects on aquaculture, causes of forest encroachment, consequences, and suggestive measures were collected from five groups of respondents: land-owning aquaculture farmer, integrated agriculture-aquaculture farmer, landless aquaculture farmer, fisher, and other. Forty respondents from three zones were selected by stratified random sampling. Eight stations were selected randomly from each zone for a social survey to investigate the root causes of deforestation and encroachment of mangrove forest areas, aquaFig. 4. Spatial distribution of mangrove forests on the Feni- Noakhali coast.
World Aquaculture 15 culture status and area, climatic hazards, and options for mitigation. Information was collected with a structured questionnaire, formal and informal interviews, and field observations. Moreover, group meetings with landless people and encroachers (squatters) were conducted in each area to assess their views and perceptions. For the public at large, the most important concerns about the effects of climate change were cyclones (cited by 75 percent of respondents), irregular rainfall (55 percent), and tidal height change (50 percent) (Fig. 5). Aquaculture farmers cited various concerns about the consequences of climate change on their farms. These included dike erosion (60 percent of respondents), infrastructure damage (50 percent), and economic losses (45 percent). An applied approach to understand the adaptation index by considering all criteria relevant to climate change allotted a ranking value of ten. Temporary weights were Table 3. Individual quality rating (qi) on the basis of measured and optimum values for the selected respondents group. Criteria Landless aqua farmer Agri cum aqua Land Fish catcher Others farmers owning aqua farmer Measured Individual Measured Individual Measured Individual Measured Individual Measured Individual value quality value quality value quality value quality value quality House building 5 89.3 4 71.4 3 53.6 3 53.6 10 178.6 materials Fuel wood 10 250.0 5 125.0 4 100.0 6 150.0 5 125.0 Grazing land 8 166.7 3 62.5 2 41.7 5 104.2 3 62.5 Foot Bridge 2 50.0 1 25.0 3 75.0 2 50.0 4 100.0 Fishing Pole 4 66.7 2 33.3 5 83.3 6 100.0 2 33.3 Fencing 4 66.7 4 66.7 2 33.3 4 66.7 1 16.7 Furniture 3 93.8 1 31.3 1 31.3 3 93.8 8 250.0 Cyclone 7 109.4 5 78.1 4 62.5 5 78.1 6 93.8 protector Table 4. Adaptation index (Wi qi) of selected respondent groups. Parameter Landless Agri cum aqua Land-owning Fish Catcher Others aquafarmer farmers House building materials 9.4 7.6 5.7 5.7 18.9 Fuel wood 37.0 18.5 14.8 22.2 18.5 Grazing land 20.6 7.7 5.1 12.8 7.7 Foot bridge 7.4 3.7 11.1 7.4 14.8 Fishing pole 6.6 3.3 8.2 9.9 3.3 Fencing 6.6 6.6 3.3 6.6 1.6 Furniture 17.3 5.8 5.8 17.3 46.3 Cyclone protector 10.1 7.2 5.8 7.2 8.7 ∑ Wi.qi 115.0 60.3 59.8 89.1 119.8 Score card 2 4 5 3 1 obtained by dividing the highest rating by each individual mean rating. Each temporary weight was then divided by the sum of all the temporary weights to arrive at the final weight of each parameter (Table 1). The sum of the product of each final weight (wi) and quality rating (qi) for each parameter was used to provide a quantitative adaptation index. Individual quality ratings presented in Table 3 reflect the congenial environment in almost all the criteria assessed among the five groups of respondents. Variation of individual quality ratings has influenced the adaptation index (Table 4) of the selected respondents group. Score cards of the adaptation index, prepared on the basis of the adaptation index, indicates the order of adaptation in the sequence of others> landless aquaculture farmer> fish catcher> agriculture-aquaculture farmer> land owning aquaculture farmer.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjExNDY=