Posted on 05/27/2006 12:19:00 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Coastside commercial fishermen were pleased that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Friday signed the Sustainable Oceans Act, severely restricting future fish-farming along the California coast.
The act, authored by Palo Alto Democrat Joe Simitian, allows ocean farming operations but requires stringent environmental protections that industry experts are calling the toughest in the nation.
Coastside fisherman Pietro Parravano, president of the Institute of Fishery Resources, said Saturday the new rules should help protect marine ecosystems and water quality. He said the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association had lobbied for passage of the act.
There are currently no finfish aquaculture operations on the California coast. Parravano said that is because the rugged coastline makes such operations too expensive for now. But aquaculture has become big business in other parts of the world, providing cheaper fish for consumers as well as sometimes hard-to-foresee impacts to the local environment.
SB 201, Sustainable Oceans ActNumber of Republicans voting for legislationAssembly: 2 (6%) Shirley Horton, Mark WylandSenate: 2 (14%) Abel Maldonado, Jeff Denham
Now they're turning against fish farming as "unnatural". Commercial fishermen, whose self-interest is obvious, are only too happy to contribute to this effort.
It is "California"
What is there left to say
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0201-0250/sb_201_cfa_20060510_150833_sen_floor.html
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT :
Supporters write that, "Fish farming poses serious risks to wild fish stocks and the marine environment. Farmed fish spread diseases and parasites; hormones, antibiotics, and chemicals pollute ocean and coastal waters; the use of fish meal and fish oils in feed deplete marine ecosystems; and predator controls harm marine wildlife. These risks have led to recent expressions of concern from the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, the Pew Oceans Commission, and the Governor's Ocean Action Strategy.
"The lack of adequate federal and international standards has forced some states like Alaska to ban all fish farming in marine waters. California banned farming salmon, non-native and transgenic species in 2003, but has no standards to site marine finfish operations, or properly assess impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, and marine habitats and ecosystems. Nor does California have any standards to protect marine wildlife, habitats, fishing and other uses; minimize pollution; restore damage to the marine environment; adequately monitor and inspect facilities; or prevent and report the escape of farmed fish."
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/10/06) The Ocean Conservancy (source) Bluewater Network California Coastal Protection Network California Coastkeeper Alliance Center for Food Safety Coastside Fishing Club Defenders of Wildlife Environment California Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo Environmental Defense Environmental Entrepreneurs Institute of Marine Sciences, UC Santa Cruz Natural Resources Defense Council Oceana O'Neil Sea Odyssey Orange County Coastkeeper Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations Planning and Conservation League San Diego Baykeeper San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Santa Monica Baykeeper Save Our Shores Seaflow Sierra Club The Nature Conservancy University of California Marine Council
This will hurt operations at Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco, IMO.
Foolish and short-sighted. The government that is big enough to "protect" you by tightly restricting the operations of fish farms is also big enough to restrict you out of business.
Typical Democratic response--If it is not regulated, then we have to regulate it cause we are the regulators.
My guess is it will hurt operations across the state, not to mention various businesses and the consumer.
Regulation, regulation, regulation.
This was a good veto opportunity.
Could one just put his fishery beyond the twelve-mile limit?
Good question. I don't know the answer.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/14677587.htm
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today signed into law new rules giving California the toughest ocean fish-farming regulations in the United States.
The measure, written by State Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, is designed to reduce the risk of pollution and harm to marine wildlife from giant floating pens of tuna, halibut, or other species that could result if the aquaculture industry expands to the California coast.
"Ocean fish-farming can now be part of California's future without sacrificing the environment," Schwarzenegger said. "This legislation will lay the groundwork for a new California aquaculture industry to thrive while providing an abundance of healthy food and more jobs."
The bill was supported by the Ocean Conservancy and other environmental groups. It passed mostly along party lines, with Democrats voting for it and nearly all Republicans voting against.
The new law requires the California Fish and Game Commission to identify which coastal locations are best suited for fish farming. It also directs the commission to require fish-farming companies to reduce pollution and chemicals, tag all farmed fish, minimize the risk of fish escaping and return each site ``to its original condition'' after the operation is finished.
Ah, very informative. Thanks a lot for the info.
Here's an SFGate.com from earlier.
Thanks for posting this.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1639355/posts
CA: State becomes 1st to regulate fish farms
SFGate.com ^ | 5/27/06 | Mark Martin
Posted on 05/27/2006 10:14:15 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
This is an interesting one. My Master's thesis was actually on the economic impact of market globalization on commercial fishing and fish farming.
Mariculture (ocean aquaculture) is a real mixed bag. My summer house overlooks salmon pens in Maine, which are tidy operations, each of which, however, produces as much pollution as a small city.
The economic benefits can be traced to where the infrastructure is strongest- Chile and the nordic countries derive the most benefit from equipment, feed and manufacturing. Local benefit decreases with time, and also decreases as efficiency in operations increases. Consolidation of asset ownership is inevitable for increased effiencency. There will be no local ownership given enough time.
Finally, high value fish require high value feed. Feed conversion ratios show that it takes from 1.2 lbs to 2.3 lbs of feed to increase the weight of high-value fish by 1 lb, causing a net loss to the ocean environment.
The farms do provide jobs, and yes, definately do decrease the cost of fish meat. There is some question as to the effect on quality.
Thanks. I meant to cross reference that thread and forgot.
There was a long article on this in Stanford Alumni mag last month. It predicted a Bush admin fed program to license fish farms at sea. The benefits included income from leasing fees to the government and a decrease in fish imports which are the second biggest item in the trade deficit after oil. If the feds have defered to states instead, that's news.
The environmentalists' ultimate objective is to destroy Western Civilization. As soon as an "alternative" becomes popular, they find a way to destroy it. Rich white liberals want to end our way of living, period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.