Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture
Although aquaculture and farmed species have many benefits for the economy and can take a little of the stress off of natural fish production and catch, there are several environmental impacts which must also be considered. The higher the position a fish is on the food chain (trophic level) the more nutrients it depends on from other smaller fish as food. By aiding one species and producing mass amounts of it in captivity or in the wild through use of open net pens, it must still feed on species of a lower trophic level. With this in mind, there is more waste output by farming fish which are higher on the trophic level, like finfish such as cod or salmon, as opposed to planktonic species such as blue mussels which feed on detritus or plankton/zooplankton. Feed for these larger finfish come in pellet form and when overfed sink to the bottom of the ocean.
Farming of finfish produce a generous amount of organic waste such as phosphates and nitrates. These by-products will contaminate the surrounding areas of water and decrease the water quality significantly for both the farmed fish as well as species which are indigenous to the area. These by-products in the water column can cause issues such as algal blooms and lower the oxygen content of the water. Aquaculture which is carried out in an open system, with open net pens like salmon or cod farms, are more detrimental to the environment since they are higher on the trophic level and use more resources and produce more waste.
When farming/culturing any species in large quantities there are several risks associated. These range from waste output, to spreading of disease throughout the population being farmed. Even more of a risk than this is the possibility that disease spreads from the cultured population to the wild population living outside the nets. Another risk of producing aquaculture in a wild environment is the possibility of the farmed species escaping their open net pens and interbreeding with those fish which are indigenous to the area. If this is to occur it is possible that the farmed organisms could outcompete the indigenous species creating a threat to the wild species. With more of any species in one specific area, there remains the risk also that more predators will be attracted. The addition of more predators to prey on the stock introduced, these predators can then also prey on the original species which are native to the area.
In many cases, fish which are cultured or grown for aquaculture purposes may also be vaccinated to prevent the spread of disease or contraction of disease. Not only can these parasites or diseases be spread amongst the fish which are farmed for aquaculture, but the can also contaminate indigenous species living around the aquaculture sites. These vaccinations are based on inactivated bacterial pathogens which may protect against bacterial infections and certain types of parasites. It has to be kept in mind that these vaccinations are present when these fish interbreed and are also still present in the fish when purchased from the supermarket.
References
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2012). Aquaculture in Canada 2012. A Report on Aquaculture Sustainability.
Masser, M.P. Bridger, C.J. A review of cage aquaculture: North America. In M. Halwart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture – Regional reviews and global overview, pp.102–125. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 498. 2007
Newfoundland Aquaculture Strategic Plan (2000). Strategic Plan: Newfoundland and Labrador Aquaculture.
R.W Penney, C.H McKenzie, T.J Mills. (2001). Assessment of the Particulate Food Supply Available for Mussel (Mytilus spp.) Farming in a Semi-enclosed, Northern Inlet. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science Volume 53, Issue 1, July 2001, Pages 107–121.
Sommerset, I., Krossoy, B., Biering, E., & Frost, P. (2005). Vaccines for fish in aquaculture. Expert Rev. Vaccines 4 (1), 89-101.
Tisdell, C. 1999. Overview of environmental and sustainability issues in aquaculture. Aquaculture Economics & Management. 3(1): 1-5.
Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture
Although aquaculture and farmed species have many benefits for the economy and can take a little of the stress off of natural fish production and catch, there are several environmental impacts which must also be considered. The higher the position a fish is on the food chain (trophic level) the more nutrients it depends on from other smaller fish as food. By aiding one species and producing mass amounts of it in captivity or in the wild through use of open net pens, it must still feed on species of a lower trophic level. With this in mind, there is more waste output by farming fish which are higher on the trophic level, like finfish such as cod or salmon, as opposed to planktonic species such as blue mussels which feed on detritus or plankton/zooplankton. Feed for these larger finfish come in pellet form and when overfed sink to the bottom of the ocean.
Farming of finfish produce a generous amount of organic waste such as phosphates and nitrates. These by-products will contaminate the surrounding areas of water and decrease the water quality significantly for both the farmed fish as well as species which are indigenous to the area. These by-products in the water column can cause issues such as algal blooms and lower the oxygen content of the water. Aquaculture which is carried out in an open system, with open net pens like salmon or cod farms, are more detrimental to the environment since they are higher on the trophic level and use more resources and produce more waste.
When farming/culturing any species in large quantities there are several risks associated. These range from waste output, to spreading of disease throughout the population being farmed. Even more of a risk than this is the possibility that disease spreads from the cultured population to the wild population living outside the nets. Another risk of producing aquaculture in a wild environment is the possibility of the farmed species escaping their open net pens and interbreeding with those fish which are indigenous to the area. If this is to occur it is possible that the farmed organisms could outcompete the indigenous species creating a threat to the wild species. With more of any species in one specific area, there remains the risk also that more predators will be attracted. The addition of more predators to prey on the stock introduced, these predators can then also prey on the original species which are native to the area.
In many cases, fish which are cultured or grown for aquaculture purposes may also be vaccinated to prevent the spread of disease or contraction of disease. Not only can these parasites or diseases be spread amongst the fish which are farmed for aquaculture, but the can also contaminate indigenous species living around the aquaculture sites. These vaccinations are based on inactivated bacterial pathogens which may protect against bacterial infections and certain types of parasites. It has to be kept in mind that these vaccinations are present when these fish interbreed and are also still present in the fish when purchased from the supermarket.
References
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2012). Aquaculture in Canada 2012. A Report on Aquaculture Sustainability.
Masser, M.P. Bridger, C.J. A review of cage aquaculture: North America. In M. Halwart, D. Soto and J.R. Arthur (eds). Cage aquaculture – Regional reviews and global overview, pp.102–125. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 498. 2007
Newfoundland Aquaculture Strategic Plan (2000). Strategic Plan: Newfoundland and Labrador Aquaculture.
R.W Penney, C.H McKenzie, T.J Mills. (2001). Assessment of the Particulate Food Supply Available for Mussel (Mytilus spp.) Farming in a Semi-enclosed, Northern Inlet. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science Volume 53, Issue 1, July 2001, Pages 107–121.
Sommerset, I., Krossoy, B., Biering, E., & Frost, P. (2005). Vaccines for fish in aquaculture. Expert Rev. Vaccines 4 (1), 89-101.
Tisdell, C. 1999. Overview of environmental and sustainability issues in aquaculture. Aquaculture Economics & Management. 3(1): 1-5.