88
T. Dempster and P. Sanchez-Jerez
culture of marine and anadromous fish in sea-cage farms is widespread in northern
Europe (e.g. Norway, Scotland, Ireland, Denmark, Faeroe Islands). Norway is presently the leading producer of fish; in 2004 over 600,000 t of salmon and sea trout
were produced in 870 concessions, while 285 concessions farmed other species such
as cod, halibut and arctic char (Norwegian Fisheries Directorate 2005). The
Mediterranean Sea supports over 500 sea-cage farms producing more than 160000 t
year
−1 of sea bream and sea bass in Greece, Spain, Italy, France, Turkey and numerous other countries. Tuna ranching operations exist in eight countries in the
Mediterranean; approximately 225,000 t year
−1 of small, wild caught pelagic fish are
used to fatten an initial biomass of 15,000 t–20,000 t of wild-caught tuna (Borg and
Schembri 2006). Extensive industries along the Atlantic coasts of Spain, Portugal
and France (Goulletquer and Le Moine 2002) and in other parts of Europe exist for
the culture of mussels, oysters and other shellfish. These occupy substantially
greater coastal space than sea-cage fish farms, which typically occupy 1–5 ha per
installation. For example, the 125,000 t of oysters and 20,000 t of mussels stocked in
the Marennes–Oléron Bay region in France occupy 4,000 ha of coastal space and
3,000 ha of nearby wetlands (Goulletquer and Le Moine 2002).
The European Union plans to expand aquaculture further, to increase seafood supplies, create jobs and reduce the trade deficit of the EU in seafood products. As this
expansion occurs, finding suitable locations for aquaculture installations in coastal
areas, and managing the interaction of aquaculture with other users of the coastal
zone will become increasingly important (Stead et al. 2002). Here, we discuss the
concept of “competition for coastal space” as a combination of the competition for
physical space and the competing activities of different users for coastal space.
3.2 Interactions of Aquaculture with Other Users
of the Coastal Zone
There are two aspects to integrating the diverse array of aquaculture that exists
throughout Europe within coastal space and managing its interactions with other
users of the coastal zone: (1) planning of site allocation for aquaculture activities,
and (2) management of the interactions of installations, the environment and other
users once they have been set up. As the environmental effects of aquaculture will
interact with those of other activities, integrated management, where the uses and
environmental effects of all users of coastal activities are considered simultaneously, may reduce conflicts and minimise negative environmental effects.
Ecological requirements should dictate first and foremost the position and
extent of aquaculture in the coastal zone (Costa Pierce 2002; Guneroglu et al.
2005). Siting criteria should be based on “ecological carrying capacities” or the
ability of the ecosystem to absorb anthropogenic pressures with no major changes
to ecosystem functions and processes. A suite of environmental impacts caused
by coastal aquaculture must be incorporated into this process to determine how
habitat and biodiversity modification caused by aquaculture can best be managed
T. Dempster and P. Sanchez-Jerez
culture of marine and anadromous fish in sea-cage farms is widespread in northern
Europe (e.g. Norway, Scotland, Ireland, Denmark, Faeroe Islands). Norway is presently the leading producer of fish; in 2004 over 600,000 t of salmon and sea trout
were produced in 870 concessions, while 285 concessions farmed other species such
as cod, halibut and arctic char (Norwegian Fisheries Directorate 2005). The
Mediterranean Sea supports over 500 sea-cage farms producing more than 160000 t
year
−1 of sea bream and sea bass in Greece, Spain, Italy, France, Turkey and numerous other countries. Tuna ranching operations exist in eight countries in the
Mediterranean; approximately 225,000 t year
−1 of small, wild caught pelagic fish are
used to fatten an initial biomass of 15,000 t–20,000 t of wild-caught tuna (Borg and
Schembri 2006). Extensive industries along the Atlantic coasts of Spain, Portugal
and France (Goulletquer and Le Moine 2002) and in other parts of Europe exist for
the culture of mussels, oysters and other shellfish. These occupy substantially
greater coastal space than sea-cage fish farms, which typically occupy 1–5 ha per
installation. For example, the 125,000 t of oysters and 20,000 t of mussels stocked in
the Marennes–Oléron Bay region in France occupy 4,000 ha of coastal space and
3,000 ha of nearby wetlands (Goulletquer and Le Moine 2002).
The European Union plans to expand aquaculture further, to increase seafood supplies, create jobs and reduce the trade deficit of the EU in seafood products. As this
expansion occurs, finding suitable locations for aquaculture installations in coastal
areas, and managing the interaction of aquaculture with other users of the coastal
zone will become increasingly important (Stead et al. 2002). Here, we discuss the
concept of “competition for coastal space” as a combination of the competition for
physical space and the competing activities of different users for coastal space.
3.2 Interactions of Aquaculture with Other Users
of the Coastal Zone
There are two aspects to integrating the diverse array of aquaculture that exists
throughout Europe within coastal space and managing its interactions with other
users of the coastal zone: (1) planning of site allocation for aquaculture activities,
and (2) management of the interactions of installations, the environment and other
users once they have been set up. As the environmental effects of aquaculture will
interact with those of other activities, integrated management, where the uses and
environmental effects of all users of coastal activities are considered simultaneously, may reduce conflicts and minimise negative environmental effects.
Ecological requirements should dictate first and foremost the position and
extent of aquaculture in the coastal zone (Costa Pierce 2002; Guneroglu et al.
2005). Siting criteria should be based on “ecological carrying capacities” or the
ability of the ecosystem to absorb anthropogenic pressures with no major changes
to ecosystem functions and processes. A suite of environmental impacts caused
by coastal aquaculture must be incorporated into this process to determine how
habitat and biodiversity modification caused by aquaculture can best be managed