'Whether it’s farmed salmon or oysters, it’s hard to get information about these public health incidents'

Opinion: Selling our waters to industrial scale aquaculture

UNITED STATES
Wednesday, September 18, 2024, 00:10 (GMT + 9)

As a marine harvester in the Midcoast and Downeast, part-time sternman, and an advocate for keeping our waters clean and open to everyone, I urge you to look at what is happening along the Maine coast. 

We are selling our waters without doing any research about the impacts of industrial-scale aquaculture. The Department of Marine Resources (DMR) is granting leases for exclusive use in areas all along the coast. Those areas are getting bigger—pushing out other marine harvesters without proper oversight or scientific study regarding the impact on the wild harvest or the environment. 

Recently at an aquaculture advisory council meeting, DMR stated the state is averaging 100 new applications a year. If you look at the math, DMR is granting 95% of those leases. DMR says it did not have a research arm to look at the questions that are being posed around responsible, sustainable aquaculture. Every year at the legislature, DMR notes that they don’t have enough staff. Yet, they keep approving leases. 

This summer has been particularly painful along the coast with a fish die-off at Cooke Aquaculture near Beals and two recall notices due to bad oysters that were farmed. One recall noted aquaculture made people ill at two different sites in Freeport, the other in western Casco Bay. 

Whether it’s farmed salmon or oysters, it’s hard to get information about these public health incidents. No press release about the salmon die-off, which was substantial. no press release about the shellfish that made people sick. The only place you can find any information is several pages in, under shellfish – not even under aquaculture. The state chose to notify the FDA and the other states where some of the oysters were sent but not its own residents. 

Why? I don’t know the answer, but it seems at least part of the reason is DMR does not want the public to hear anything but the good news around aquaculture even when it puts public health at risk. 

I have reviewed several scientific studies around aquaculture that provide examples of potential negative impacts from large-scale industrial aquaculture. 

• In a study on mussel farming, lobster spawn was reduced in and around the site. 
• Top culture aquaculture reduces the flow velocity, which reduces the transport of nutrients and oxygen- rich water, creating a competitive environment with the wild harvest. 
• Oyster aquaculture, specifically top culture, is touted as being highly beneficial to marine ecosystems. However, all the research I have seen that indicates a positive relationship comes from studies done on bottom culture oysters, grown in a natural setting, that are not part of a commercial farm. 
• Calcium carbonate is an important element that reduces water acidity and is necessary for the development of shellfish. Calcium carbonate is in low supply due to global warming. Top culture shellfish are positioned to have access first to this crucial element. 

These are just a few reasons why I am part of Protect Maine’s Fishing Heritage Foundation. We are watching other communities design their own future, creating and working together to develop aquaculture ordinances along the Maine coast. In every case, it’s giving communities a chance to have a say in their own future before it’s too late. 

Camden Reiss Brunswick, ME

This Letter to the Editor was originally published in the Machias Valley News Observer 

This article represents the opinion of the author. The opinion articles published do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of this media. Fish Info & Services is an independent media, open to the opinion of its readers. If you wish to publish, contact us at info@seafood.media

editorial@seafood.media
www.seafood.media

Print