Aquaculture Site Allocation Policy Better Late than Never, but Still Seriously Flawed

According to the Conservation Council, the Aquaculture Site Allocation Policy released Tuesday by provincial government should have been enacted 10 years ago, but it is still a useful and necessary step to take. Marine Conservation Director Janice Harvey remarked, "This is a flawed and incomplete policy. Nonetheless, it takes some important steps forward and we welcome that. We just wish it had happened in 1990 when we first asked for it."

The Conservation Council has been monitoring environmental issues with respect to salmon aquaculture since 1988. In 1990, CCNB called for a moratorium on salmon aquaculture until legally binding environmental controls were implemented. Among other things, CCNB called for the jurisdiction of the provincial Department of Environment to be extended to nearshore waters and for DOE to assert a legislative mandate under the Clean Environment Act to close down an aquaculture site if monitoring indicated that the bottom or water quality had been degraded. CCNB also called for the departmental budget to be increased to cover this new responsibility (see backgrounder). At the time, 50 farms were producing approximately 8,000 tonnes of fish.

CCNB's demands were dismissed and predictions of problems to come were ridiculed. "In the meantime," says Harvey, "production increased to 85 farms producing 25,000 tonnes of salmon, disease and parasite problems hit with a vengeance, pollution problems emerged in Lime Kiln Bay, Bliss Harbour and Passamaquoddy Bay, and conflicts with commercial fishermen increased. Ten years later, the provincial government is finally beginning to admit the industry requires environmental regulation."

The Site Allocation Policy restricts where new farms can be located and requires more stringent environmental management on individual sites. The Department of Environment will use the Clean Water Act and Clean Environment Act to enforce environmental performance standards yet to be determined. "Despite this progress, there are problems with the policy," Harvey said.

"While the Environment Department will now be involved, the information on the environmental performance of individual farms is still considered confidential. While other industries in the province have their environmental records subject to public scrutiny, aquaculture companies are being protected from this by the government. We believe it is time for each company to be accountable to the public for its environmental record, particularly since they are operating in public waters."

Harvey added that the role the Environment Department will play, while important, is limited and does not address the broader marine environmental quality issues such as nutrient enrichment, habitat loss and biodiversity loss on a region-wide basis. "These larger issues are really federal jurisdiction, and DFO and Environment Canada must now step in to fill the regulatory gaps that still remain," said Harvey.

Harvey also believes the fundamental environmental issue facing the industry - how many fish can be grown in southwestern New Brunswick without degrading the marine ecosystem - is not addressed by this policy. "Even in the controlled growth areas where the government says they will not consider new sites, they will still consider increased production on existing sites. It is the fish production level, and not the number of sites, that is the real problem in those areas. For instance, since 1997 when the policy review began, total tonnage of fish grown increased from 18,000 to 25,000 tonnes. That's nearly a 40% increase during a time when environmental and disease problems hit their peak, a moratorium was in place on new farms, and new sites for existing companies were only granted to control disease problems."

CCNB contends that too many fish are being grown overall, and the ecosystem cannot absorb the wastes and nutrient loading the existing production is creating. "To allow higher production on existing sites would defeat the purpose of the controlled zones. This suggests that the government still hasn't really grappled with the fact that there are ecological limits to growth in this industry. Further, there is no indication the government will not load up the open zones with new sites so that the same problems we see in controlled zones will be created in those areas. There must be a production cap imposed until science can suggest how many fish can be grown safely in each area."

The Conservation Council is also concerned about the decision-making process for new sites, and the availability of information on the environmental conditions of sites. "CCNB, along with commercial fishermen's associations, have fought hard to have the decision-making process opened up. This policy reflects no change in the current situation with respect to public participation and access to information."

"This government, like the former one, does not acknowledge a legitimate public stake in the quality and use of public waters. There is no improvement in the minimal opportunity people have to contribute to the site allocation process. People have to see an advertisement in the newspapers, track down the coordinates of the site through the DAFA office, and submit letters. Written input goes into a bureaucratic and political black hole, with no access to information on which a final decision is based."

"Further, the only publicly available information on a proposed site is its coordinates. Although the applicant is required to submit environmental information as part of the application, this is not available as part of the public comment phase. This does not lend itself to informed comment and limits the quality of information received by the government from the interested public. Finally, the government's reputation for responsible decision-making in site allocation is poor. At this point, we have no assurance this will improve."

CCNB calls on the provincial Department of Environment and Local Government to usher in a new era of public accountability of the industry, and public participation in the process of determining acceptable environmental performance standards for the industry. "Unless DELG takes a different approach to public issues from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Aquaculture, their credibility as regulators will quickly disappear," said Harvey. "We implore Minister Jardine to set a new standard with respect to government and public oversight of this industry."

Take me to the Backgrounder from June 21, 1990 of the CCNB archives.