NOAA should go back to the drawing board

From a column in the Bradenton Times:

Industrial-scale finfish farming is not sustainable, it:

• Is not inclusive, as it favors wealthy investors and actively harms other existing industries, such as fishing
• Does not expand access to nutritious domestic seafood, as the fish would be sold for the highest price and have been fed and doused with a variety of chemicals
• Harms coastal and ocean ecosystems that existing fishing livelihoods depend on, due to the transfer of disease, fecal pollution, toxic chemical applications, and fish escapes.

GOAL 1: MANAGE SUSTAINABLY AND EFFICIENTLY Improve the regulatory system for sustainable coastal and marine aquaculture through collaboration with partners.” 

In relation to offshore finfish farming, Goal 1 Objectives actually contradict the Vision and in reality, would accomplish the following:

• Objective 1A: supporting "the establishment of a clear, efficient, and appropriate regulatory framework for sustainable offshore aquaculture” means the agency is advocating for passage of the AQUAA Act, a bill that would open federal waters to industrial-scale fish farming and actually give NOAA the authority to regulate this space. The bill fails to protect the marine environment or remedy the negative economic impacts such an expansion would have on other existing industries or small-scale fishing livelihoods.
• Objective 1B to "authorize small-scale or limited-time aquaculture activities” including "commercial trials” is the agency’s promise to keep giving taxpayer money to private companies to artificially distort the marketplace away from community-driven aquaculture programs. 
• Objective 1C is the agency’s promise to "advance NOAA aquaculture directives under existing Executive Orders,” meaning that the Biden Administration plans to endorse Trump’s Executive Order 13921, a disastrous order with the goal of eviscerating environmental and social safeguards in order to fast-track and rubber-stamp the permitting process under the guise of streamlining regulations.
• Objective 1D is the agency’s promise to eagerly abide by Trump’s EO 13921, by identifying more "aquaculture opportunity areas” to aid prospective investors in siting their facilities, even though several of the existing AOA proposals are already controversially-sited and lack any public buy-in.

GOAL 3: EDUCATE AND EXCHANGE INFORMATION Build awareness and support for coastal and marine aquaculture through two-way communication with diverse stakeholders and partners”

Unfortunately, the agency plans to use taxpayer money to attempt to convince people that harmful forms of aquaculture are just as beneficial as truly sustainable forms of aquaculture.

• Objective 3A calls the propaganda campaign an effort to "improve public perception”
• Objectives 3C and 3E appear to value "equitable access to concise education” and outreach to "diverse audiences,” but when compared to the agency’s actual practices, that is, ignoring all voices in coastal communities that are in opposition to industrial-scale development.

Conclusion: Instead of steamrolling fishing communities to force an industrial offshore fish farming regime on our federal waters, NOAA should go back to the drawing board to develop truly community-focused proposals for supporting seafood production, including support for independent fishermen and small-scale, sustainable aquaculture.

 If you want to read the full draft plan, you can find it here.

Andrianna Natsoulas

Campaign Director

Don't Cage Our Oceans