Part A

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ON AQUACULTURE The Major Drivers of Ecosystem Changes and their Relative

Importance for Aquaculture

Katerina Sevastou, Ioannis Karakassis, Maria Panagiotidou e-mail: sevastou@biology.uoc.gr

Marine Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, University of Crete

This section of the Deliverable has been written by contributors of the Leader Partner

of Work Package 3

1. Introduction

Coastal areas and shallow waters are biologically diverse and productive ecosystems

which sustain a wide variety of human activities (Burbridge et al. 2001) such as

agriculture, rural and urban development, tourism, recreation and leisure activities as

well as navigation and dredging, and play a major role to the total harvest of marine

organisms through fisheries and aquaculture. Since most of the capture fisheries in

Europe are either overexploited or declined, aquaculture has been promoted in many

parts of Europe as an alternative to fisheries, which in turn has lead to a rapid increase

in the production of farmed marine resources from coastal land and waters.

Coastal aquaculture forms a significant and rapidly growing component of world

aquatic production with a global production that has tripled both in terms of biomass

and value since the 1980s (FAO 1999). In 2003, marine aquaculture in Europe was

estimated at 2 238 583 tonnes, and valued at 5 583 532 US $ (FAO, FIGIS 2000-

2006). In a global scale, it is foreseen that mariculture will further diversify and

increase in production because of its great potential for the production of food, but

also due to its substantial contribution to the socio-economic development of a region

through generating employment, rural development, and increased national incomes

(Burbridge et al. 2001)

Anthropogenic activities influence environmental processes and ecosystems and as

such, aquaculture may affect the environment in various degrees. Poorly managed

aquaculture may have adverse impacts on the environment, among which organic

enrichment, toxins and genetic pollution are widely documented in the literature as

current issues of concern (e.g. Ackefors & Enell 1990, Gowen et al. 1990, Braaten

1991, Munday et al 1992, Black 2001, Utter & Epifanio 2001). Likewise, aquaculture

is heavily dependent on ecosystem services and is highly vulnerable to environmental

change and pollution caused by other users of the coastal zone; thus, it typically takes

place in water of high quality. However, aquaculture is affected by its own activities

as well, and therefore producers should protect their adjacent environments by setting

and maintaining high environmental standards to avoid local environmental

degradation which can lead to production problems.

1

Burbridge et al. (2001) recognized that marine aquaculture forms a socially and

economically important component of fisheries and state that the future success of

mariculture industry will depend on: (i) improving environmental compatibility of

culture systems; (ii) improving public understanding of advances in mariculture,

maintaining the high quality environment required for efficient mariculture

production; (iii) continuous monitoring to ensure mariculture is protected from

adverse impacts from other activities; and (iv) effective formulation of policy where

stakeholders have been involved in the early stages of decision making.

It is therefore evident that towards a sustainable aquaculture industry it is essential to

identify the main driving forces of ecosystem change and assess their nature, relative

importance and extent to which they affect the water quality in aquaculture zones. A

subsequent step of extreme importance is the setting of reference levels and the

establishment of appropriate indicators of the aquaculture – environment interactions,

as they would practically help farmers, planners, regulators and other groups of policy

makers to effectively select sites for aquaculture activities avoiding environmental

pressures and conflicts over other coastal uses, and to monitor the impacts of both

natural and anthropogenic factors on aquaculture.

2. Major issues of concern in the marine environment

Environmental processes are known to be complex and appear to interact within

different levels of biotic and abiotic organisation. Therefore, environmental issues of

concern are linked to, or influenced by, one another at various degrees and are not

strictly restricted within certain political boundaries (GESAMP 2001a). This occurs

especially in the marine environment, where critical issues cannot be approached

without considering the ecological interaction among the seas, the coastal zone and

the associated freshwater systems. Furthermore, the oceans and coasts are extensively

used and therefore affected by human kind, as we strongly depend on them for vital

resources, such as food and water, but we also exploit the various services they can

provide and support, i.e. employment, recreation, effluent treatment. However, as

natural resources are at present under unprecedented pressures due to the occurrence

of or increase in various phenomena of different origin (IOC 2001), the capacity of

coastal ecosystems to support goods and services for the global population changes.

2

Thus, the link between socio-economic driving forces, such as demography,

technology, economy, politics, and marine environment is considered to be strong.

In 2001, two international scientific working groups of specialised experts, the Joint

Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection

(GESAMP) and the Health of the Oceans (HOTO) module of Global Ocean

Observing Systems (GOOS) reported on the state of the marine environment,

identified its major problems, their nature and severity and suggested critical areas of

concern where research and policy actions should focus on (GESAMP 2001a,b, IOC

2001). Various marine environmental problems along with key pressures, drivers and

impacts affecting European marine environment have been also discussed recently in

the State of the Environment Report of the European Environment Agency (EEA

2005a).

In the above reports pollution, perceived as the deterioration of water quality owing to

land and marine-based activities, has been identified as a persistent environmental

problem, the centre of concern during the past decades. However, in those documents

stress is also laid on the different pressures leading to marine pollution and its various

effects on the oceans, while the emergence of new threats to the marine environment

and the necessity to deal with them has been highlighted and discussed. According to

these reports, the most serious problems having a strong effect on the quality and uses

of the marine and coastal environment are:

Global issues of environmental concern in the marine environment

destruction / alteration of habitats overfishing sewage and chemical effects on human health and the environment coastal development eutrophication / HABs hydrological and sediment flows changes global warming

In a more detailed approach, the above list of global environmental concerns may

extend to include more subentries, i.e. wetland loss, transfer of alien species,

reduction of biodiversity, sea level fluctuation, etc.

3

Destruction / alteration of habitats

Marine and coastal ecosystems are considered important economic goods as they

provide valuable services, such as food production, raw materials, recreational

amenities, wastes treatment, protection from storms and employment opportunities.

However, habitat destruction and ecosystem alteration is nowadays considered as the

most widespread and frequently irreversible impact of the socio-economic activities

on the coastal zone. Worldwide, the vulnerable ecosystems of dunes, wetlands,

mangroves, coral reefs and seagrass beds suffer or are destroyed due to pollution

(sewage and chemical compounds), urban development, destructive fishing methods,

introduction of non-indigenous organisms, mining.

Overfishing

Overfishing is not a recent issue. Already recognized internationally in the early

1890s in the North Atlantic and the Pacific, was the subject of the London Conference

on Overfishing in 1946. For many years fishery resources were thought to be

inexhaustible. However, intensive fishing activities remove vast amounts of fishes

from seas and freshwaters leading to declines in many previously abundant fish and

shellfish populations. Furthermore, the reduction of biomass from the middle of food

chain may have largely unknown effects. The crisis is even more intensified due to

destructive ways of fishing

Sewage and chemical effects on human health and the environment

Sewage effluent contains industrial, municipal and slaughterhouse wastes, animal

remains, water and wastes from domestic baths, utensils and washing machines,

kitchen wastes, faecal matter and many others (Islam & Tanaka 2004). It contains in

itself a variety of harmful substances, such as viral, bacterial and protozoan

pathogens, toxic chemicals (organoclorines, heavy metals) and many other organic

and inorganic substances which pose direct and indirect effects on ecosystems and its

organisms. Numerous studies have indicated that sewage pollution have a massive

effect on human health worldwide. Chemicals (pesticides, fertilizers, organic

compounds, heavy metals) are also suspected of causing cancer, teratogeny as well as

disrupting many physiological processes.

4

Coastal development

People are gravitating towards the coasts more than ever before. According to recent

estimates, 37% of the world's population live within 100 kilometres of the coast

(Cohen et al., 1997). As coastal growth rates and tourism increase so does the pressure

on the marine environment. Natural habitats are altered or destroyed in order to

accommodate coastal population; natural resources (water, fish) are overexploited;

garbage is often dumped on important habitats (wetlands, mangroves); volumes of

wastes getting into the sea increase.

Eutrophication / HABs

Excessive nutrient loads to coastal waters, typically in the form of nitrogen and

phosphorus compounds or both, result in eutrophication, a phenomenon which is

considered among the most damaging of all human influences on the oceans, in terms

both of scale and consequences. Nutrient pollution originates from anthropogenic

activities taking place at a considerable distance from the coast, with predominant

emission sources being agricultural and industrial activities and households. Several

are the symptoms of eutrophication: oxygen depletion of bottom waters and

sediments, increased turbidity of waters, biodiversity changes, habitat loss (e.g., coral

reefs, sea grass beds), changes in the productivity of the system (including fish

abundances), and the growth of harmful algal blooms (HABs) (Elofsson & Folmer

2003). When the latter occurs, accumulations of phytoplankton, macroalgae and

occasionally protists are reported, within which certain species can produce

compounds (e.g. toxins) that can alter cellular processes of other organisms, ranging

from plankton to humans. The most severe effects of HABs include mass animal

(including human) mortalities, respiratory or digestive tract problems, memory loss,

seizures, lesions and skin irritation as well as losses of coastal resources such as

submerged aquatic vegetation and benthic fauna (Sellner et al 2003).

Hydrological and sediment flows changes

Many wide-spread practices related to socio-economic activities such as agriculture,

industry and urbanization affect significantly the hydrological and sediment flows in

coastal areas. Diverting rivers, construction of dams and barrages, increasing

irrigation and use of water in industry, alter the hydrological flow of rivers and

consequently interrupt the life cycles of fish like salmon and eels that need to migrate

5

between the sea and rivers for completing their life cycles. Furthermore, the natural

supply of nutrients and sediments to coastal waters is reduced, leading to accelerated

coastal erosion and loss of ecosystems that depend on nutrients. By contrast,

increasing sedimentation rates induced by deforestation, diversion of water courses,

straightening or deepening rivers and streams, built up of roads may have adverse

effects on wetlands, deltaic habitats and bottom dwelling communities (e.g., coral

reefs, seagrass beds) as they can change the seasonality of the river flow.

Global warming

Since the late 19th century, average global temperature has risen by 0.6 ± 0.2 °C and,

unless preventive measures are taken, is expected to rise between 1 and 3.5 °C over

the next century (IPCC 2001). This global warming leads to climate changes and is

probably the best known phenomenon affected by but also affecting seas and coasts.

Among the major threats of global warming to the marine environment, besides the

accompanying sea level rise, is the possible change of major current flows, which

could result in changes in the structure and distribution of ecosystems, with far

reaching implications on the ecology of the oceans and the economics of the

surrounding countries. Global warming is also expected to cause severe and more

frequent extreme climate events, such as hurricanes, flood and draughts, which could

do enormous damages to intertidal ecosystems and coastal structures. Additionally,

fisheries, as an activity highly depended on healthy and balanced ecosystems are

expected to be significantly affected by ecosystem changes due to global warming.

2.1. Regional perspectives

The above issues, most of which are thought to be long standing problems, should be

included in any list of global concerns with regard to the marine environmental

quality. However, the intensity in which they appear, the impact they may have on

both the marine ecosystems and the associated human activities and therefore, the

prioritisation they receive from policy makers should not be regarded as univocal in

every area of the world. As it was pointed out in one of GESAMP reports (2001b), the

intensity of pressures varies from place to place and so does the vulnerability of

different ecosystems. In this document, the main sources of problems for each type of

ecosystem are reported.

6

Vulnerable areas and systems and the sources of their problem

Coral reefs: eutrophication, sediments, overfishing, destructive fishing,

reef mining, aquarium and curio trade, diseases

Wetlands: reclamation and development, including landfills

Seagrass beds: siltation, coastal development, eutrophication, physical

disturbance

Coastal lagoons: reclamation, pollution

Mangroves: excessive exploitation, clearing for reclamation, development

and aquaculture

Shorelines: development, modification of habitats, erosion

Watersheds: deforestation, soil erosion, pollution, loss of habitats

Estuaries: reduced water flows, siltation, pollution

Small islands: changes in sea level, waste management, pollution

Continental shelves: pollution, fishing, dredging, navigation

Semi-enclosed seas: pollution, coastal development, fishing

(Source: GESAMP 2001b)

Accordingly, environmental problems and their strength varies regionally in Europe’s

seas and coasts because of their hydrography and diversity in landscape, as well as

because of the differing strength of socio-economic activities, which are giving rise to

pressures that are more of a local scale (EEA 2005a). In the following list, the major

problems that different European seas face are summarised.

European seas and their major problems

Baltic Sea: eutrophication / HABS, overfishing, invasive species

Barents Sea: overfishing, pollution from shipping, military activities and

oil extraction

North Sea: food web damages, chemical pollution, coastal development

Celtic-Biscay Shelf Sea: overfishing, habitat destruction, oil drilling

Iberian Coast Sea: hydrological cycles alteration

Mediterranean Sea: coastal erosion, eutrophication hot spots / HABs,

invasive species, fisheries by-catches

Black Sea: overfishing, habitat destruction

7

From the list, it becomes apparent that different European regions are suffering from

both unique and common problems, with the latter varying greatly with regard to the

extent and degree they occur not only between but also within the same sea. The case

of eutrophication in European waters is an illustrative example of this fact. HAB

events are more diverse in terms of types of toxin produced in northern european

countries, where the toxicity level in most of the major HAB toxin types is, as well,

higher (Figures 2.1, 2.2). On the contrary, in the oligotrophic environment of the

Mediterranean Sea, eutrophication, and therefore HABs events, is a scarce

phenomenon, limited to specific coastal and adjacent offshore areas like the Adriatic,

the Gulf of the Lion and parts the Aegean, where mean nutrient concentrations are

relatively higher (EEA 2005a). However, severe cases of eutrophication have been

evident in enclosed coastal bays, such as the Gulf of Trieste, which receive elevated

nutrient loads from rivers, together with direct discharges of untreated domestic and

industrial waste.

Likewise, though sewage treatment is clearly of high priority in most countries of

Europe, regional differences exist. In the north-western European countries more than

90 % of the population are generally connected to sewers and wastewater treatment

plants, while in southern Europe the percentage is between 50 % and 80 %. The

percentage is even lower in the new 10 countries of European Union, where the

population connected does not exceed 60 % (EEA, 2005b). Those differences along

with the existing diversity in the technology used for wastewater treatment, as well as

the regional differences in the degree of coastal development and coastal population

increases, result in variations in nutrient, pollutant and contaminant discharges.

8

Figure 2.1: HAB events reported within 1990-1999 in Western Europe. a) different types of toxins observed in each country. PSP: Paralytic Shellfish Poison, DSP: Diarrheic Shellfish Poison, ASP: Amnesic Shellfish Poison, b) presence of PSP toxins. (Source ICES/IOC, IFREMER.) Figure 2.1: HAB events reported within 1990-1999 in Western Europe. a) different types of toxins observed in each country. PSP: Paralytic Shellfish Poison, DSP: Diarrheic Shellfish Poison, ASP: Amnesic Shellfish Poison, b) presence of PSP toxins. (Source ICES/IOC, IFREMER.)

9 9

Figure 2.2: Presence of a) DSP toxins, b) ASP toxins in HAB events reported for the period 1990-1999 in Western Europe. (Source ICES/IOC, IFREMER.)

10

3. Driving forces in marine ecosystems: their role and relative importance

Within the cause-effect DPSIR framework, the major environmental issues of concern

described previously could be viewed as a mixed set of driving forces (e.g. global

warming), pressures (e.g. overfishing) and impacts (e.g. habitat destruction) affecting

the marine environment, but also interacting with one another.

A comprehensive table summarizing the main drivers of change and associated

phenomena of interest having a strong effect on the quality of the marine and coastal

environment as well as on the ecosystem capacity to sustain human activities is

presented in the Integrated, Strategic Design Plan for the Coastal Ocean Observations

Module of GOOS developed by COOP (Coastal Ocean Observations Panel) (2003)

(Table 3.1). Though nowadays “natural” forcings completely unrelated to human

influence of any kind are lacking, in this table a distinction is made between natural

and anthropogenic forcings, with the former including inputs of energy (e.g., winds,

tides, currents, waves, solar radiation) and materials (e.g., freshwater sediment,

nutrients, organic matter) from all kind of sources (terrestrial, atmospheric, oceanic).

With regard to the phenomena of interest in coastal waters, increasing human activity

has a major role as a driver of ecosystem changes, through increases in population

density, hydrological and geochemical cycle alterations, nutrients and contaminants

inputs increases, destruction of habitats, commercial and recreational fisheries,

introductions of invasive species and pathogens. In one of the reports produced by

GESAMP in 2001 it is concluded that, although notable success was made in

controlling the environmental problems caused by some forms of human activities in

certain coastal ecosystems, mainly in developed countries, the global degradation of

the marine environment continues and in many places is even intensifying (GESAMP,

2001a).

One of the main goals and contribution of the HOTO module of GOOS was the

understanding of trends in and conservation of global ocean health with a view to

contribute to the sustainable development of marine environment. Since the ability to

maximize the economic benefits derived from the intelligent use of marine ecosystem

and its resources was thought to be limited by an inadequate understanding of the

11

human influences on the environment and vice versa, a framework was provided for

collecting basic information on this interrelationship.

Table 3.1: Main drivers of ecosystem changes and associated issues of concern in the marine environment. (Source: COOP – GOOS, 2003.)

12

Therefore, a table was constructed in which a general characterisation of the

relationships between marine resource use of socioeconomic benefits and certain

analytes indicative of environmental health was presented (Table 3.2). The respective

assignments of the entries “3”, “2” and “1” signify increasing strengths in the

relationships between the variables and the issues. Blank cells represent either a weak

relationship or one in which current scientific information is too limited to make an

assignment.

According to this table, aquaculture, treated as an anthropogenic activity contributing

to the total production of seafood, is believed to have a low effect on most of the

proposed variables, while on the other hand, it is shown to be affected, even at a low

strength, by all variables, and more strongly by dissolved oxygen, algal toxins and

human pathogens. However, as the above table was not created for emphasizing on

aquaculture, certain variables that could be important for aquaculture development

were not considered. Moreover, the differential effect the selected variables could

have on each of the major aquaculture types, finfish and shellfish, was not addressed

separately, albeit a similar approach was used for harvested seafood. Therefore, it was

essential for the purposes of this review to modify the above table in order to include

environmental issues that are reported or expected to be significant for aquaculture

(i.e. light conditions, turbidity, exotic species), and discriminate between shellfish and

finfish production, as they are activities which are having different environmental

demands and therefore, are practiced in environments with different characteristics;

furthermore, interactions that have not been considered in detail in the original table

were revisited. This was achieved through considerable efforts on reviewing the

existing published information, (the most relevant and comprehensive references are

reported in the Appendix of Part A), as well as through discussions among the

experienced partners of ECASA project team. Table 3.3 is the modified version of the

original table provided by HOTO module of GOOS.

13

Table 3.2: Relationship of socio-economic benefits in the coastal zone and certain analytes. Numbers “3”, “2”, “1” denote increasing importance and the arrows signify the direction of impact. The direction of impact might be one or two ways. (Source: IOC 2001)

14

Table 3.3: Modified version of the table provided by HOTO in 2001. As in the original table, numbers “3”, “2”, “1” denote increasing importance fonts, while changes in the strength or direction of the

relationship are indicated with blue fonts. and the arrows signify the direction of impact. New relationships are indicated using redredTable 3.3: Modified version of the table provided by HOTO in 2001. As in the original table, numbers “3”, “2”, “1” denote increasing importance and the arrows signify the direction of impact. New relationships are indicated using fonts, while changes in the strength or direction of the relationship are indicated with blue fonts.

15 15

In this table, a general assessment of the nature and strength of the relationships is

provided as well; yet, the estimated impacts may vary locally, depending on the

intensity of the pressure, or with regard to the spatial scale. The release of artificial

radionuclides, accidentally or deliberately, from nuclear industry or naval sources

have been reported to create local effects in the UK, contaminating estuarine, mud and

subtidal sediments of the Cumbrian coast and beaches adjacent to Dounreay (Bonnett

1988, McKay 1989, RIFE 2004), therefore perceived as potential contaminants for

both wild and cultured species of shellfish and finfish. However, a similar effect has

not been indicated in other European countries; thus the estimated strength of the

artificial radionuclides impact on seafood and aquaculture is low (3). Similarly, small

changes in nutrient concentrations have been found around fish farms in the water

column (Pitta et al., 1999; La Rosa et al., 2002; Nordvarg and Jahansson, 2002; Belias

et al., 2003; Soto and Norambuena, 2004), giving rise to local effects, while in a wider

scale, the effects are hardly detectable (Pitta et al, 2005).

The effect of aquaculture production on nutrients is expected to differ not only

spatially but also between fin- and shell- fish cultures, as the former produce a net

input of nutrients, whereas shellfish cultures, in particularly mussel cultures, remove

particulate organic matter from the water column (La Rosa et al 2002); hence, the

difference in the strength of impact on nutrients between the two major types of

aquaculture. Likewise, the effect of aquaculture on suspended matter varies with

regard to the species cultured. Shellfish species consume suspended and resuspended

material from the water column and therefore can reduce significantly the quantity of

the available suspended material (Rosenberg & Loo 1983). Consequently,

phytoplankton concentration has been found to be reduced by mussel beds over the

whole size range (Asmus & Asmus 1991); however, a relationship between

phytoplankton growth and finfish farming has not yet been established (Beveridge

1996, Pitta et al. 1999, Soto & Norambuena 2004)), and therefore no impact towards

this direction was recorded on Table 3.3.

Based on the modified table of interrelationships we could rank the different activities

with regard to their degree of impact on each variable (Table 3.4). Apparently, waste

disposal is the activity exhibiting the highest impact on most of the analytes, while

aquaculture and tourism are the two economic activities which, though they are

16

affecting several of the variables yet, their relative impact on them and therefore their

relative importance compared to other forms of anthropogenic activities is quite low

in most cases. Nonetheless, aquaculture seems to be the human aspect evidently

affecting genetic diversity in marine ecosystems, through the introduction and

subsequent release of exotic species, though its impact is estimated to be low;

additionally, its ranking is relatively high with regard to human activities affecting the

concentration of pharmaceuticals in the environment.

In theory, genetic pollution should not be of concern as far as commodity aquaculture

is concerned, as this is practiced in fully closed ponds or recirculating systems.

However, accidental escapes of reared, non-native or transgenic fishes have been

reported fairly regularly (NRC 2002) due to damages from storms or predators, giving

rise to further problems related to genetic swamping, hybridization, competition, and

displacement of indigenous populations (Utter & Epifanio 2002). An example of the

possible unintended effects of aquaculture on native fish populations is the case of

native Norwegian populations, which were weakened by diseases transferred through

introduced species for aquaculture activities. Saegrov et al (1997) have reported that

an average of 30% of Norwegian natural spawners, percentage which might reach 80

in some rivers, is escapees from fish farms that compete with and displace the

weakened natural populations. Furthermore, evidence demonstrates that ecological

adaptation of native populations has been disrupted through interbreeding of wild and

cultured populations (Einum & Fleming 1997).

As antibiotics used in aquaculture industry are directly and intentionally introduced in

the marine environment, aquaculture, though less developed compared to other land

industries, is estimated to affect the concentration of pharmaceuticals (substances used

for treating and preventing human and animal diseases) in the seas at the same degree

as does the disposal of industrial wastes.

17

Table 3.4: Relative importance of coastal activities to different classes of analytes/variables. Based on Table 3, different font colours indicate the strength of impact (red: high, blue: medium, green: low). In the first column, the ranking of aquaculture (A/R) amongst other activities is denoted, while in the second column the significance of each variable to aquaculture (A/S), as derived from table 3.3, is presented.

18

Diseases are a considerable problem for intensive aquaculture, and therefore,

antibiotics are supplied to farmed species either through their feeds or through baths

and injections. However, their use gives rise to several concerns regarding both

human and marine ecosystem health. Some of the drugs used in aquaculture may be

taken up by exploitable wild populations of fish, shellfish and crustacean, and in

several occasions they were detected in concentrations that were far above those

accepted in food for human consumption (Munday et al. 1992). An additional

problem of concern is the lack of specificity of many therapeutants, which is very well

illustrated through anti-lice treatments. The properties of lice that present specific site

for action of any anti-lice are not unique to these lice (Alderman et al. 2004). In

particular other crustaceans such as lobster crab, and shrimp may be affected. For

example, in the cold waters of the Bay of Fundy, hatching of lobsters occurs in July to

September (Campbell 1986) and larval production has been observed as late as

September. Since larval stages of lobsters are pelagic, it is possible that treatment of

lice infested fish and release of pesticide formulations could coincide with the

presence of lobster larvae in the water (Burridge et al. 2000). Furthermore, the

antibiotics consist of a number of antibacterial agents, which, when entering the

aquatic environment, may affect the structure of natural bacterial communities. For

example, Samuelsen et al. (1988) showed that the ratio of aerobic and anaerobic

sediment bacteria diminished after treatment with oxytetracycline, as it favours the

growth of anaerobic bacteria. Additionally, the well-known problem of bacterial

resistance to antibiotics holds also for the case of aquaculture, though it seems to be a

short term phenomenon (Austin 1985).

Although aquaculture takes up the fourth place among other economic activities in

terms of their effects on benthos, nonetheless, benthic enrichment beneath the sea

farms is considered the most widely reported effect of environmental impact of

aquaculture (Gowen & Bradbury 1987, Wu, 1995, Fernandes et al. 2001). Several

authors have reported the presence of a loose and flocculent black sediment under fish

cages, commonly named "fish farm sediment" (Hall et al. 1990, Holmer 1991, Angel

1995, Karakassis et al. 1998); this sediment is characterized by low values of redox

potential (Hargrave et al. 1993), high content of organic material (Hall et al. 1990,

Holmer 1991, Karakassis et al. 1998) and accumulation of nitrogenous and

phosphorous compounds (Holby & Hall 1991, Hall et al 1992, Karakassis et al, 1998).

19

Nutrients and physical disturbance are also significant causal factors, but are generally

less important than carbon loading. While low levels of carbon loading can increase

benthic productivity, the higher levels usually associated with fish farms generally

lead to low biodiversity and a shift of benthic production to bacteria (WGEIM 2002).

This can create hypoxic or even anoxic conditions and possibly the production of

hydrogen sulphide and other toxic gases immediately under the cages. However, a

study investigating the seasonal variability of several sedimentary characteristics in a

silty sediment, Mediterranean fish farm, Karakassis et al. (1998) showed that all the

measured variables (organic matter, organic carbon/nitrogen, chlorophyll a,

phaeopigments, water content and total phosphorous) varied substantially according

to distance from the cages and season, as did the thickness of the farm sediment layer,

indicating that aquaculture environmental effects are of a local scale. In a similar

study combining sediment geochemistry and macrofauna in 3 Mediterranean fish

farms exhibiting different environmental characteristics (Karakassis et al. 2000), the

impacts of fish farming on the benthos was once more shown to vary considerably

depending on the distance and the season as well as on the specific characteristics of

the farming site, pointing out the differential effect of aquaculture, like most of human

activities, in relation to the type of ecosystem. That was recently confirmed on a wider

scale through a meta-analysis study on the benthic impacts of fish farming (Kalantzi

& Karakassis in press), which indicated that the horizontal distance affected by fish

farm decreases with high depth, low latitude and fine sediment.

4. The impact of anthropogenic factors on aquaculture

Aquaculture takes place in the ambient environment, therefore, favourable physical,

environmental and water quality conditions are imperative for its successful

performance. However, as it has already been stated, anthropogenic forcing has a

major influence on coasts and oceans, contributing greatly to ecosystem changes,

many of which are regularly viewed as degradation of the marine environment. Thus,

the harmful potential of anthropogenic activities to aquaculture, among which

aquaculture itself is placed as well, should not be ignored.

For an initial assessment of the potential impact different anthropogenic activities may

have on aquaculture, Table 3.3 was used as a starting point. Human activities

20

estimated to affect environmental attributes vital for aquaculture were considered as

having an equal effect on aquaculture as well. Subsequently, a new table has been

produced in which the interrelationship between different human activities is shown

(Table 4.1). Apparently, an impact does not always exist between different

anthropogenic activities, as they might be practiced in different environments without

sharing any interface (i.e. maritime operations vs agroforestry), or the impact might be

one-way only (agroforestry affects aquaculture but aquaculture does not have any

effect on agroforestry development).

Variables and analytes affecting aquaculture activities (strength of impact)

algal toxins (1)

dissolved oxygen (1)

human pathogens (1)

predators (1)

wind (1)

phytoplankton abundance (1-2)

petroleum, hydrocarbon, oil (1-3)

herbicides, pesticides, biocides (2)

suspended particulate matter (2)

water temperature (2)

turbidity (2)

PAHs (2-3)

synthetic organics, POPs (2-3)

artificial radionucleotides (3)

metals and organometals (3)

nutrients (3)

pharmaceuticals (3)

exotic species (3)

light conditions (3)

salinity (3)

pH (3)

All the studied anthropogenic forces is proposed to have detectable effects on

aquaculture; industrial activities, intensive agriculture, and even recreational activities

may cause chemical pollution in the vicinity of aquaculture zones through mostly

modified freshwater inputs, while urbanization and tourism is more likely to cause

bacteriological pollution; the biological aspect of pollution is connected with

maritimes and aquaculture itself and so is the problem of disease transmission.

However, though some human activities may occasionally have a catastrophic effect

on aquaculture, the fact that these occur scarcely does not allow considering them as

more risky for aquaculture industry. An example for this is the risk associated to oil

spills caused by maritime activities and closely associated with oil production. Tanker

accidents causing oil spills happen worldwide, however, the frequency of their

21

occurrence is low relatively to other human activities, and therefore their potential

impact on aquaculture is rated lower.

Waste disposal is once more indicated as the primer activity significantly affecting

aquaculture performance through the changes it imposes to water physicochemical

parameters of importance to aquaculture, such as dissolved oxygen, water

temperature, turbidity, as well as through the introduction into the water of

contaminants and pollutants which are potentially harmful to both the farmed species

and humans. Obviously, an optimal way for obtaining reference levels and

quantitatively assessing the impact of the various anthropogenic factors on

aquaculture would be by using as indicators variables which are of primary

importance to aquaculture and at the same time they are directly affected by human

activities. Dissolved oxygen falls within this category, being a key parameter for

aquaculture, as it is considered to be one of the most important factors for maintaining

life of cultured organisms. Aquatic animals are sensitive to the levels of water oxygen.

Generally, it is agreed that unfavourable culture conditions occur when the levels of

saturation fall below 70% (Munday et al 1992); nonetheless, the actual thresholds for

each specific type of culture should be defined through literature review. For example,

in the ‘‘Law to Ensure Sustainable Aquaculture Production” that was established in

1999 for Japan, the value of 4ml/l of dissolved oxygen was adopted in the criterion for

the healthy environment, as it was the minimal requirement for normal growth of the

yellowtail (Seriola quinqueradiata). This Law also established 2.5 ml/l of dissolved

oxygen as a minimum limit for fish farm environments, which is intermediate

between 2.0 and 3.0 ml/l; the former is the value at the extreme margin of survival for

cultured fish, while the latter is the value when feeding activity of fish begins to

decrease (Harada, 1978).

22

Table 4.1: Relationship between the different human activities/coastal uses. As in previous tables, numbers “3”, “2”, “1” denote increasing impact strength of the activities of the first column on the activities of the first row.

* uknown strength of impact** negative impact above a certain degree of intensity⎯ no impact

23

Dissolved oxygen changes relate heavily to different forcings of both natural (i.e.

hydrographic conditions) and anthropogenic (waste disposal) nature; hence, the

frequency of occurrence of the proposed thresholds depends on a set of factors, which

may vary. Therefore, if dissolved oxygen concentrations were to be used as a reliable

indicator of anthropogenic impacts on aquaculture, an extensive study should be

developed for assessing thoroughly the contribution of each driver and for quantifying

its impact with regard to the different environmental characteristics and the set of

drivers appearing to affect aquaculture simultaneously.

4.1. Recorded risks of anthropogenic impact on aquaculture

A complementary approach, crucial for identifying actual impacts of anthropogenic

forces on aquaculture and the rate of their occurrence, is the use of information on

recorded damages aquaculture farms have suffered from, which may be derived from

industrial sources, such as insurance companies, stakeholders, farmers. However,

access to such kind of information has not always been possible due mostly to policy

reasons occurring in industry. Nonetheless, within ECASA project activities, it was

possible to collect insurance data from Mediterranean, namely, Greece and Spain,

while additional data based on the experience of aquaculture farmers were gathered

from Portugal (Tables 4.2 & 4.3).

Table 4.2: Risk assessment for aquaculture in Algavre, Portugal, based on the experience of local farmers. Number of farms contributing to the study, 12 (8 shellfish, 4 fish farms).

Shellfish Finfish

Agroforestry 2 2 4,44Airport effluent 5 5 11,11Aquaculture 1 1 2,22Dredging 3 3 6,67HABs 4 4 8 17,78Industrial wastes 3 3 6,67Maritimes 1 3 4 8,89Municipal wastes 3 3 6 13,33Salt extraction 3 3 6,67Storms 1 1 2 4,44Temperature 3 1 4 8,89Theft 4 4 8,89Other 3 1 4 8,89TOTAL 29 16 45 100

(%)AQUACULTURE TYPE

RISKS Total

24

Table 4.3: Number of cases-events per year for each category of aquaculture losses (finfish) for a period of four years in Greece and Spain. (Sources: Agrotiki Asfalistiki, AGROSEGURO)

DAMAGES

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total (%) 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total (%)Boat collision 1 1 3,45Disease 51 71 62 48 2 234 55,45 3 3 10,34Equipment 1 1 0,24 0Hatcheries death 11 13 7 7 1 39 9,24 0Hatcheries low O2 1 1 2 0,47 0Illegal actions 1 1 2 0,47 0Oil spill 0 1 1 3,45Predator attack 9 11 13 6 39 9,24 1 1 2 6,897Storms 19 14 14 15 14 76 18,01 3 5 7 7 22 75,86Storms - equipment 1 1 1 3 0,71 0test 4 4 0,95 0Thermal inversion 3 3 0,71 0Transportation 6 5 4 1 1 17 4,03 0Unidentified 1 1 2 0,47 0TOTAL 103 116 104 80 19 422 100 3 7 11 8 29 100

GREECE SPAIN

The results of the questionnaire distributed to farmers of a well developed aquaculture

area in Portugal, indicates that people involved with mariculture fear more the

possible impact of other uses of the coastal zone and their effects on the environment,

as when they malfunction they might be catastrophic for aquaculture. However, the

set of insurance data that were available from the Mediterranean indicates that only a

low percentage of the recorded aquaculture damages were actually attributed to

human activities (boat collision, oil spills in Spain), verifying thus the belief that

though anthropogenic forces are expected to have a significant impact on aquaculture

industry, the fact that many human activities either they do not coexist with

aquaculture activities (agriculture outfalls) or they do not happen regularly (tanker

accidents), in reality, lowers the observed impact they have on aquaculture.

5. Incompatibilities between uses of the coastal zone and aquaculture

Among the most important factors which affect the environmental compatibility of

coastal aquaculture and determine its feasibility and sustainability is site selection.

According to Huguenin and Colt (1989), the most important site factors and water

quality requirements for aquaculture are those listed in Tables 5.1 and 5.2

respectively.

25

Table 5.1: Bio-physical factors important for aquaculture site selection. (modified from Huguenin and Colt 1989)

Biological Environment Locational Factors Primary Productivity: phostosynthetic activity Watershed Characteristics: area gradients (elevations and distances), ground cover, runoff, up-gradient activitiesLocal Ecology: number of trophic levels, dominant species Ground Water Supply: aquifers, water table depth, qualityWild populations of desired species: adults, sources of seed stocks Tides: ranges, rates, seasonal and storm variations, oscillationsPresence and Concentrations of Predators: land, water, airborne Waves: amplitude, wave length, direction, seasonal and storm variations, storm frequencyEndemic diseases and Parasites Coastal Currents: magnitude, direction and seasonal variations

Existing Facilities and characteristicsAccessibility of siteHistory of Site: prior uses and experiences

Soil Factors Meteorological Factors Soil Type. Profile, Subsoil Characteristics Winds: prevailing directions, velocities, seasonal variations, storm intensity and frequencyPercolation Rate: coefficient of hydraulic permeability Light: total annual solar energy impingement, intensity, quality, photoperiod: diurnal cycleTopography and distribution of soil types Air Temperature and variationsParticle Size and Shape Relative Humidity or Dew Point and variationsAngle of Repose: wet, dry Precipitation: amount, annual distribution, storm maxima and frequencyFertilityMicrobiogical PopulationLeachable Toxins: pesticides, heavy metals, other chemicals

Physical Parameters Chemical Parameters Biological ParametersTemperature Range (daily and seasonal variability) pH and Alkalinity Bacteria (type and concentrations)Salinity Range (tidal and seasonal variability) Gases VirusParticulates (solids) total gas pressure Fungi composition (organic and inorganic) oxygen Others size nitrogen concentration carbon dioxideColor hydrogen sulfideLight Nutrients artificial or natural nitrogen compounds total annual incident energy phosphorus compounds intensity of radiant energy trace metals and speciation quality of light Organic Coumpounds photoperiod (daily cycles) biodegradable

non-biodegradableToxic Coumpounds heavy metals biocides

Table 5.2: Seawater properties important in aquaculture water quality management. (modified from Huguenin and Colt, 1989)

26

However, for good aquaculture practices supporting infrastructure is needed, while

social and socio-economic considerations should be taken into account (Table 5.3).

Space is required both on land and in the water and is probably considered the most

critical factor determining the relationships between aquaculture and other human

activities, such as fishing, navigation, recreational activities, and conservation. These

activities are all major competitors for space in the coastal zone.

Supporting infrastructure Socio-economic considerationsRoad & Communication Local demand & SupplyElectricity International marketFish-feed manufacture Cost of basic supply for goodsSlaughtering facilities Capital cost

Waste disposal facilities Risks & insuranceHealth service EmploymentAdvisory service RegulationsExpertiseEducationRepair & Maintenance

Table 5.3: Supporting infrastructure and socio-economic aspects to be considered in aquaculture site selection. (modified from PAP/RAC 1996)

There is a tendency for mariculture to provoke public perceptions, mostly a) due to

negative assessments of the environmental impacts it was cited to have in early

studies dated back in 1980’s, and b) because of a general trend to feel concern about

any new human “intrusion” on nature, no matter how benign it might be. However,

aquaculture technologies have very much improved during the following years,

minimizing greatly the effects on the environment, while at the same time it has

contributed substantially to socio-economic development of the coastal zone. Some of

the positive effects of aquaculture are presented in Table 5.4.

In most cases, the aquatic component of coasts is under public ownership and can be

subjected to various uses, unlike land, which is usually under private ownership

before it is developed; therefore, the potential for conflicts among potential users is

always present, even at a low level. In order to solve spatially-related competition

between coastal activities, it is therefore urgent to consider mariculture as a

27

component of Integrated Coastal Zone Management, beginning with a clear

understanding and recognition of the role of mariculture in coastal development, and

then try to achieve ICZM objectives through incorporation of all activities in coastal

areas.

Table 5.4 : Positive Interactions among mariculture and other users of the coastal zone. (Adopted by WGEIM Report 1998)

Benefits Fresh water hatcheries

Salt water hatcheries

Nearshore fishfarms (cages)

Nearshore shellfish

suspension culture

Nearshore shellfish bottom culture

Offshore finfish and shellfish culture

Employment* X X X X X XTourism revenue X X XRecreational fishing X X X X XWater quality X X X X X XEducation X X X X X XStock enchancment X X X

* Employment includes rural development, transportation, packaging, and appropriate income multipliers

Type of Mariculture

Advantages from including aquaculture in the coastal zone planning:

aquaculture acts as:

a renewable source-based activity which can be easily sustainable

a source of seafood and primary products when capture fisheries have

reached their maximum yield

a guarantee of good water quality, the main integrating element in coastal

resource systems, because aquaculture is the first activity to be affected by

any alteration of the environment, and thus

a protection against the threats from less environmentally friendly

industries

(Source: WGEIM, 1998)

28

As mariculture is usually a relatively new activity, it needs to establish rights to access

the coastal zone in the context of the already existing activities. Moreover, most

legislative systems tend to protect existing activities, while they seem to be inadequate

and/or non-applicable for aquaculture; therefore, most of them are not beneficial for

integrating mariculture in coastal management plans and as a result, many

opportunities for economic growth have been lost.

Aquaculture is valuable in developing, planning and managing the

coastal zone in terms of:

land use and occupation

population welfare and fixing

best uses of renewable resources

preserving environmental quality

(Source: WGEIM, 1998)

Besides space, aquaculture shares more conflicts with the users of coasts and sea;

however, there are some aspects of other human activities, such as infrastructure and

economic development that act in favour of mariculture. The interrelationships of

aquaculture industry with the various uses of the coastal zone summarized in 1996 in

the framework of PAP/RAC of the Mediterranean Action Plan of UNEP are

illustrated in Table 5.5. From this table it becomes apparent that though several

conflicts exist among aquaculture and the other coastal uses as far as space,

regulations and environment quality are concerned, nonetheless, most of the

economical aspects of the major human activities is believed to enhance aquaculture

development; this is accomplished through the supply of appropriate infrastructure,

such as roads, electricity and waste disposal facilities, benefits deriving mostly from

coastal and industrial development, as well as through the supply of local markets or

fish meals which are outcomes of tourism and fisheries respectively. However,

competition among aquaculture and tourism stakeholders or fishermen often occurs,

since in the former case the existence of aquaculture facilities in a specific area

discourages tourists, while in the latter case competition between fishermen and fish

farmers may arise in low settlement areas where transfers of employment from fishery

to aquaculture leads to social disturbance.

29

5.1. Relationships within aquaculture

Competition for space and conflicts over water quality could also occur between

different aquaculture practices, i.e finfish versus shellfish, or between traditional and

new technology systems, i.e. bottom shellfish cultivation and long lines. All types of

aquacultures could be destroyed by pathogenic diseases from farms in the vicinity and

there are even cases where pathogens from finfish can be accumulated by cultured

shellfishes in farms nearby.

Likewise, therapeutants used in fishfarms may affect strongly, even have deleterious

effects on shellfish cultivations within the same or an adjacent farm. Further indirect

effects may occur from both pathogens and antibiotics as they might adversely affect

the benthic environment resulting in anoxic conditions. Nonetheless, there are several

examples of successful coexistence of different aquaculture activities, especially

between finfish and shellfish cultivation, as in that case the nutrient enriched effluents

of the fishfarms can be utilised efficiently and in an integrated approach by shellfish

species. The different types of relationships among aquaculture practices were also

summarised within PAP/RAC, Mediterranean Action Plan of UNEP (Table 5.6).

30

Table 5.5: Relationships between mariculture and other users of the coastal zone. (Source: PAP/RAC 1996)

Intensive ExtensiveSPA

TIAL RESOURCES land reclaiming (-) land use (-) land reclaiming (-) coastal land (-) coastal land (-) spawning areas (-)shipping traffic (-) land reclaiming (-) harbors (-) nurseries (-)millitary zones (-) sailing, bathing (-) artificial reefs (-)dredging (-) fishing (-) fishing zones (-)

historical sites (-)

QUA ITY OF ENVIRONMENT pollutants (-) sewage (-) sewage (-)ballast water (-) organic matter (-) antifoulling paints (-) fertilizers (-) nutrients (+) disease transmission (-)warmed water (+) bacteria & viruses(-) pesticides (-) organic matter (+) genetic escape (-)

nutrients (-) organic matter (-) freshwater management (+/-)suspended solids (-)freshwater management (-)

Y infrastructure (+) market (+) attractio of investment (+/-) infrastructure (+) infrastructure (+) attractio of investment (+)attractio of investment (+/-) infrastructure (+) seasonal employment (+/-) market (+)

local market (+) infrastructure (+)infrastructure (+) fish meal for aquafeeds (+)

SOCIAL RESOURCES living habitats (-) eco tourism (+) internal competition (-)seascape (-) education (+)wildlife (-)

REGULATIONS areas around (-) minicipality (-) protected area (-) sanctuaries for fisheries (+/-)harbours reserved (-) policy (+/-) wild fauna & flora (-)military zones (-) environmental standards (+)

FISHERIESAGRICULTUREACTIVITY INDUSTRY & HARBOUR URBANIZATION TOURISM & RECREATION

L

ECONOM

(+) in favour of aquaculture (-) negative effect on aquaculture

31

Shellfish FinfishSPATIAL RESOURCES already established activity (-) already established activity (-) already established activity (-)

nurseries (-)artificial reefs (-)fishing zones (-)

QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENT pathogens (-) pathogens (-) pathogens (-)biodiversity (-) waste (-) bioedeposition (-)bioedeposition (-) food faeces (-) anoxia (-)anoxia (-) treatments (-)genetic (-) genetic (-)

carrying capacity wetlands (-) integrated aquaculture systems (+)under (+) underground seawater (-)above (-) holding capacity

under (+)above (-)

ECONOMY market (+)

SOCIAL RESOURCES internal competition (-)education (+)

REGULATIONS licensing or leasing system (+)monitoring (+)

INTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS FINFISH/SHELLFISH REATIONSHIPS

WATER QUANTITY & DYNAMICS

ACTIVITY

Table 5.6: Relationships between aquaculture practices. (Source: PAP/RAC 1996)

(+) in favour of aquaculture (-) negative effect on aquaculture

6. Conclusions: indicators of environmental impacts on aquaculture and incompatibilities between major users of coastal zone

The review presented within this study, which was based on an extensive scientific

bibliographic research and many fruitful discussions among the experience team of

ECASA project, resulted in a selected set of sources of pressures on aquaculture that

need to be taken into account during site-selection within the context of ICZM.

Weather-Storms

Weather condition variations and especially the occurrence of storm events has been

indicated by all parts as a significant source of damage for aquaculture industry,

which could lead to enormous economical losses; therefore, it is of extreme

importance to be addressed during site selection of individual farms as well as during

planning of aquaculture zones. Although farmers themselves try to take care of this

issue by avoiding very exposed sites, it has been identified as the most important

source of financial losses by all sources of information. On the other hand, exposure is

an important prerequisite for both adequate and high quality water as well as for

removal of wastes. In this context, there is a need for optimisation of the site selection

32

with regard to weather conditions and hydrography, which can be accomplished by

taking into account the risks and benefits resulting from this environmental attribute.

Potential ECASA indicators for this aspect are suggested to be the:

• frequency of storms

• wave-height (average and frequency of extreme values)

• fetch openness (embayment degree described in Yokoyama 2003)

Disease and parasites

This has been indicated as the second most important issue for aquaculture welfare,

identified as a source of damage to aquaculture which in most cases stems from

aquaculture practices themselves. This is even worsening partly due to management

of individual farms (e.g. stocking density, health management, use of prophylactic

measures etc.) and partly due to environmental issues, such as quality of the ambient

water, and proximity to other aquaculture farms.

Potential ECASA indicators for this aspect are suggested to be the:

• production by other farms using the same species at distance <2km

• water quality issues (see below, pollution)

Predator attack

Although less important than the previous two points, predators cause also losses to

fish farms at unpredictable rates. Some anti-predator media (scarers, nets etc) are used

for birds but the efficiency of anti-predator devices is less well documented for turtles,

seals, dolphins and tunas which have been shown to cause damages to both farmed

fish and nets (Beveridge 1996). The fact that most of the predators (with the exception

of some bird species) are protected elements of wildlife implies that aquaculture could

only avoid the areas where these species occur.

Potential ECASA indicators for this aspect are suggested to be the:

• colonies of birds in the vicinity (<2km)

• colonies of seals in the vicinity (<1km)

• nesting beaches for sea turtles in the vicinity (<10km)

• frequency of observation of dolphins and tunas in the area

33

Pollution

Pollution has not been identified as a major source of losses in the questionnaires

received, however, it was by far considered the most significant risk for aquaculture,

as it is known from the literature that in cases of pollution incidents (particularly oil

spills, in Scotland, Spain and Greece) the result was total destruction of the farmed

capital. Both land based sources of pollution and maritime operations may contribute

to pollution problems as well as to other less well identified issues that may have

negative effects on aquaculture such as the introduction of alien species through

ballast water.

Potential ECASA indicators for this aspect are suggested to be the:

• distance from land based sources of pollution

o distance from waste discharge points (2km)

o distance from harbours

o distance from rivers

• distance from major maritime routes

Other issues

Although not specifically documented in the scientific literature there are also issues

that could directly or indirectly affect aquaculture by introducing nuisance in the

ambient conditions or by inducing socio-economic conflicts with other users of the

coastal zone, particularly tourism and fishing. An example of this is the use of the

shallow water ecosystems of the coastal zone as nursery grounds for several species of

fishes that depend on these ecosystems for their reproduction. Development of

aquaculture may contribute to reducing the space available for these nurseries; on the

other hand, mariculture may constitute a physical obstacle for fishing activities (cages,

offshore, longlines, etc.) and therefore contribute to the protection of highly sensitive

nurseries from fishing pressure.

Potential ECASA indicators for this aspect are suggested to be the:

• distance from fishing grounds (1km)

• distance from tourist facilities (1km)

• distance from houses (1km)

34

7. References

Ackefors H, Enell M (1990) Discharge of nutrients from Swedish fish farming to

adjacent sea areas. Ambio 19:28–35

Alderman DJ, Smith P, Davies IM, Haya K (2004) Chemicals used in mariculture.

ICES Cooperative Research Report

Angel D, Krost P, Gordin H (1995) Benthic implications of net cage aquaculture in

the oligotrophic Gulf of Aqaba. Aquaculture society 25:129–173

Asmus RM, Asmus H (1991) Mussel beds: limiting or promoting phytoplankton.

Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 148: 215–232

Austin B (1985) Antibiotic pollution from fish farms: effects on aquatic microflora.

Microbiological Science 2:113–117

Beveridge MCM (1996) Cage Aquaculture. Fishing NewsBooks. Blackwell, Oxford

Black KD (2001) Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture. Sheffield Academic Press,

Sheffield, UK

Bonnett PJP, Appleby PG, Oldfield F (1988) Radionuclides in coastal and estuarine

sediments from Wirral and Lancashire. Environmental Science & Technology

70:215–236

Braaten B (1991) Impact of pollution from aquaculture in six Nordic countries:

release of nutrients, effects and waste water treatment. In: De Pauw, Joyce N

(eds) Aquaculture and the Environment. Special Publication No. 14. Ghent,

Belgium: European Aquaculture Society, p 40–41

Burbridge P, Hendrick V, Roth E, Rosenthal H (2001) Social and economic policy

issues relevant to marine aquaculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 17: 194–

206

Burridge LE, Haya K, Page FH, Waddy SL, Zitko V, Wade J (2000) The lethality of

the cypermethrin formulation Excis registered to larval and post-larval stages of

the American lobster (Homarus americanus). Aquaculture 182:37–47

Campbell A (1986) Migatory movements of ovigerous lobsters, Homarus

americanus, tagged off Gran Manan, eastern Canada. Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 43:2197–2205

Chong KC (1990) Economic and social considerations for aquaculture site selection:

An Asian perspective. In: New MB, de Saram H, Singh T (eds) Technical and

35

economic aspects of shrimp farming. Proceedings of the AQUATECH'90

Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 11-14 June 1990, pp 24–35

Cohen JE, Small C, Mellinger A, Gallup J, Sachs J (1997) Estimates of coastal

populations. Science 278:1211–1212.

EEA (2005a) The European environment — State and outlook 2005. Copenhagen

EEA (2005b) European environment outlook. EEA report 4, Copenhagen

Einum S, Fleming IA (1997) Genetic divergence and interactions in the wild among

native, farmed and hybrid Atlantic salmon. Journal of Fish Biology 50:634–651

Elofsson K, Folmer H (2003) Management of eutrophicated coastal ecosystems: a

synopsis of the literature with emphasis on theory and methodology. Ecological

Economics 47:1–11

FAO (2001) Yearbook of Fishery Statistics 1999. Aquaculture production. FAO

Statistics Series 160, vol 88/2

FAO FIGIS 2000-2006. http://www.fao.org/figis/servlet/SQServlet?file=/usr/local/

tomcat/FI/5.5.9/fi5/webapps/figis/temp/hqp_20581.xml&outtype=html

Fernandes TF, Eleftheriou A, Ackefors H, Eleftheriou M, Ervik A, Sanchez-Mata A,

Scanlon T, White P, Cochrane S, Pearson TH, Read PA (2001) The scientific

principles underlying the monitoring of the environmental impacts of

aquaculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 17:181–193.

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection) and

Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (2001a) Protecting the oceans

from land-based activities - Land-based sources and activities affecting the

quality and uses of the marine, coastal and associated freshwater environment.

Reports and Studies GESAMP No. 71

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection) and

Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (2001b) A sea of troubles. Reports

and Studies GESAMP No. 70

Gowen RJ & Bradbury NB (1987) The ecological impact of salmonid farming in

coastal waters: a review. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review

25:563–575

36

Gowen RJ, Rosenthal H, Makinen T, Ezzi I (1990) Environmental Impact of

Aquaculture Activities. Special Publication No. 12. Ghent, Belgium: European

Aquaculture Society, pp 257–283

Hall POJ, Anderson LG, Holby O, Kollberg S, Samuelsson MO (1990) Chemical

fluxes and mass balances in a marine fish cage farm. I. Carbon. Marine Ecology

Progress Series 61:61–73

Hall POJ, Holby O, Kollberg S, Samuelsson MO (1992) Chemical fluxes and mass

balances in a marine fish cage farm. IV. Nitrogen. Marine Ecology Progress

Series 89:81–91

Harada T (1978) Yellowtail and amberjack. In: Kawamoto N (ed) Details of Fish

Culture. Koseisha-Koseikaku, Tokyo, pp 463–503

Hargrave BT, Duplisea DE, Pfeiffer E, Wildish DJ (1993) Seasonal changes in

benthic fluxes of dissolved oxygen and ammonium associated with marine

cultured Atlantic salmon. Marine Ecology Progress Series 96:249–257

Holby O, Hall POJ (1991) Chemical fluxes and mass balances in a marine fish cage

farm. II. Phospshorous. Marine Ecology Progress Series 70:263–272

Holmer M (1991) Impacts of aquaculture on surrounding sediments: generation of

organic-rich sediments. In: De Pauw N, Joyce J (eds) Aquaculture and the

environment. European Aquaculture Society Special Publication 16:155–175

Huguenin JE, Colt J (1989) Design and operating guide for aquaculture seawater

systems. Development in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science vol 20, Amsterdam,

Elsevier

IOC (2001) The Final Design Plan for the Health Of The Oceans Module of the

Global Ocean Observing System. GOOS Report No. 99; IOC Information

Document Series No 1167; UNESCO 2001

IOC (2003) The Integrated, Strategic Design Plan for the Coastal Ocean Observations

Module of the Global Ocean Observing System. GOOS Report No. 125; IOC

Information Documents Series N°1183; UNESCO 2003

IPCC (2001) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Third Assessment Report –

Climate Change 2001. Watson RT, the Core Writing Team (eds)

Islam S, Tanaka M (2004) Impacts of pollution on coastal and marine ecosystems

including coastal and marine fisheries and approach for management: a review

and synthesis. Marine Pollution Bulletin 48:624–649

37

Kalantzi I, Karakassis I (2006) Benthic impacts of fish farming: Meta-analysis of

community and geochemical data. Marine Pollution Bulletin in press

Karakassis I, Hatziyanni E (2000) Benthic disturbance due to fish farming analyzed

under different levels of taxonomic resolution. Marine Ecology Progress Series

203:247–253

Karakassis I, Tsapakis M, Hatziyanni E (1998) Seasonal variability in sediment

profiles beneath fish farm cages in the Mediterranean. Marine Ecology Progress

Series 162:243–252

La Rosa T, Mirto S, Favaloro E, Savona B, Sara G, Danovaro R, Mazzola A, (2002)

Impact on the water column biogeochemistry of a Mediterranean mussel and

fish farm. Water Research 36:713–721

McKay WA, Pattenden NJ (1989) Radionuclides in shoreline waters of the northeast

Irish Sea. Science of the Total Environment 84:159–167

Munday B, Eleftheriou A, Kentouri M, Divanach P (1992) The interactions of

aquaculture and the environment: a bibliographical review. Report prepared for

the European Communities Directorate General for Fisheries

NRC/NAS (National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences) (2002)

Committee on Atlantic Salmon in Maine. Genetic Status of Atlantic Salmon in

Maine. National Academy Press, Washington DC, USA

PAP/RAC (1996) Approaches for zoning of coastal areas with reference to

Mediterranean aquaculture. PAP-10/EAM/GL.1. Split, Croatia

Public and Corporate Economic Consultants (PACEC) and Stirling Aquaculture

(1998) The Economic Impact of Scottish Salmon Farming. Cambridge, UK:

Public and Corporate Economic Consultants

RIFE (2004) Radioactivity in Food and the Environment, 2003. RIFE report 10

Rosenberg R, Loo LO (1983) Energy flow in a Mytilus edulis culture in western

Sweden. Aquaculture 35:151–161

Saegrov H, Hindar K, Kalas S, Lura H (1997) Escaped farmed Atlantic salmon

replace the original salmon stock in the River Vosso, western Norway. ICES

Journal of Marine Science 54:1166–1172

Samuelsen OB, Torsvik V, Hansen PK, Pittman K (1988) Organic waste and

antibiotics from aquaculture. ICES, CM 1988/F: 14

38

Sellner KG, Doucette GJ, Kirkpatrick GJ (2003) Harmful algal blooms: causes,

impacts and detection. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Technology

30:383–406

Soto D, Norambuena F (2004) Evaluation of salmon farming effects on marine

systems in the inner seas of southern Chile: a large-scale mensurative

experiment. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 20:493–501

Utter F, Epifanio J (2001) Marine aquaculture: Genetic potentialities and pitfalls.

Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 12:59–77

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(1998) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 1998/F:2

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(2002) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 2002/F:4

Wu RSS (1995) The environmental impact of marine fish culture: towards a

sustainable future. Marine Pollution Bulletin 31:159–166

Yokoyama H (2003) Environmental quality criteria for fish farms in Japan.

Aquaculture 226:45–56

39

APPENDIX

This review was based on the following references:

Ackefors H, Enell M (1990) Discharge of nutrients from Swedish fish farming to

adjacent sea areas. Ambio 19:28–35

Alderman DJ, Smith P, Davies IM, Haya K (2004) Chemicals used in mariculture.

ICES Cooperative Research Report

Angel D (1998) Marine aquaculture and the marine environment in the gulf of Aqaba:

are these on a collision course, or can they co-exist? The year of the sea. Israel

ministry of the Environment

Angel D, Krost P, Gordin H (1995) Benthic implications of net cage aquaculture in

the oligotrophic Gulf of Aqaba. Aquaculture society 25:129–173

Angel D, Post A, Brenner S, Eden N, Katz T, Cicelsky A, Lupatsch I (1998)

Environmental impact assessment of the Ardag net cage fish farm on the northern

Gulf of Aqaba. A report prepared for the Ardag Fish Company Eilat, Israel

Angel DL, Katz T, Eden N, Black KD, Malej A, Tsapakis M, Turk V, Cook EJ, Sayer

M, Spanier E, Lojen S, Collins K, Pitta P (2005) Diurnal dynamics in water

quality and plankton around a net pen fish farm in the Red Sea. ASLO Summer

meeting, Santiago de Compostela, 19–24 June 2005

Asmus RM, Asmus H (1991) Mussel beds: limiting or promoting phytoplankton.

Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 148: 215–232

Austin B (1985) Antibiotic pollution from fish farms: effects on aquatic microflora.

Microbiological Science 2:113–117

Azam F, Fonda Umani S, Funari F (1999) Significance of bacteria in the mucilage

phenomenon in the northern Adriatic Sea. Annali dell Instituto Superiore di Sanita

35:411–419

Bald J, Borja A, Uriarte A, González M (2002a) Environmental impact assessment of

open sea cages for aquaculture in the Mediterranean coast of Spain. Extended

abstracts and short communications. Aquaculture Europe 2002. Trieste (Italy)

European Aquaculture Society Special Publication, p 137–138

Bald J, Borja A, Uriarte A, González M (2002b) Site selection protocol for open sea

cages for aquaculture in the mediterranean coast of Spain. Extended abstracts and

40

short communications. Aquaculture Europe 2002. Trieste (Italy) European

Aquaculture Society Special Publication, p 139–140

Bariche M (2005) Age and growth of Lessepsian rabbitfish from the Eastern

Mediterranean. Journal of Applied Icthyology 21:141–145

Bariche M, Letourneur Y, Harmelin-Vivien M (2004) Temporal fluctuations and

settlement patterns of native and Lessepsian herbivorous fishes on the Lebanese

coast (eastern Mediterranean). Environmental Biology of Fishes 70:81–90

Bayarri S, Baldassarri LT, Iacovella N, Ferrara F, di Domenico A (2001) PCDDs,

PCFDs, PCBs and DDE in edible marine species from the Adriatic Sea.

Chemosphere 43:601–610

Ben-Dor E (1996) Airborne imaging spectroscopy as a tool for quantitative mapping

of the environment in Israel. In: Gradus Y, Lipshitz G (eds) The Mosaic of Israeli

Geography at the Close of the Twentieth Century. Ben-Gurion University of the

Negev Press, p 497–503

Beveridge MCM (1996) Cage Aquaculture. Fishing NewsBooks. Blackwell, Oxford

Black KD (2001) Environmental Impacts of Aquaculture. Sheffield Academic Press,

Sheffield, UK

Black KP, Parry GD (1999) Entrainment, dispersal, and settlements of scallop dredge

sediment plumes: field measurements and numerical modelling. Canadian Journal

of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 56:2271–2281

Boers M (2005) Overview of historical pits, trenches and dump sites on the

Netherlands’ Continental Shelf. In: van Rijn LC, Soulsby RL, Hoekstra P, Davies

AG (eds) SANDPIT: Sand transport and morphology of offshore sand mining pits

– Process knowledge and guidelines for coastal management. End document April

2005 - EC Framework V Project No. EVK3-2001-00056

Bongiorni L, Shafir S, Angel D, Rinkevich B (2003) Survival, growth and gonad

development of two hermatypic corals subjected to in situ fish-farm nutrient

enrichment. Marine Ecology Progress Series 253:137–144

Bonnett PJP, Appleby PG, Oldfield F (1988) Radionuclides in coastal and estuarine

sediments from Wirral and Lancashire. Environmental Science & Technology

70:215–236

Borja A (2002) Los impactos ambientales de la acuicultura y la sostenibilidad de esta

actividad. Boletín del Instituto Español de Oceanografía 18:41–49

41

Boyd SE, Cooper KM, Limpenny DS, Kilbride R, Rees HL, Dearnaley MP,

Stevenson J, Meadows WJ, Morris CD (2004) Assessment of the re-habilitation of

the seabed following marine aggregate dredging Science Series Technical Report,

CEFAS Lowestoft

Braaten B (1991) Impact of pollution from aquaculture in six Nordic countries:

release of nutrients, effects and waste water treatment. In: De Pauw, Joyce N

(eds) Aquaculture and the Environment. Special Publication No. 14. Ghent,

Belgium: European Aquaculture Society, p 40–41

Burbridge P, Hendrick V, Roth E, Rosenthal H (2001) Social and economic policy

issues relevant to marine aquaculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 17:194–

206

Burridge LE, Haya K, Page FH, Waddy SL, Zitko V, Wade J (2000) The lethality of

the cypermethrin formulation Excis registered to larval and post-larval stages of

the American lobster (Homarus americanus). Aquaculture 182:37–47

Campbell A (1986) Migatory movements of ovigerous lobsters, Homarus

americanus, tagged off Gran Manan, eastern Canada. Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 43:2197–2205

Chong KC (1990) Economic and social considerations for aquaculture site selection:

An Asian perspective. In: New MB, de Saram H, Singh T (eds) Technical and

economic aspects of shrimp farming. Proceedings of the AQUATECH'90

Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 11-14 June 1990, pp 24–35

Cloern JE (1987) Turbidity as a control on phytoplankton biomass and productivity in

estuaries. Continental Shelf Research 7:1367–1381

Cohen JE, Small C, Mellinger A, Gallup J, Sachs J (1997) Estimates of coastal

populations. Science 278:1211–1212

Collie JS, Hall SJ, Kaiser MJ, Poiner IR (2000) A quantitative analysis of fishing

impact on shelf-sea benthos. Journal of Animal Ecology 69:785–798

de Groot SJ (1979) The potential environmental impact of marine gravel extraction in

the North Sea. Ocean Management 5:233–249

De Jong F, Bakker JF, van Berkel CJM, Dankers NMJA, Dahl K, Gätje C, Marencic

H, Potel P (1999) Wadden Sea Quality Status Report. Wadden Sea Ecosystem No.

9. Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Trilateral Monitoring and Assessment

Group, Quality Status Report Group. Wilhelmshaven, Germany

42

Duplisea DE, Jennings S, Malcom SJ, Parker R, Sivyer B (2001) Modelling potential

impacts of bottom trawl fisheries on soft sediment biogeochemistry in the North

Sea. Goechemical Transactions 14:1–6

EEA (1999) State and pressures of the marine and coastal Mediterranean

environment. Environmental assessment report No 5, Copenhagen

EEA (2003) Testing of indicators for the marine and coastal environment in Europe -

Part 2: Hazardous substances. EEA technical report No 85, Copenhagen

EEA (2003) Testing of indicators for the marine and coastal environment in Europe.

Part 3: Present state and development of indicators for eutrophication, hazardous

substances, oil and ecological quality. EEA technical report No 86, Copenhagen

EEA (2002) Europe's biodiversity - biogeographical regions and seas. EEA,

Copenhagen

EEA (2002) An indicator-based approach to assessing the environmental performance

of European marine fisheries and aquaculture EEA technical report 87,

Copenhagen

EEA (2002) Testing of indicators for the marine and coastal environment in Europe.

Part 1: Eutrophication and integrated coastal zone management EEA Technical

Report No 84, Copenhagen

EEA (2003) Europe’s environment: The third assessment EEA environmental

assessment report No. 10, Copenhagen

EEA (2003) Europe's water: An indicator-based assessment. Topic report No 1,

Copenhagen

Einum S, Fleming IA (1997) Genetic divergence and interactions in the wild among

native, farmed and hybrid Atlantic salmon. Journal of Fish Biology 50:634–651

Elofsson K, Folmer H (2003) Management of eutrophicated coastal ecosystems: a

synopsis of the literature with emphasis on theory and methodology. Ecological

Economics 47:1–11

Erez J, Iluz D, Silverman J, Lazar B (2005) Recent eutrophication processes caused

by caged fish farming in the northern Gulf of Eilat (Aqaba). ASLO Summer

meeting, Santiago de Compostela, 19–24 June 2005

EEA (1995) Europe's Environment - The Dobris Assessment. EEA environmental

assessment report No. 1, Copenhagen

EEA (2005a) The European environment — State and outlook 2005. Copenhagen

EEA (2005b) European environment outlook. EEA report 4, Copenhagen

43

Eyre BD, Ferguson AJP (2002) Comparison of carbon production and decomposition,

benthic nutrient fluxes and denitrification in seagrass, phytoplankton, benthic

microalgae- and macroalgae-dominated warm-temperate Australian lagoons.

Marine Ecology Progress Series 229:43–59

FAO (2001) Yearbook of Fishery Statistics 1999. Aquaculture production. FAO

Statistics Series 160, vol 88/2

FAO FIGIS 2000-2006. http://www.fao.org/figis/servlet/SQServlet?file=/usr/local/

tomcat/FI/5.5.9/fi5/webapps/figis/temp/hqp_20581.xml&outtype=html

Fernandes TF, Eleftheriou A, Ackefors H, Eleftheriou M, Ervik A, Sanchez-Mata A,

Scanlon T, White P, Cochrane S, Pearson TH, Read PA (2001) The scientific

principles underlying the monitoring of the environmental impacts of

aquaculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 17:181–193

Fonteyne R (1999) Physical impact of beam trawls on seabed sediments. In: Kaiser

MJ, de Groot SJ (eds) Effect of fishing on non-target species and habitats.

Blackwell Science, p 15–36

Gabbay S (2000) Coastal area management programme (CAMP) Israel: final

integrated report. Split: PAP/RAC

Galil BS (2000) A sea under siege – alien species in the Mediterranean. Biological

Invasions 2:177–186

Galil BS, Spanier E, Ferguson WW (1990) The Scyphomedusae of the Mediterranean

coast of Israel, including two Lessepsian migrants new to the Mediterranean.

Zoologische Mededelingen (Leiden) 64:95–105

Genin A, Lazar B, Brenner S (1995) Vertical mixing and coral death in the Red Sea

following the eruption of Mount Pinatubo. Nature 377:507–510

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection) and

Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (2001a) Protecting the oceans

from land-based activities - Land-based sources and activities affecting the

quality and uses of the marine, coastal and associated freshwater environment.

Reports and Studies GESAMP No. 71

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection) and

Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (2001b) A sea of troubles. Reports

and Studies GESAMP No. 70

44

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection) (2001)

Planning and management for sustainable coastal aquaculture development

Reports and Studies GESAMP No 68

Golani D, Lerner A (2003) Was the ichthyofauna of the sandy shore of the northern

Gulf of Eilat influenced by adjacent mariculture activity? The Israeli Journal of

Aquaculture, BaMidgeh 55:238

Golik A, Rosen DS (1999) Management of the Israeli Coastal Sand Resources Israel

Oceanographic and Limnological Research, (MAP/UNEP), Haifa

Gordon N, Herut B, Kimor B (2005) Microphytoplankton monitoring as a useful tool

in detecting eutrophication and harmful algae off the near shore waters of the

Mediterranean coast of Israel. ASLO Summer meeting, Santiago de Compostela,

19-24 June 2005

Gowen RJ & Bradbury NB (1987) The ecological impact of salmonid farming in

coastal waters: a review. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review

25:563–575

Gowen RJ, Rosenthal H, Makinen T, Ezzi I (1990) Environmental Impact of

Aquaculture Activities. Special Publication No. 12. Ghent, Belgium: European

Aquaculture Society, pp 257–283

Hall POJ, Anderson LG, Holby O, Kollberg S, Samuelsson MO (1990) Chemical

fluxes and mass balances in a marine fish cage farm. I. Carbon. Marine Ecology

Progress Series 61:61–73

Hall POJ, Holby O, Kollberg S, Samuelsson MO (1992) Chemical fluxes and mass

balances in a marine fish cage farm. IV. Nitrogen. Marine Ecology Progress

Series 89:81–91

Harada T (1978) Yellowtail and amberjack. In: Kawamoto N (ed) Details of Fish

Culture. Koseisha-Koseikaku, Tokyo, pp 463–503

Hargrave BT, Duplisea DE, Pfeiffer E, Wildish DJ (1993) Seasonal changes in

benthic fluxes of dissolved oxygen and ammonium associated with marine

cultured Atlantic salmon. Marine Ecology Progress Series 96:249–257

Hitchcock DR, Drucker BR (1996) Investigation of benthic and surface plume

associated with marine aggregates mining in the United Kingdom Oceanology

International 96. The Global Ocean– towards operational oceanography

45

Hjerne O, Hansson S (2002) The role of fish and fisheries in Baltic Sea nutrient

dynamics. Limnology & Oceanography 47:1023–1032

Holby O, Hall POJ (1991) Chemical fluxes and mass balances in a marine fish cage

farm. II. Phospshorous. Marine Ecology Progress Series 70:263–272

Holmer M (1991) Impacts of aquaculture on surrounding sediments: generation of

organic-rich sediments. In: De Pauw N, Joyce J (eds) Aquaculture and the

environment. European Aquaculture Society Special Publication 16:155–175

Huguenin JE, Colt J (1989) Design and operating guide for aquaculture seawater

systems. Development in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science vol 20, Amsterdam,

Elsevier

IET (International Experts Team) (2001) Evaluation of Pollution in the Gulf of Eilat.

Report for the Israeli Ministries of Infrastructure, Environment and Agriculture.

Prepared by the International Expert Team (M.J. Atkinson, Y. Birk, H.

Rosenthal), 10 December 2001

IOC (2001) The Final Design Plan for the Health Of The Oceans Module of the

Global Ocean Observing System. GOOS Report No. 99; IOC Information

Document Series No 1167; UNESCO 2001

IOC (2003) The Integrated, Strategic Design Plan for the Coastal Ocean Observations

Module of the Global Ocean Observing System. GOOS Report No. 125; IOC

Information Documents Series N°1183; UNESCO 2003

IPCC (2001) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Third Assessment Report –

Climate Change 2001. Watson RT, the Core Writing Team (eds)

Islam S, Tanaka M (2004) Impacts of pollution on coastal and marine ecosystems

including coastal and marine fisheries and approach for management: a review

and synthesis. Marine Pollution Bulletin 48:624–649

Jameson SC, Ammar MSA, Saadalla E, Mostafa HM, Riegel B (1999) A coral

damage index and its application to diving sites in the Egyptian Red Sea. Coral

Reefs 18:333–339

Kalantzi I, Karakassis I (2006) Benthic impacts of fish farming: Meta-analysis of

community and geochemical data. Marine Pollution Bulletin in press

Karakassis I, Hatziyanni E (2000) Benthic disturbance due to fish farming analyzed

under different levels of taxonomic resolution. Marine Ecology Progress Series

203:247–253

46

Karakassis I, Tsapakis M, Hatziyanni E (1998) Seasonal variability in sediment

profiles beneath fish farm cages in the Mediterranean. Marine Ecology Progress

Series 162:243–252

Kress N, Herut B, Angel D (1996) Environmental conditions of the water column in

Haifa Bay, Israel, during September-October 1993. Water Science Technology

32:57–64

La Rosa T, Mirto S, Favaloro E, Savona B, Sara G, Danovaro R, Mazzola A, (2002)

Impact on the water column biogeochemistry of a Mediterranean mussel and

fish farm. Water Research 36:713–721

Lazar B, Silverman J, Erez J (2005) Does fish farming affect nutrients and dissolved

oxygen inventories in the water column of the northern Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea?

ASLO Summer meeting, Santiago de Compostela, 19-24 June 2005

Lotan A, Ben-Hillel R, Loya Y (1992) Life cycle of Rhopilema nomadica: a new

immigrant scyphomedusan in the Mediterranean. Marine Biology 112:237–242

Lozan JL, Rachor E, Reise K, Suendermann J, von Westernhagen H (2003)

Warnsignale aus Nordsee und Wattenmeer. Wissenschaftliche, Hamburg

Lozan JL, Rachor E, Reise K, von Westernhagen H, Lenz W (1994) Warsignale aus

dem Wattenmeer. Blackwell Berlin

Luckenbach T, Epel D (2005) Nitromusk and polycyclic musk compounds as long-

term inhibitors of cellular xenobiotic defense systems mediated by multidrug

transporters. Environmental Health Perspectives 113:17–24

Machias A, Karakassis I, Giannoulaki M, Papadopoulou KN, Smith CJ, Somarakis S

(2005) Response of demersal fish communities to the presence of fish farms.

Marine Ecology Progress Series 288:241–250

Machias A, Karakassis I, Labropoulou M, Somarakis S, Papadopoulou KN,

Papaconstantinou C (2004) Changes in wild fish assemblages after the

establishment of a fish farming zone in an oligotrophic marine ecosystem.

Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 60:771–779

McKay WA, Pattenden NJ (1989) Radionuclides in shoreline waters of the northeast

Irish Sea. Science of the Total Environment 84:159–167

Monbet Y (1992) Control of phytoplankton biomass in estuaries: A comparative

analysis of microtidal and macrotidal estuaries. Estuaries 15:563–571

47

Munday B, Eleftheriou A, Kentouri M, Divanach P (1992) The interactions of

aquaculture and the environment: a bibliographical review. Report prepared for

the European Communities Directorate General for Fisheries

Nash CE, Iwamoto RN, Mahnken CVW (2000) Aquaculture risk management and

marine mammal interactions in the Pacific Northwest. Aquaculture 183:307–323

NRC/NAS (National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences) (2002)

Committee on Atlantic Salmon in Maine. Genetic Status of Atlantic Salmon in

Maine. National Academy Press, Washington DC, USA

Palmeri L, Bendoricchio G, Artioli Y (2006) Modelling nutrient emissions from river

systems and loads to the coastal zone: Po River case study, Italy. Ecological

Modelling

PAP/RAC (1996) Approaches for zoning of coastal areas with reference to

Mediterranean aquaculture. PAP-10/EAM/GL.1. Split, Croatia

Pitta P, Karakassis I, Tsapakis M, Zivanovic S (1999) Natural vs. mariculture induced

variability in nutrients and plankton in the eastern Mediterranean. Hydrobiologia

391:181–194

Por FD (1978) Lessepsian migration - the influx of Red Sea biota into the

Mediterranean by way of the Suez Canal. Springer Verlag, Berlin

Pranovi F, Da Ponte F, Raicevich S, Giovanardi O (2004) A multidisciplinary study

of the immediate effects of mechanical clam harvesting in the Venice Lagoon.

ICES Journal of Marine Science 61:43–52

Public and Corporate Economic Consultants (PACEC) and Stirling Aquaculture

(1998) The Economic Impact of Scottish Salmon Farming. Cambridge, UK:

Public and Corporate Economic Consultants

RIFE (2004) Radioactivity in Food and the Environment, 2003. RIFE report 10

Rilov G, Benayahu Y, Gasith A (2002) Effect of an exotic prey on the feeding habit

of a predatory snail. Marine Environmental Research 54:85–98

Rilov G, Gasith A, Benayahu Y (1996) Selected aspects in the ecology of large

predatory gastropods in rocky littoral habitats along the Israeli Mediterranean

coast. In: Steinberger Y (ed) Preservation of Our World in the Wake of Change,

Vol VI B. ISEEQS publication, Jerusalem, p 608–613

Rilov G, Gasith A, Evans SM, Benayahu Y (2000) Unregulated use of TBT-based

anti-fouling paints in Israel (eastern Mediterranean): high contamination and

48

imposex levels in two marine gastropods. Marine Ecology Progress Series

192:229–238

Rinkevich B, Angel D, Shafir S, Bongiorni L (2003) Fair is foul and foul: Response to

a critique. Marine Ecology Progress Series 261:305–309

Roos PC (2004) Seabed pattern dynamics and offshore sand extraction. Hulscher

SJMH, de Vriend HJ (eds), Enschede, University of Twente

Rosenberg R, Loo LO (1983) Energy flow in a Mytilus edulis culture in western

Sweden. Aquaculture 35:151–161

Saegrov H, Hindar K, Kalas S, Lura H (1997) Escaped farmed Atlantic salmon

replace the original salmon stock in the River Vosso, western Norway. ICES

Journal of Marine Science 54:1166–1172

Samuelsen OB, Torsvik V, Hansen PK, Pittman K (1988) Organic waste and

antibiotics from aquaculture. ICES, CM 1988/F: 14

Sellner KG, Doucette GJ, Kirkpatrick GJ (2003) Harmful algal blooms: causes,

impacts and detection. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Technology

30:383–406

SoHelMe (2005) State of the Hellenic marine Environment. In: Papathanassiou E,

Zenetos A (eds) HCMR publications

Soto D, Norambuena F (2004) Evaluation of salmon farming effects on marine

systems in the inner seas of southern Chile: a large-scale mensurative

experiment. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 20:493–501

Stachowitsh M, Fanuko N, Richter M (1990) Mucus aggregates in the Adriatic Sea:

an overview of types and occurrences. Marine Ecology P.S.Z.N.I. 11:327–350

Stefanelli P, Di Muccio A, Ferrara F, Attard Barbini D, Generali T, Pelosi P,

Amendola G, Vanni F, Di Muccio S, Ausili A (2004) Estimation of intake of

organochlorine pesticides and chlorobiphenyls through edible fishes from the

Italian Adriatic Sea during 1997. Food Control 15:27–38

Stock M, Schrey E, Kellermann A, Gaetje C, Eskildsen K, Feige M, Fischer G,

Hartmann F, Knoke V, Moeller A, Ruth M, Thiessen A, Vorberg R (1996)

Oekosystemforschung Wattenmeer - Synthesebericht: Grundlagen fuer einen

Nationalparkplan Schriftenreihe des Nationalparks Schleswig-Holsteinisches

Wattenmeer

49

Storelli MM, Storelli A, Marcotrigiano GO (2001) Heavy metals in the aquatic

environment of the Southern Adriatic Sea, Italy: macroalgae, sediments and

benthic species. Environment International 26:505–509

Utter F, Epifanio J (2001) Marine aquaculture: Genetic potentialities and pitfalls.

Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 12:59–77

Vollenweider RA, Giovanardi F, Montanari G, Rinaldi A (1998) Characterization of

the trophic conditions of marine coastal waters, with special reference to the NW

Adriatic Sea: proposal for a trophic scale, turbidity and generalized water quality

index. Environmetrics 9:329–357

Watling L, Norse EA (1998) Disturbance of the seabed by mobile fishing gear: a

comparison to forest clear cutting. Conservation Biology 12:1180–1197

Webb SF (2001) A databased perspective on the environmental risk assessment of

human pharmaceuticals I – collation of available ecotoxicity data. In: Kummerer

K (ed) Pharmaceuticals in the environment – sources, fate, effects and risks.

Springer –Verlag, Berlin, p 213–219

Westerberg H, Rönnback P, Frimansson H (1996 ) Effects of suspended sediments on

cod egg and larvae and other behaviour of adult herring and cod. ICES CM

1996/E:26 (Marine Environmental Quality Committee)

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(1998) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 1998/F:2

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(2002) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 2002/F:4

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(2004) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 2004/F:02

WGEIM (ICES Working Group on the Environmental Interactions of Mariculture)

(2005) Report of the Working Group on Environmental Interactions of

Mariculture. ICES CM 2005/F:04

Wielgus J (2003) Estimation of ecological and economic damage of anthropogenic

coral reef stressors in the Gulf of Eilat. PhD Thesis, University of Bar-Ilan

50

Wittenberg M, Hunte W (1992) Effects of eutrophication and sedimentation on

juvenile corals I. Abundance, mortality and community structure. Marine Biology

112:131–138

Wu RSS (1995) The environmental impact of marine fish culture: towards a

sustainable future. Marine Pollution Bulletin 31:159–166

Wyatt T (1998) Harmful algae, marine blooms, and simple population models. Nature

and Resources 34:40–45

Yahel R, Yahel G, Genin A (2002) Daily cycles of suspended sand at coral reefs: A

biological control. Limnology & Oceanography 47:1071–1083

Yokoyama H (2003) Environmental quality criteria for fish farms in Japan.

Aquaculture 226:45–56

Zakai D, Chadwick-Furman NE (2002) Impact of intensive recreational diving on reef

corals at Eilat, Northern Red Sea. Biological Conservation 105:179–187

Zwirn MJ (1998) Toward an environmental protection regime for the Gulf of Aqaba:

international law prospects for a contentious region. International Environmental

Law USDA EENV 321

51

52