BILL ANALYSIS
SJR 18
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SJR 18 (Simitian, et al.)
As Amended April 6, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :23-11
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 8-3
----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Huffman, Arambula, | | |
| |Blumenfield, Caballero, | | |
| |Fletcher, Bonnie | | |
| |Lowenthal, Feuer, Yamada | | |
| | | | |
|-----+---------------------------+---+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Fuller, Anderson, Tom | | |
| |Berryhill | | |
| | | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Urges the United States Congress (Congress) to develop
a federal regulatory framework for marine aquaculture that
undergoes complete environmental review and is at least as
protective as that codified in California's Sustainable Oceans
Act (SB 201 (Simitian), Chapter 36, Statutes of 2006) to address
environmental & economic concerns. Specifically, this
resolution :
1)Requests that Congress develop a comprehensive federal
regulatory framework for marine aquaculture that undergoes
complete environmental review and is at least as protective as
the framework codified in the Sustainable Oceans Act.
2)Notes that the Legislature opposes any expansion of marine
aquaculture off the Pacific Coast without such a regulatory
framework in place.
3)Notes that the Legislature also opposes any federal policies
and legislation that would weaken California's role in
permitting decisions regarding marine aquaculture.
4)States a number of findings in support of the request,
including:
SJR 18
Page 2
a) The importance and value of California's ocean waters
and marine life;
b) The potential threat to these values from unregulated
marine aquaculture, but also the potential value of
responsible marine aquaculture; and,
c) The unique importance of the Sustainable Oceans Act in
regulating marine aquaculture, the state's interest in
marine aquaculture in federal waters off the California
coast, and the potential dangers in permitting marine
aquaculture without a comprehensive federal regulatory
framework.
EXISTING LAW : The Sustainable Oceans Act requires a lease from
the Fish and Game Commission be obtained in order to practice
marine finfish aquaculture. Prior to issuing a lease, the
Department of Fish and Game (DFG) is required to prepare a
programmatic environmental impact report (PEIR) for existing and
potential commercial aquaculture in the state's costal and
inland areas. The Act requires DFG to consider multiple factors
in the PEIR, such as the effects of escaped fish on wild stocks,
the effects on ocean and coastal habitats, the effects of fish
feed and fish meal, and the appropriate design of facilities and
farming practices to avoid adverse environmental impacts. The
intent behind requiring a PEIR was to examine the impact of
marine aquaculture on a state-wide basis.
FISCAL EFFECT : Nonfiscal
COMMENTS : Fish farming in the ocean - also known as "marine
aquaculture" - has expanded greatly in recent years, and
large-scale aquaculture operations are beginning to be located
in deeper waters - the United States "federal waters" - among
other places, off the California coast. This change from small
operations to large ones has been compared to the replacement of
small family farms with large industrial farms on land, with
environmental problems similar to those caused by large animal
operations on land now appearing with fish farming in the ocean.
Large scale open-ocean aquaculture presents a number of
potential environmental impacts, including over-using fishmeal
feed (made from wild-caught fish, thus depleting the wild fish
stocks), concentrating excessive amounts of fish waste on the
SJR 18
Page 3
ocean floor, introducing exotic fish into the ecosystem (when
farmed fish escape) as well as disease and parasites (which
multiply in crowded fish pens), and releasing antibiotics or
other chemicals (sometimes used to control diseases) into the
water.
Nevertheless, with many ocean fish stocks depleted from past
overfishing, marine aquaculture offers one possible means of
providing sustainable seafood. With appropriate management -
such as the integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, which combines
fish pens with shellfish, seaweed, and lobster-farming
operations - fish farms have the potential to provide a revenue
source for coastal communities while contributing to the
recovery of depleted wild fish stocks. And because this
industry is still developing, the bill sponsor points out, this
is the time to "get it right" from the beginning, by creating a
regulatory framework that prevents development of serious
environmental problems while allowing for growth of aquaculture.
The current California law on marine aquaculture, SB 201,
contains substantial environmental protections. First, it
requires that a programmatic environmental impact report be
prepared to provide a framework for managing marine finfish
aquaculture in an environmentally sustainable manner, and so
that state-wide effects of aquaculture can be appropriately
evaluated. In addition, the law sets a number of standards,
including requiring best management practices, environmental and
water quality monitoring, reducing the use of fish meal and fish
oil (for feed) as well as chemicals and antibiotics, protecting
public trust values, wildlife, habitats, and fishing, and
specifically prohibits adverse cumulative impacts of aquaculture
operations.
There is no comparable federal regulation at present, and
because aquaculture is fundamentally different from fishing, the
current federal laws (which were designed to regulate fishing,
e.g., the Magnuson-Stevens Act) are inappropriate for managing
the growing aquaculture industry. This resolution would request
that Congress develop a comprehensive framework that is
appropriate for regulating this expanding industry.
Analysis Prepared by : Igor Lacan / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
SJR 18
Page 4
FN: 0004051