Rationale & Background

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) developed Technical Guidelines on Aquaculture Certification to advance sustainable aquaculture development (Aquaculture Guidelines) [1]. The FAO Aquaculture Guidelines provide substantive criteria to gauge the sustainability of aquaculture systems, but a comprehensive assessment of whether these guidelines are being applied in the United States has not been conducted.  This comparative analysis examines the conformance of U.S. aquaculture management to these internationally-accepted guidelines adopted by the FAO. The assessment will highlight strengths of the U.S. management system at the federal level, as well as elucidate where further efforts to follow FAO Aquaculture Guidelines may be beneficial.

Seafood sustainability has become a central component in the production and marketing of fish and seafood products, but potential confusion arises because criteria for sustainability often are interpreted, established, and promoted in several different ways by different stakeholders [2]. In its simplest form, “sustainability” is about meeting the needs and wants of current generations without compromising those of future [3], [4]. The U.S. aquaculture industry must comply with a complex and multidimensional regulatory framework intended to address considerations that include fisheries management and interaction with wild stocks, protected species interactions, nutrient discharge, siting, seafood safety, and aquatic animal health.

Some current assessments of sustainability, such as certification schemes, focus on the management and impacts of a single operation under evaluation (e.g., a single farm or a cluster of farms monitored collectively). Some industry members have questioned the value of certification in the context of North American production, suggesting it is costly, confusing, inefficient, and unpredictable as the criteria and conditions for approval vary depending upon the scheme [5]. Alternatively, one can view sustainability as the result of a well-designed and implemented management (governance) system, and conduct assessments on this higher order scale – not on a snapshot of an individual operation at any given point in time, but rather on the capacity of the system to respond to variability and impacts via management measures in all operations under the system's jurisdiction.

The management of aquaculture in the United States occurs at multiple levels of government in which federal, state, and local authorities/agencies often have shared, and at times overlapping, responsibilities to regulate farming activities.  The existence of multiple regulatory bodies reflects the origins of governance in the United States as a compact among individual states that joined together to form a national government, the United States of America in 1787.  The framers of the U.S. Constitution envisioned that state governments, not the national government, would be the main system of governance for citizens on a day-to-day basis [6]. As a result, the U.S system of government developed in a way that is highly deferential to the states. 

A primary role of the U.S. federal government is to regulate interstate commerce and coordinate national policies agreed upon by state representatives in the U.S. Congress. Multiple state-federal regulatory coordination bodies have been developed to guide aquaculture development at the federal government level and between federal and state levels of government. These state-federal partnership programs, such as the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference, were developed to ensure consistent and coordinated aquaculture management in the United States.

State governments regulate aquaculture operations like facility siting and harvesting seasons within state boundaries for both land-based and freshwater farming operations. State agencies also assist with permitting, monitoring, and enforcing federal statutes. In coastal state waters, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (43 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq.) grants individual States rights to the natural resources of submerged lands from the coastline to no more than 3 nautical miles (5.6 km) into the Atlantic, Pacific, the Arctic Oceans, and the Gulf of Mexico commonly referred to as state waters. The only exceptions are Texas and the west coast of Florida, where State jurisdiction extends from the coastline to no more than 3 marine leagues (16.2 km) into the Gulf of Mexico. Under this authority, coastal states manage, develop, and lease resources throughout the water column and on the seafloor in coastal state waters [7], including those used for aquaculture.

Under customary international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the U.S. federal government has sovereignty over the water column, seabed, and subsoil of its territorial sea (0 to 12 nautical miles) and Exclusive Economic Zone adjacent to its territorial sea, extending 200 miles seaward from the coastline with sovereign rights for exploiting, conserving, and managing living and nonliving resources. U.S. federal laws that affect aquaculture activities within the marine and coastal waters of the United States include the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. § 1361–1423h), Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.), Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq.), Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251–1387), and National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) [7]. 

Federal implementation of these and other related statutes are coordinated through the Executive Office of the President. While many federal laws and regulations were not created specifically for aquaculture, they do address the public interests in protecting water quality, food safety, marine habitat, wildlife, and navigable waters with which aquaculture operations must comply.  Often, implementing regulations address aquaculture specifically and define the standards used to ensure the environmental integrity, animal health and welfare, and social responsibility of aquaculture operations. In addition, federal agencies policy documents, guidance documents, memorandums, strategic plans, and internal legal opinions guide federal agency actions, resource deployment, and decision-making with respect to aquaculture.

Six federal agencies share principal responsibility for the implementation of national legislation as it relates to the management of aquaculture. Their activities are coordinated under the Executive Office of the President via the Office of Science and Technology Policy, National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Environment as the Subcommittee on Aquaculture (formerly structured as the Interagency Working Group on Aquaculture and the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture). The interagency coordinating body is chaired by the USDA and co-chaired by NOAA due to the significant portfolio of aquaculture-related activities in each agency in freshwater and marine ecosystems, respectively.  The primary federal agencies serving on the subcommittee include: 

● U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) with responsibility for seafood safety under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq.), particularly the amended sections referred to as the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2011. The FDA administers the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point program through its Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and regulates the manufacture and distribution of food additives and drugs given to animals including cultured fish and shellfish through the Center for Veterinary Medicine.

● U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service manages a broad range of aquaculture programs under its Veterinary Services and Plant Protection and Quarantine program for the protection of aquatic animals and plant health against the entry, establishment, and spread of economically and environmentally significant pests, and to facilitate the safe trade of agricultural products.  Pertinent USDA legislative authorities include the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.), which provides authority over the mandatory inspection of Siluriformes fish and fish products (i.e., catfish); the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. § 8301 et seq.) to prevent, detect, control, or eradicate diseases of farmed animals including aquaculture species and to promote species-specific best management practices; and the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act (21 U.S.C. § 151-158) to ensure that pure, safe, potent, and effective biologic products are available for sale and distribution in the United States for use in animals. 

● Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for water quality and effluent discharges into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1344). EPA also regulates underground waste disposal sites for water safety under the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. § 300f); pesticide use in aquaculture under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq.); and chemical use under the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. § 2601–2629).

● U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has regulatory and permitting authority over the placement of aquaculture structures or equipment in navigable waters under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. § 403). ACOE also jointly administers section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1344) with EPA.

● National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) maintains regulatory authority for fisheries, marine sanctuaries, marine mammals, threatened and endangered species, and essential fish habitat conservation in the Exclusive Economic Zone under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq.), the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. § 1431 et seq. and 33 U.S.C. §1401 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. ch. 31 §§ 1361–1423h).

● U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is the lead agency responsible for the implementation of the Lacey Act (16 U.S.C. § 3371–3378), an umbrella statute for the protection of wildlife species and plants taken or possessed in violation of state, tribal, foreign, or U.S. law and provides authority to detain and inspect aquaculture product.

In addition to federal agency programs, key voluntary (i.e., non-regulatory) plans and programs have been established through government-industry partnerships and interagency cooperation.  These include the National Aquatic Animal Health Plan administered under the Executive Office of the President’s Subcommittee on Aquaculture to ensure aquatic animal health; Commercial Aquaculture Health Program Standards developed by the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service - Veterinary Services in collaboration with the National Aquaculture Association to improve aquatic animal health management, protect and expand aquaculture business opportunities, promote and facilitate trade, and improve resource protection and environmental sustainability; and the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference to foster and promote shellfish sanitation through the cooperation of state and federal control agencies, the shellfish industry, and the academic community.

The objective of this project is to evaluate the conformance of U.S. aquaculture management relative to the “Minimum Substantive Criteria” of the FAO Aquaculture Guidelines. The Aquaculture Guidelines, in addition to most ecolabelling and certification schemes, concentrate on evaluating discrete management techniques implemented on an individual aquaculture operation basis; however, the approach of this conformance assessment focuses on the management system as a whole.  It is our view that sustainability can be assessed holistically by focusing on the overarching management system rather than a snapshot of one aquaculture operation in isolation.  Our approach evaluates the capacity of a management system to address sustainability criteria for all aquaculture operations under a given jurisdiction. Thus, if the processes of the overall management system are adequate to guide the sustainable management of an individual operation, then this should be an indication of the sustainability of  seafood products produced from operations under the management’s jurisdiction.

[1] FAO. 2011. Technical Guidelines on Aquaculture Certification. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Version adopted by the 29th Session of the Committee on Fisheries (COFI), Rome, Italy. 31 January–4 February 2011. 123 p. ISBN: 978-92-5-006912-8. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i2296t.pdf 

[2] Sainsbury, K. J. 2008. Review of Guidelines for Ecolabelling of Fish and Products from Capture Fisheries, and Recommended Minimum Substantive Requirements. Report for the Expert Consultation on Ecolabelling Guidelines for Fish and Fishery Products, Rome, 3-5 March 2008. https://corpora.tika.apache.org/base/docs/govdocs1/356/356755.doc 

[3] WCED. 1987. Our Common Future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Published as Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427, Development and International Co-operation: Environment, August 2.

[4] UN. 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, General Assembly Resolution 42/187, 11 December 1987.

[5] Ethier, V. 2014. “Certification – Is it worth the cost?” Features. Finfish Fish. Aquaculture North America. December 29, 2014. https://www.aquaculturenorthamerica.com/certification-is-it-worth-the-cost-1179/ 

[6] Khan Academy. 2019. “The relationship between the states and the federal government.” AP Gov: CON-2.A.2 (EK). https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-government-and-civics/us-gov-foundations/us-gov-relationship-between-the-states-and-the-federal-government/a/relationship-between-the-states-and-the-federal-government-article 

[7] USCOP. 2004. Primer on Ocean Jurisdictions: Drawing Lines in the Water in An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. Final Report. Washington, DC, ISBN#0–9759462–0–X 480p. https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/full_color_rpt/03a_primer.pdf