titel kann auch über zwei zeilen – titel titel

Actual and potential aquaculture

locations in the Baltic Sea

Region

Actual and potential aquaculture locations in the Baltic Sea Region | page 2

Outline

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4

(A) Mapping of existing aquaculture locations ………………………………………………………………………. 5

1. Denmark ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5

2. Estonia ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 6

3. Germany ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8

3.1. Mecklenburg-West Pomerania ……………………………………………………………………………….. 10

3.2. Schleswig Holstein ……………………………………………………………………………………………... 10

4. Latvia ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11

5. Lithuania ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12

6. Poland …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13

6.1. Pomeranian Voivodeship ……………………………………………………………………………………… 14

6.2. Warmian-Masurian Voivodship ………………………………………………………………………………. 15

6.3. West Pomeranian Voivodship ………………………………………………………………………………... 16

7. Russia ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 17

(B) Potential marine aquaculture locations in the Baltic Sea …………………………………………………….. 19

1. General aspects …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19

2. Important parameters …………………………………………………………………………………………... 21

2.1. Legal conditions ……………………………………………………………………………………………….... 21

2.2. Spatial requirements ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 22

2.3. Social acceptance ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 22

2.4. Technical parameters …………………………………………………………………………………………... 23

2.5. Physical parameters ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 23

2.6. Chemical water parameters …………………………………………………………………………………… 24

2.7. Ecological parameters …………………………………………………………………………………………. 24


2.8. Animal welfare …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 24

2.9. Economic sustainability…………………………………………………………………………………..……. 24

3. Potential marine aquaculture in selected countries ……………………………………………………… 25

3.1. Denmark …………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 25

3.2. Estonia …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25

3.3. Germany (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania and Schleswig Holstein) …………………………………… 26

3.4. Latvia ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 26

3.5. Lithuania ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 27

3.6. Poland …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28

3.7. Russia …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29

(C) Detailed information of selected sites …………………………………………………………………………… 30

1. Plans for marine aquaculture - Bornholm (Denmark) ……………………………………………………. 30

2. Plans for marine aquaculture - Saaremaa (Estonia) ……………………………………………………… 32

3. Potential land-based aquaculture locations in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania (Germany) ……….. 34

Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37

References …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 38

This publication was prepared within the framework of the INTERREG IV B project AQUAFIMA. www.aquafima.eu The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of the authors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

http://www.aquafima.eu/


Introduction

In the frame of INTERREG IVb Baltic Sea Region Project AQUAFIMA this report provides an overview of selected existing actual aquaculture locations in the Baltic Sea Region. Moreover it discusses parameters for potential marine aquaculture locations and gives detailed information of three identified potential aquaculture regions.

Aquaculture is the controlled breeding of water living organisms including fish, crustaceans, molluscs and aquatic plants e.g. in finfish net cages in the Baltic Sea. Today, fish from aquaculture production contributes to nearly half of the world´s human fish consumption and it is expected that this share will be 65 % by 2030. The sufficient supply of fish and seafood depends on aquaculture to meet the growing demand from an increasing population. The FAO recorded 190 countries and territories with aquaculture production in 2010 or before. Currently, 93 nations and territories are practicing mariculture worldwide. In Europe, the share of production from brackish and marine waters was 81.5 % in 2010, dominated by marine cage culture of finfish e.g. Atlantic salmon.

The European aquaculture respects the highest standards for environment, nature, climate and animal welfare, but is stagnating or even decreasing for the last 20-30 years. Several important European producers have recently ceased expanding or have even contracted. Some aquaculture farms go out of business or will be absorbed by larger farms. Moreover investors start new businesses in the field of controlled breeding of marine or freshwater living organisms. Therefore the mapping of currently existing aquaculture locations can only be a snap-shot. Additional specified aquaculture farm data are often saved by national data protection acts and therefore not available.

Until now marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region exists only on a very low level, because of administrative burden, time-consuming licensing systems, strict environmental protection regulations, an overall lack of sites with suitable hydrological conditions and low salinity. Thus makes it difficult for interested parties to start open system facilities in the Baltic Sea. The development of marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region needs the coordinated action of all relevant authorities and stakeholders. Most risks can be reduced by using best management practice and there is potential for mariculture in the Baltic Sea.


(A) Mapping of existing aquaculture locations

Several important European producers have recently ceased expanding or have even contracted. Some aquaculture farms go out of business or will be absorbed by larger farms. Moreover investors start new businesses in the field of controlled breeding of marine or freshwater living organisms. Therefore the mapping of aquaculture locations can only be a snap-shot. Additional specified aquaculture farm data are often saved by national data protection acts and therefore not available. National aquaculture statistics in the European Union are based on Regulation (EC) No 762/2008.

1. Denmark Freshwater as well as the marine fish farms produce primarily rainbow trout. This fish species has been farmed in freshwater ponds for more than 100 years.

Marine fish farming was initiated in Denmark in the 1970s. There are 18 marine fish farms, about 230 freshwater fish farms (primarily in Jutland) and more than 40 fully recirculated aquaculture facilities in Denmark. Salmonids, pikeperch and turbot are cultivated in 12 saltwater tanks or raceways, too. Other farmed fish species are eel, carp, pike, perch, Atlantic salmon and sturgeon. The freshwater fish farms produced about 30,000 tonnes in 2007. The marine fish farms produced around 10,000 tonnes in 2010. In order to avoid damages to the marine net cages, they are taken out of water during winter time (source: Danish Ministry of the Environment).


2. Estonia

Fish farming was initiated in Estonia in the 1890s. German landowners farmed brown trout and common carp in ponds. More intensive fish farming was developed in the 1960s. Research in marine aquaculture was initiated in Estonia at the beginning of the 1970s. In 1989 the Estonian aquaculture had the highest productivity of fish for human consumption (1,743 tonnes from more than 40 fish farms and additional many agricultural enterprises which were breeding fish). A decline in fish farming was caused by the collapse of the socialistic economy in 1991. The following table depicts Estonian aquaculture trends of the past 10 years. 2012 is not the best reference year, 2013 is likely to produce circa 1,000 tonnes.

Tab. 1: Estonian aquaculture trends (years 2002 and 2012)

aquaculture production 2002 2012

annual production (tonnes) ~ 258 ~ 374

number of fish farms ~15; 1 RAS unit ~23; 8 RAS units

main species trout (> 80%), carp eel trout (~ 65%), (sturgeon,

carp, eel)

relative share of RAS / water reuse systems < 2 % ~40 % in volume

relative share of brackish/saltwater systems (~20 %); 1 net pens unit;

1 flow trout unit 0%

critical issues for production expansion

-

lengthy administrative

license procedure for the

construction of the sea

( - 3 years)

other remarks - pollution charges (taxes)

The aquaculture companies cultivate their fish and crustaceans in ponds, flow through, recirculating systems and net cages. The produced organisms are used for consumption (e.g. rainbow trout, carp, freshwater crayfish, eel, Siberian sturgeon, whitefish Coregonus sp., African catfish), stocking (e.g. carp, freshwater crayfish) and restocking (e.g. juveniles of salmon, pike, pikeperch, tench, asp, eel, Sea trout Salmo trutta).

The Estonian carp farms are rather located in southern part of the country, because of a nearly two weeks longer period of vegetation there.


3. Germany

Aquaculture is mostly carried out in the southern part of Germany. Common carp and rainbow trout are the dominant species. The majority of aquaculture companies cultivate their fish and crustaceans in ponds, artificial basins and raceways. Closed recirculating systems are a technology where large sums of money have been invested to in recent years and 120 farms already used these systems in 2011. It can be stated that aquaculture production does not cover the demand in Germany and additional supply needs to be imported.

Until now marine aquaculture in the German part of the Baltic Sea Region exists only on a very low level.

In Germany the first aquaculture statistic was done with the beginning of 2012. General statistic data are now available for the first time, but specified aquaculture farm data are saved by the Data Protection Act. Consequently, it hampers receiving a clear and detailed picture of the situation in the aquaculture industry.

The German aquaculture production of the 4,762 firms amounts to some 39,000 tons in 2011. Details are shown by table 1 and 2 below.

Tab. 2: Aquaculture production in Germany in 2011 (source: https://www.destatis.de)

organisms number of companies production in tonnes

fish 4,739 18,269

common carp

3,008 5,082

rainbow trout 2,038 8,102

salmon trout 207 1,024

brown trout 362 561

European eel 18 660

European catfish unknown 203

mussels 11 20,830

crustaceans 39 7

total production 4,762 39,202

https://www.destatis.de/


Tab. 3: Aquaculture farms in Germany in 2011 (source: https://www.destatis.de)

feature number of farms size of farms

farms for fish and/or crustaceans

ponds (without trout ponds) 3,832 24,112 hectare

trout ponds/artificial basins/raceways 2,642 4,973,471 m3

recirculation systems 120 62,594 m2

farms for mussels

bottom cultures 10 3,105 hectare

The following map provides a general overview of aquaculture locations in the northern part of Germany (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania and Schleswig Holstein).



3.1. Mecklenburg-West Pomerania The first aquaculture statistic was done in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania in 2012. In freshwater fishery 778 tonnes of fish came from aquaculture and 445 tons from river and lake fishery in 2010 (Brämick, 2011).

There were 22 aquaculture farms with a production of nearly 1,000 tonnes of fish in 2011. More than half of the total production (547.6 tonnes) comes from recirculation systems. Only one farm is situated in the Baltic Sea (production < 10 tonnes). In 1988 there was still a trout production of 800 tonnes in the Baltic Sea region of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania, but the approvals in the field of water law and nature protection law were withdrawn.

There are three regional focuses of aquaculture farms: Mecklenburg Lake Region, Rostock and Ludwigslust-Parchim.

40.9 % of the total aquaculture production was used for other purposes than food supply like sustainment of water ecosystems, spawn, stocking and restocking.

Brämick (2011) divided aquaculture production in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania in carp farms, trout farms and warm water farms for statistic purpose. In 2010 the carp production of 7 carp farms (4 % of German carp farms, total 168 in Germany) had a yield of 203 tonnes, the rainbow trout production of 6 rainbow trout farms (1 % of German trout farms, total 483 in Germany) had a yield of 150 tonnes and the warm water farming of 6 catfish and sturgeon farms (15 % of German warm water farming, total 39 in Germany) had a yield of 243 tons (without sturgeon).

3.2. Schleswig Holstein In 2011 the total aquaculture production was 10,760 tonnes. Mussel breeding is the most important part of aquaculture by quantity and sales revenue in Schleswig-Holstein. The marine aquaculture production of mussels in

7 plants was 10,580 tonnes in North Sea and Baltic Sea. Blue mussel farming is done in definite areas of the German Wadden Sea along the Schleswig-Holstein coast in the North Sea. They use an area of 2,000 hectare and there are no more than 8 licenses for fishing boats. Moreover a company combines farming of Saccharina latissima and Mytilus edulis in the Firth of Kiel. The good water quality in the region made organic certification possible. The only oyster farm (Crassostrea gigas) is situated on the Isle of Sylt. The company uses an area of 30 hectare. The oysters are farmed directly in the North Sea, but they are taken out of water during winter time. At this season farming is onshore with North Sea water. 33 aquaculture plants totalled a fish production of 178.6 tonnes. The most farmed fish species were carp (82 tonnes in

33 farms), rainbow trout (77 tonnes in 9 farms) and tench (5 tonnes in 15 farms). Other farmed fish species were pike, brown trout, salmon trout, pikeperch, eel and catfish. Additionally, there are plants producing crustaceans, fry respectively caviar and algae.

Marine finfish aquaculture exists only on a very low level. One company is farming salmon trout (big rainbow trout) in the Firth of Kiel in Schleswig-Holstein. Trout is farmed in net cages in the North Sea and Baltic canal.

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=DOKJAA&search=Mecklenburg-West&trestr=0x401

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=DOKJAA&search=Pomerania&trestr=0x401

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=DOKJAA&search=Mecklenburg-West&trestr=0x401

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=DOKJAA&search=Pomerania&trestr=0x401


4. Latvia

Fish farming for consumption and fish breeding for fish restocking and reproduction in natural streams and lakes are the two main directions for aquaculture in Latvia.

The aquaculture production was 546 tonnes in 2011 (source: FAO). Latvian aquaculture is mainly focused on carp breeding. Further farmed species are trout, sturgeon, pike and African catfish. In 2011 the five state-owned Fish Hatcheries – Tome, Dole, Karli, Brasla, Pelci released about 15 million fish larvae, juveniles and smolts. Year by year the contribution of private hatcheries to the restocking programme is growing and varies from 10-25 %.

There are a lot of small fish farms in Latvia (nearly 140), that are registered as aquaculture companies, even

though dealing only with fishing services in their backyard ponds.


5. Lithuania Pond aquaculture history started from monasteries in XVI-XVII in Lithuania. There are 18 private companies and 50 private farmers engaged in pond fish farming, it is over 10,500 hectares of ponds, with a yield of about 3,000–3,500 tonnes of carp, catfish, tench, trout, pike, eel and other fish. About 95 % of production was represented by carps. The total aquaculture production was 3,280 tonnes in 2011 (source: FAO). Over the last 10 years aquaculture production in Lithuania has increased almost by 45 %. But the production is still below the level of 1990. Also development of ecological aquaculture in Lithuania was mentioned. In 2012 the part of ecological fish products was 35 %. In our days pond fisheries is as an additional element in rural tourism and recreation. There are 24 small private companies planning to grow fish in RAS. They were financially supported from EFF 2007-2013 period, planed (declared) production - 720 tonnes fish per year.

Lithuanian Fishery Service under Ministry of Agriculture is operating with six fish breading centers and is responsible for stocking material of salmon, pike, carp, crucian carp, burbot, pikeperch, tench, trout, whitefish, peled and less common species. The juveniles are used to stock lakes, rivers and ponds. Carp selection is also being carried out. Carp growing farms and individual farmers are provided with stocking material, too. The programme of sturgeon stock restoration is started in 2011. At present capacities, it would be possible to incubate 400 million fish eggs per year, but lack of funds has limited possibilities of exploiting these opportunities.

There is no marine aquaculture at all in Lithuania because of its short coast line with sandy beaches and very windy and stormy environment.


6. Poland Freshwater aquaculture has a long tradition in Poland. The total aquaculture production was 29,043 tonnes in 2011 (source: FAO). Carp and trout are the most important aquaculture species. In general carp farms are distributed throughout Poland. The warmer conditions in the central and southern parts of the county cause the location of larger carp farms there. Trout farms are mostly located in the north on the Baltic Sea coast and in the areas with clear and cold water in the south of the country.


6.1. Pomeranian Voivodeship

Currently, more than 150 aquaculture plants work in the Pomeranian Voivodeship. Most companies are breeding finfish in freshwater ponds, basins or raceways. There is only one farm using recirculation basins. The aquaculture organisms are used for human consumption, restocking purposes and angling ponds.

The farmed species are rainbow trout, Arctic char, brook trout, sea trout, brown trout, sturgeon, carp, salmon, grayling, pike, bream, Maraena whitefish, European whitefish, tench, African catfish, silver carp, eel, pikeperch, perch, roach and crucian carp.


6.2. Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship

At the moment more than 80 aquaculture plants work in the Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship. Only two of them are public, all others private. Additional there are nearly 30 angling ponds (not mapped). Most companies are breeding finfish in freshwater ponds, basins or raceways. There are few farms using circulation basins, indoor basins or indoor circulation ponds and 2 companies breeding in cages. The aquaculture organisms are used for human consumption, restocking purposes and angling ponds.

The farmed species are rainbow trout, carp, catfish, grass carp, tench, crucian carp, perch, pikeperch, pike, roach, silver carp, bream, Maraena whitefish, European whitefish, African catfish and sturgeon.


6.3. West Pomeranian Voivodeship

Currently, more than 150 aquaculture plants work in the West Pomeranian Voivodeship. Only three of them are public, all others are private. Most companies are breeding finfish in freshwater ponds, basins or raceways. There is only one farm using recirculation freshwater ponds. Two companies have hatcheries, few use cages or lakes. The aquaculture organisms are used for human consumption, restocking purposes and angling ponds.

The farmed species are rainbow trout, Arctic char, brook trout, sea trout, brown trout, carp, tench, pikeperch, perch, sturgeon, pike, Maraena whitefish, European whitefish, crucian carp, grass carp, roach, asp, chub, burbot, catfish, silver carp, ide, eel, chub, vimba and vendace.


7. Russia

Only 0.2 % of the world aquaculture production comes from the Russian Federation, but the country has the largest water resources suitable for aquaculture in the world. After a decrease in aquaculture production in the middle of the 1990s developments took place in the sector. There are about 2,500 aquaculture companies, mostly small and medium-size businesses, in Russia with a commercial aquaculture production of around 130,000 - 140,000 tonnes. The mariculture production is less than 10,000 tonnes, yet. Now Russian aquaculture tries to introduce modern methods of breeding, cultures more species and a shift to semi-intensive methods. Big opportunities for development gives the new Federal Law “On aquaculture” adopted in the middle 2013.

Aquaculture based on recycling water and pastoral aquaculture is popular for species like salmon, sea and rainbow trout and whitefish.

There are two regions of Russia that are connected to the Baltic Sea – Kaliningrad region and Leningrad region - but no marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region of the country. Some attempts to develop it are known but without any result until now. Shallow waters and low salinity are the main restrictions for the development of marine aquaculture in the Russian Baltic Sea Region.

There are only eight commercial aquaculture enterprises in Kaliningrad region with a total aquaculture production of about 40 tonnes. Main species are carp from ponds, trout and sturgeon from cages, sterlet and African catfish from recycling systems. In Kaliningrad region only whitefish is farmed for reproduction to restore populations.

There are 38 commercial aquaculture enterprises in Leningrad region with a total production of about 5,900 tonnes in 2012. Main species are rainbow trout (95%), whitefish, carp, sturgeon and African catfish. The aquaculture production meets only 3% of the needs in this region. All restocking activity is financed by government, but can be implemented by both state and private enterprises. There are 7 state restocking plants in the Baltic Sea Region in Russia (see map). Total amount of released larvae and fingerlings is as follows:

salmon – 340,000

sea trout – 60,000

whitefish – 300,000

lampetra – 2,800,000.


(B) Potential marine aquaculture locations in the Baltic Sea

1. General aspects

“Strategic Guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture” are to be found in COM (2013) 229 final: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. It is the basis for defining national sustainable aquaculture multi-annual strategic guidelines for the Member States.

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is very important in the development and management of economic activities in the Baltic Sea and can motivate potential investors. The lack of space for mariculture can be overcome by identifying and mapping most suitable sites. But such exercises are very complex and could be done only in selected areas for aquaculture purpose. Results from exercises regarding other potential marine space uses can also be included in identifying most suitable aquaculture locations. MSP can help to minimize or avoid conflicts with other potential users and other stakeholders, can open the possibility to find synergies and is very important for small sectors like aquaculture. Investors for new aquaculture plants requiring permits, e.g. marine net cages, could benefit from MSP by shorter and more inexpensive approval procedures. Currently, authorisation procedures for aquaculture farms need 6 month (Norway) to 2-3 years in some EU member states. There is potential for improvement by reducing administrative burdens in terms of costs and time.

The subareas around the Baltic Sea offer very different environmental and ecological conditions e.g. depth, current, salinity, temperature and ice covering in winter. The countries around the Baltic Sea are at very different level regarding marine aquaculture. Since it is possible and quite inexpensive to develop sustainable marine aquaculture, the EU has appropriated resources for it. Economic and ecological acceptable aquaculture in the sea needs most suitable locations including the best candidates regarding farming and marketing.

The aquaculture activities in the Baltic Sea are stagnating lately due to administrative burden, unfavourable natural conditions and the negative impact experience of mariculture on the ecosystem. Most risks can be reduced by using best management practice and there is potential for mariculture in the Baltic Sea.

Sustainable marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) offers several possibilities:

protection of endangered fish stocks

generation and transfer of knowledge on stocking/re-stocking strategies and aquaculture technologies

direct and easy information for consumer, e.g. open days of companies

creation of value by production, processing, services, trade, investigations

job creation

meet regional demand of high quality fish products

offer more fresh (not defrosted) products to BSR consumers continuously

breeding with high EU standards of food safety, animal welfare and environmental protection

prevent long transport distances.

The sufficient supply of fish and seafood depends on aquaculture. The vast supply of imported fish products can be counteracted directly by BSR consumers by consciously and consequently buying regional aquaculture fish products. Nearly all current marine aquaculture locations are inshore respectively in sheltered areas in BSR, as close as possible to land station and in low depth water because of economic reasons. It is tried to locate mariculture out of visibility from beaches to avoid conflicts with the tourism sector. The challenge of offshore mariculture is significant exposure to wind, wave action and other users. There are efforts of locating marine aquaculture in the open sea because of local competition for space with other stakeholders, water quality problems and a partly negative public perception. “Estimates of offshore mariculture potential are based on key assumptions about its near-future development: offshore mariculture will develop within exclusive economic zones (EEZs), will mainly use culture systems


modified from inshore mariculture, and will mainly employ species with already proven culture technologies and established markets. These assumptions set the stage for the identification of analytical criteria. Thus, EEZs were used as spatial frameworks to define the limits of national offshore mariculture development. Potential was defined by the depth and current speed limits on offshore cages and longlines, the cost-effective area for offshore mariculture development, and the favourable conditions for grow-out of representative species” (FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER 549). Currently, 93 nations and territories are practicing mariculture worldwide. The following figure shows the potentially available space (very rough estimate) for marine aquaculture along the coastlines of 20 EU member states including Baltic region states.

Fig. 1: Potentially available space for marine aquaculture along the coastlines of 20 EU member states (red – close to beaches: stretches of coastline in km with a distance within 1.5 km to beaches; green – far from beaches: stretches of coastline in km with a distance > 1.5 km to beaches; countries from left to right: Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK); source: JRC report “European Aquaculture Performance Indicators” As you can see in the diagram Finland and Sweden have the highest potentially available space for marine aquaculture along the coastlines mostly far from beaches. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland only have little potentially available space mostly far from beaches, too. Especially Denmark and also Germany have some more potentially available space close to beaches in BSR.


2. Important parameters

The Baltic Sea is almost totally enclosed, quite shallow, has unique characteristics and is a fragile ecosystem. The salinity of the Baltic Sea is depending from the yearly saltwater inflow events from the North Sea, which are differ in the intensity from year to year and periods, respectively. Based on this phenomenon, the salinity in the Baltic Sea is declining from the western to the eastern part because of the very small linking to the North Sea and the large water supply by many rivers. Thus, in some areas even freshwater species find suitable living conditions. Site selection is a key factor in marine aquaculture planning, affecting both success and sustainability of the mariculture. It needs to keep in mind complex economic, legal, ecological and environmental effects (like salt water inflow events) as well as social and technical factors. Each of these parameters is interacting directly or indirectly with the environment and/or the society and therefore all decisions need a case-by-case basis.

The environmental impact of mariculture depends on different factors:

organisms farmed, e.g. finfish, mussels, algae

type of production system, e.g. net cages for fishes, long lines for mussels and algae

intensity of production

feed type

nutrient loading, e.g. N and P lost into the environment through feed wastage, fish excretion

use of chemicals (no medicine and disinfectant in net cages)

introduction of pathogens

introduction of alien species

hydrography and water quality of the aquaculture location

assimilative capacity of the ecosystem

sediment quality and bottom-dwelling animals

fish fauna in the ecosystem.

Organic substances accumulate in the region of marine net cages on the sea bottom. It can result in a local change of bottom-dwelling invertebrates and oxygen lack situations. The accumulation depends on quantity of organic substances, hydrographical conditions, species farmed and farming conditions.

Wu (1995) found an environmental significant impact usually confined to a vicinity of up to 1 km of the farm.

First of all, the investor needs a detailed idea for an aquaculture farm. He needs a decision about the to be farmed organisms and the technical equipment, e.g. net cages for a certain fish species, long lines for algae or mussels. For that purpose a good knowledge of the aquaculture sector is a pre-condition. Finfish production is expected to receive the highest profit margins in Europe. A sustainable mariculture needs the breeding of extractive organisms, e.g. mussels or algae, in Integrated Multi Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) in addition.

The next step is the search for a suitable area by careful attention of the legal conditions. Many problems can be avoided by using the international knowledge or co-operation, good planning and additional investments in special technical solutions, e.g. predator nets. Unexpected problems could occur and result in long-time and expensive challenges within the planning and building phase.

2.1. Legal conditions

There is a complex legal regulation in the field of aquaculture. National laws are basing on EU laws and international laws. Sometimes national commitments are exceeding by far EU demands.

In many cases, it is resulting in very complex regulations with unforeseeable and time-consuming licensing procedures for potential aquaculture investors. The environmental regulation seems to be the biggest administrative burden in the BSR.


Investors have to apply for several permits, e.g. in the field of building law, water law, nature protection law, shipping law and fish hygiene. Often environmental impact studies or special analyses are necessary, too. Principally modifications damaging to the environment have to remain undone and the farms have to be in conformity with general public interest, Water Framework Directive and national laws. There are e.g. public or private, military, marine environment endangering and contrary to spatial planning reasons against aquaculture activities.

Research and development in the field of aquaculture technology opens new perspectives for successful approval procedures.

Each approval depends on different criteria and often responsible public authorities offer the opportunity for consultations in preparation for the approval procedures.

2.2. Spatial requirements

The demand for water and land areas depends on the cultivated species and the technical parameters of the planned marine aquaculture farm. Space conflicts can occur with other stakeholders and users mainly in coastal waters. Krost et al. (2011) state a demand of more than 5,000 square meters in the sea and more than 500 square meters on land for a mariculture farm. Both areas have to have a good accessibility and a reasonable distance.

There are a lot of spatial compatibilities of aquaculture with other regional uses, e.g. protected areas, fisheries, tourism, wind farms, agriculture, harbors, shipping routes, cables, military use, sand extraction, oil or gas exploration or dumping of dredging material in the coastal zones. Protected areas in particular Natura 2000 regions need special planning and assessments (see “Guidance document on aquaculture activities in the Natura 2000 Network”).

Locations with minimal local ecosystem effects should be preferred areas for aquaculture. Characteristic areas e.g. stocks of macrophytes, stocks of long life mussels, stony grounds, natural reefs and other habitats worthy of protection or resting places of roosting water birds can be regional excludes. There can also be national or regional fixed minimum distance between mariculture and shoreline or other uses. Additional not only the water depth but also the distance between the deepest part of the net cage and the bottom surface is an important parameter.

The distance from shore has to be in accordance with general and local regulations corresponding to spatial planning of other users. That´s why a suitable minimum distance of finfish net cages from shore could be 1.5 nm, but the distance to major settlements should be more than 2 nm and preferably not within sight of shore users. Zebra mussel farming is restricted to enclosed coastal areas, e.g. lagoons or inlets, because of their ecological requirements. Potential mariculture locations should have no interference for waterways, minor interference for recreational activities, no or minor interference for fisheries and no or minor to moderate interferences for residents and visitors.

Offshore locations within the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) are potential near-future offshore mariculture sites. The boundaries of the EEZs are within sovereign national legal jurisdictions up to 200 nm offshore. The distance offshore from onshore infrastructure represents the economic cost limit. The cost-effective area for this development is the area within 25 nm of a port. Also locations within EEZs, but presently outside of cost-effective areas, could be of interest in the future (FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549).

2.3. Social acceptance

All potential stakeholders should be informed and included in an early planning phase. Doubts, e.g. changes of the characteristic landscape or noise pollution, should be discussed and cleared in order to avoid long-time and expensive delays. Some local people benefit from new jobs or infrastructure improvements. Good cooperation and regular communication with local communities and other stakeholders help to avoid or to solve conflicts in planning the operating of an aquaculture farm.


According to national laws most marine aquaculture plants need an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). During the consultation period of the EIA process stakeholders, e.g. local people, authorities, NGOs, businesses, have the opportunity to come up with their comments, suggestions and ideas.

The general image of aquaculture has to be improved by consumer information. Regional fish by aquaculture seems to be a worthwhile field for promotion of high qualitative, sustainable and transparent products in Baltic Sea Region. Certification, for instance in organic production of aquaculture organisms, is another possibility to realise larger markets.

2.4. Technical parameters

The local conditions have to be compatible with the technical requirements. The technical equipment of the marine aquaculture plant needs to fix in the ecosystem. The land basis requires a landing place for the working boat and the optimal distance between both locations should be considered. The best available technology should be preferred.

2. 5. Physical parameters

Physical parameters are the overall weather conditions, water movements and saltwater inflow events, submarine ground characteristics and water characteristics like depth and temperature in course of the year. Water movements are tides, waves and currents and have to be checked carfully in the planning stage.

Windy or stormy weather conditions can cause heavy losses of the marine aquaculture plant. Water movements can cause water turbidity. The water turbidity can also be influenced by aquaculture, a regular documentation is necessary. Also cold winters causing ice-covered water surface can bring problems.

Additionally, the water and sediment parameters (structure and quality) need to be known in the planning phase. The major impact is on the sediments and may result in high sediment oxygen demand up to anoxic sediments, production of toxic gases and a change in benthic diversity. Decreases of dissolved oxygen and increases of nutrient level in the water near of the farm occur.

The most present farms are located in the least exposed regions of the coastal zone, but these areas are limited and often excluded because of other uses. More exposed sites have the advantage that benthic impacts are reduced, but there is a demand for special adapted technical solutions suitable to the more intensive physical forces of the sea in these regions, e.g. submersion systems.

The best water depth for Blue mussel farming is 10-30 m, for Zebra mussel farming much lower due to shallowness of the natural habitats, e.g. < 2 m for the Curonian Lagoon (SUBMARINER, Compendium, pp. 93/94). A suitable minimum water depth of finfish net cages near the coastline could be 12 m. The distance between net bottom and seabed should be minimum 2-3 m.

Depth is also an important criterion for the present technical limits in near-future offshore mariculture potential. The suitable depth for cages and long lines is 25-100 m (FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549).

Mariculture demands adequate technical equipment for sheltered to high exposed sites. The water currents need to be suitable for effective young settlement and the uptake of particulate matter not exceeding 2 m/s for Zebra mussel farming. Blue mussel farming needs small to moderate water currents (SUBMARINER, Compendium, pp. 93/94). Finfish cages and cultured animals require moderate to higher water currents of 0.1-1 m/s (FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549). Favourable temperatures for some farmed species are given in FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549:

best temperature for Atlantic salmon: 1.5–16 °C

best temperature for blue mussel: 2.5–19 °C

best temperature for IMTA: 2.5–16 °C.

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=water&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=turbidity&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on


2. 6. Chemical water parameters

The basic water parameters relevant for aquaculture farming are the content of oxygen, toxic substances and nutrients, e.g. nitrogen and phosphorus. The salinity sets limits to the selection of species for aquaculture farming and their growth. The water quality has a high influence on the aquaculture product quality and has to be documented in each mariculture farm.

The public available data basis has to be checked and might possibly be completed by own studies. Modifications damaging the ecosystem have to remain undone. 2. 7. Ecological parameters

The influence of mariculture to the ecosystem, input and output, has to be estimated. From there is to be

considered the marine aquaculture plant can also be destroyed by stormy weather conditions resulting in the

emigration of the farmed fishes in the ecosystem. Expected pollution needs to be below the assimilative capacity

of the marine ecosystem.

Fed-aquaculture, e.g. finfish, could be problematic in eutrophic coastal waters, therefore a combination with extractive organisms, e.g. algae or mussels, should be preferred in IMTA.

Favourable food availability for the farmed species is given in FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549:

best chlorophyll-a concentration: > 0.5 mg/m3

best chlorophyll-a concentration for IMTA: > 0.5 mg/m3.

Open farming systems in the sea can influence the marine ecosystem in the field of genetic diversity caused by escaped aquaculture organisms. Therefore the national laws need to be followed, e.g. farming of native and/or triploid species. Suitable technical solutions should be used, e.g. predator nets. Other problems for the ecosystem could be parasites and diseases.

The effects to the sediment surface have to be documented in each mariculture farm. Farming damage to the benthos has to remain undone.

There is also the possibility that native ecosystem organisms influence the farmed species in a negative way, e.g. by predators, parasites, diseases or seasonal appearance of toxic algae. 2. 8. Animal welfare

The economical farming requires the concentration of many organisms, but the stocking rate has to be adapted to the needs of the farmed species. The owner has to document the animal welfare in all steps of farming and transport.

Sustainable production with better animal welfare could be certified and communicated to the consumers in order to explain higher prices.

2.9. Economic sustainability

Finally, only the investor has to decide about the business risks connected with his mariculture project. The potential farmer needs a positive economic outlook for his capital investment considering all legal, ecological, technical and social factors. Therefore the marketing strategies need to be included in the planning phase. A combination of production and processing is a realistic chance to sell higher value-added aquaculture farm products.

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=higher&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=value-added&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=farm&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on

http://dict.leo.org/#/search=product&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on


3. Potential marine aquaculture in selected countries

3.1. Denmark

Denmark has a sea area of 105,000 km2 and aquaculture has a long and well established tradition. Danish

aquaculture is strictly regulated by environmental rules and new environmental regulations have to be implemented and followed in practise. The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries works to ensure a sustainable development of the aquaculture sector through support for research and development. The most important challenge is to reduce the impact on the environment. All Danish fish farms (full recirculation eel farms excluded) have to be officially approved in accordance with the Danish Environmental Protection Act.

Danish marine fish farms have existed since the 1970’s. Denmark can expand its aquaculture production because of good natural conditions for fish farming (best for Salmonids). Mussels and seaweed should also cultivate in Danish sea farms. The potential for marine farming is estimated to 1 % of the Danish Sea - 10 km

2 for fish

breeding, 100 km2 for shellfish farming and 1000 km

2 for seaweed. The Danish potential for Salmonids, primarily

Rainbow trout, is estimated to 500,000 tonnes per year at 100 sites in the Baltic Sea. Baltic salmon culture should be demonstrated. The isle of Bornholm could be a centre (www.partiseapate.eu. Presentation Workshop Gdansk 2013 “Baltic Sea Farming: An Industry Perspective” - Karl Iver Dahl-Madsen and Lisbeth Jess Plesner, Danish Aquaculture).

Marine spatial planning is an important topic in Denmark and a sea farm plan is on its way. Environment restricts the aquaculture production.

The Danish project “Offshore aquaculture, development of technology for offshore sea farming” works in the field of developing offshore aquaculture. “The present Danish sea farms are located in the least exposed regions in the Danish fjords and sounds. Environmental constraints are limiting production increase, and new locations in the coastal zone are rarely allocated. The shortage of suitable inshore sites emphasizes the urge to move to more exposed sites where benthic impacts are reduced or eliminated. The offshore areas of the Danish sea territory holds vast areas with no or negligible activities apart from capture fishery. Venturing into these areas with aquaculture opens a major window of opportunity, but is also a serious challenge being too great for a single company to lift. The overall purpose of developing the offshore production system is to create the technical foundation for “farming the ocean”. In other words to make it possible to locate cage culture facilities in areas now not considered suitable for fish farming because of their exposure to the physical forces of the open sea. The project will develop a system based on a combination of the traditionally used circular PE gravity cage system combined with the innovative submersion system. This makes it possible for the present fish farmers to use their existing gear and methodology for harvest, feeding etc. without having to venture into a whole new technological setup. When the weather changes for the worse, the farmer can submerge the whole system below the wave action and let it stay there till the storm has passed, before he lets the system reappear at the surface and resumes normal operation procedures.” http://orbit.dtu.dk/en/projects/offshore-aquaculture-development-of-technology-for-offshore-sea-farming-38925(a3513653-7835-4f85-a917-29ee7e272d67).html.

3.2. Estonia

Aquaculture has a positive image in the society. Currently, the spatial planning of maritime areas – human activities on the sea (outside the coastline) is taking place in Estonia and the spatial planning of the maritime areas of Pärnumaa and Hiiumaa has been initiated. The extent is to the limits of the territorial waters. The idea is to map where specific activities take place, which in the coastal sea and which not.

Estonia had an aquaculture production of 374 tonnes in 2012, in 2013 is likely to produce circa 1,000 tonnes. Potential production of the actual existing freshwater and recirculation farms is estimated to nearly 2,400 tonnes per year. Four new enterprises started their production in 2011. The actual and the potential aquaculture production is mainly large rainbow trout.

http://www.partiseapate.eu/

http://www.partiseapate.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/LisbethKarl_Baltic-Sea-Farming_130416_Dansk-Akvakultur.pdf

http://orbit.dtu.dk/en/projects/offshore-aquaculture-development-of-technology-for-offshore-sea-farming-38925(a3513653-7835-4f85-a917-29ee7e272d67).html




Detailed information about the actual planning of marine aquaculture in the coastal waters of the Isle of Saaremaa is given in chapter C of this report.

3.3. Germany (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania and Schleswig Holstein)

The use of natural surface waters for aquaculture farms is nearly excluded and mostly forbidden due to environmental protection regulations and spatial conflicts. In the field of marine aquaculture especially Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture = IMTA is a future option.

Experimental marine aquaculture projects, breeding mussels, algae and fish together, already exist in the German Baltic Sea Region, but there are needs for further applied research. The general aim is the ecological sustainable, social accepted and economic stable mariculture. The best option is the combination of fed aquaculture with farming of different species of extractive organisms, e.g. algae and mussels, in IMTA using organisms adapted to the local ecosystems. In this way a balanced system can be created, with reduction at maximum or even better complete prevention of negative impacts to the ecosystem by compensation of CO2 and nutrients e.g. nitrogen, phosphorus.

Currently, German consumers do eat aquaculture products from the Baltic Sea. So, there is potential for more locally produced healthy aquaculture products, additional employment, new impulses in the field of research and development, education and tourism. The dimension of German marine aquaculture needs to bring in line ecology and economy using best possible practice.

Over the past years one might seek to introduce aquaculture systems that are land-based. Many closed recirculation systems are indoors. There are important advantages compared to open aquaculture systems like little waste, little risk of disease and no threat that the fish will escape into the wild.

Investors are looking for suitable locations for new recirculation plants. Disused agricultural buildings like barns or halls can be used for aquaculture facilities. Two separate areas are needed, one for production (minimum 30-70 m

2) and one for processing (minimum 20-30 m

2). The recirculation technology for aquaculture has developed in

recent years and is still developing. There are several companies specialised in construction and installation of complete recirculation plants. The combination of traditional aquaculture farms with biogas plants is profitable because of the energy bonus according to the Renewable Energy Law.

Aquaponic is a special farming system and combines aquaculture with cultivating plants in hydroponic systems in a symbiotic form. It is also an alternative to farmers as it offers an ecological way to monitor the nutrient cycle in the systems. The basic idea of aquaponic systems is that nutrients from the aquaculture system are resorbed by the plants. And the so “cleaned” water is pumped back to the aquaculture system. Well educated staff and ongoing training are essential prerequisites for successful aquaponic farming.

Land-based systems offer the chance to raise fish in close vicinity to cities thus keeping transportation costs to the consumers low. Aquaculture can be an important step for regional development and local employment creation. The improvement of technology could allow the introduction of new native and non-native species.

3.4. Latvia In 2013 the coastal zone infrastructure plan will be worked out. In the guidelines aquaculture is not mentioned. Three years ago when the document base was worked out, aquaculture was not so popular. Theoretically, the guideline assessment is prepared in accordance with the activity plan, but in the same time it is possible to include proposals.

For the next years there is planned a considerable EU support for the aquaculture development in the sea. According to the EU regulation Latvia will work out the aquaculture multi-annual strategic guidelines for year 2014 – 2020, which will determine the aim, activity directions and tasks that are planned for developing of the Latvian aquaculture sector including marine aquaculture.


Latvia does not have any positive experience in marine aquaculture. No one has actually started a practical work in the sea, but recently there have appeared new projects, that want to develop mariculture. As an example there can be mentioned a businessman who contacted the Ministry of Agriculture and indicated an interest in developing aquaculture beyond coastal waters – in metal construction cages in 30 m depth, cages that could be turned-down at different depths levels depending on the required water temperature, thus preventing against waves, wind and ice effect. Currently, this application is in the phase of consideration in the Ministry of Agriculture, and is the first practical situation for aquaculture activity inception in Latvian sea waters.

It is possible to breed fish in Latvian sea waters, for instance cod, salmon, sea trout, rainbow trout, other salmonids or whitefish. Of course, care should be taken with regards to water environment pollution. However, if there will be a serious and realistic project, then MEPRD as one of the competent institutions will review and evaluate whether aquaculture activities must be forbidden or allowed in the Gulf of Riga, because it is a very sensitive ecosystem. The possibility to breed molluscs or algae in the Gulf of Riga that probably does not create pollution can be evaluated. It could be possible to breed fishes in the open coast of Kurzeme. There are no strict positions, each case should be evaluated.

In marine spatial planning at first there are excluded those territories that are, for instance, seaways, harbours, military training sites. Immediately there are also excluded the protected sea territories, and in these it is not possible to develop aquaculture. Theoretically the remaining territories can be used but each case must be considered individually before initiating a practical activity.

In relation to integration, at present the new direction is that by connecting aquaculture with activity of the wind farms the development of a fine natural preserve is taking place, as shipping is not allowed in these territories. Thus it is the protected territory.

For aquaculture development issue it is necessary to look not only at the sea but also at the land side by using sea water through bores on land built farms that could be taken into account in the coastal zone planning and sea spatial plan. Technologies are proceeding and developing, for instance, amounts of the aquaculture production could increase by using recirculation systems.

3.5. Lithuania

Within the new period of the Common Fishery Policy for 2014 – 2020 aquaculture will get more attention. Development of aquaculture will go by two axes - sustainability and innovations. 38 new supported ways to improve aquaculture are provided in new CFP - 13 to make fishery and aquaculture sustainable and 27 for innovations.

The Lithuanian Baltic coastal areas have wide although still unused perspectives to implement aquaculture projects. Aquaculture integrating into spatial planning programmes and linked maps already started. Reviewing for a current marine environment situation offers information about sea relief studies, sediments, substrate, fish breeding places and marine resources (wind, oil, fish resources, shipping intensity).

It is necessary to look for new ways of efficient usage of marine resources aimed not only for the development of scientific and business potential, promotion of the economy but also focused on the improvement of the environment of the Baltic Sea. Mussels can be cultivated not only for fodder but also for bio-fertilizers, they can also be used in water treatment projects. So growing it in aquaculture could be just for environment protection, which could be very useful after 10 or 20 years. It is impossible now to get marketable size of mussels.

Geothermal resources of the Western Lithuania may be used for fish farming. Marine water from Nida to Smiltyne is good for aquaculture. In other places water is not good enough. For now Lithuania do not has any plans for offshore aquaculture installations.

Currently, there is too much attention for nowadays situation and too less for aquaculture and fishery future inclusive future resources planning. Access to suitable sites for aquaculture production can be difficult. Major concerns exist over the application of Environmental Impact Assessment rules at the local level. They are often


applied in a way which constrains aquaculture development. There must be some changes and Lithuanians have to work on that. Necessary changes are to improve competitiveness of the aquaculture industry management and make National multiannual strategic plan.

There are no particular requirements for aquaculture, but sustainability should be one of the main. Currently, accordingly to the developed state of the ICZM strategy, there are no restrictions against aquaculture development. The main ecological factor affecting the development of marine aquaculture is protected areas, Natura 2000 areas. Economic factors are shipping ways and fishing areas.

Lithuania has to leave some space for innovations even if now it looks impossible, even if now can’t develop aquaculture in Lithuanian small marine water areas. It is possible that there won’t be any place for aquaculture in marine waters in the future, but if there will be potential of marine aquaculture they have to take example from other European countries for aquaculture development in Lithuania.

Baltic marine waters protection should be one of the priorities. Every new business plan should be object for environment impact assessment.

3.6. Poland The Polish coast does not create favourable conditions for the development of aquaculture. Most of the coastline without bays and lagoons does not provide protection against strong waves during storms. Thus, any actions in the field of aquaculture have potentially the best conditions in the Gulf of Gdansk mainly the Puck Bay, and the Vistula Lagoon or Szczecin Lagoon. All of these areas are currently Natura 2000 areas with all the associated constraints to aquaculture.

In addition, the adverse factors occurring in the coastal zone of the Polish Baltic Sea salinity is at 7 per thousand. This is the most stressful salinity to aquatic organisms. At that salinity, these organisms spend relatively much power to regulate their osmotic balance. Thus, the growth rate is strongly affected, what is a very unfavourable aspect in terms of breeding them.

Another negative aspect is the experience derived from the 80ies of the twentieth century, in those years cage culture of rainbow trout was carried out in the Puck Bay. The economical and environmental results of that activity were weak, e.g. as feed the wastes from the local fish processing plant was used. The collapse of communistic polity together with the economic collapse caused the abandonment of the farm and idea of any fish aquaculture in the region.

At the moment, there are no officially known plans for the development of fish aquaculture in the Polish zone of the Baltic Sea.

The only known planned activities in the field of aquaculture related to the possible cultivation of zebra mussel (Dreisena polymorpha) and blue mussel (Mytilus edulis). In the area of the Szczecin Lagoon works on a molluscs contribution towards counteracting eutrophication with zebra mussel were conducted in the 1980-90's.. Further works in this direction declares University of Szczecin with the activity: Research and development of farming zebra mussels. In the Gulf of Gdansk works similar type on blue mussel declares the University of Gdansk and the National Marine Fisheries Institute as the project: Development of mussel farming under the Baltic conditions (SUBMARINER project).

There is no any information about final localization of such activities in Polish marine areas. Potentially it is possible in all zones of internal sea waters and coastal waters designed as molluscs and crustacean habitat shellfish.


In western Poland were designated seven such areas:

Odra river close to Szczecin

Roztokę Odrzańską (Odra River Mount)

Zalew Szczeciński, (Szczecin Lagoon)

Świnę, (Świna River estuary)

Dziwną, (Dziwna River estuary)

Zatokę Pomorską, (Pomerania Bay)

"Central coastmarine waters".

3.7. Russia

The Federal Law “On Aquaculture” has been adapted in July, 2013. It gives new opportunities for development.

The Law establishes:

main definitions concerning aquaculture

principles of state regulation of aquaculture

proprietary rights on aquaculture facilities and breeding fishes

governmental support of aquaculture

organisation of aquaculture business.

There is a plan to develop four aquaculture enterprises equipped with recycling systems in Kaliningrad region, and that will reach the following production:

sturgeon – 1500 tonnes and 4.5 tonnes of caviar,

pick-perch – 500 tonnes,

rainbow trout – 1000 tonnes.

A regional programme for development of aquaculture in Kaliningrad region has been adopted in 2012. This programme provides for compensation of 30% of the cost of building infrastructure for aquaculture.

Some attempts to develop mariculture are known but without any result until now. Shallow waters and low salinity are the main restrictions for the development of marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region of Russia.


(C) Detailed information of selected study sites

1. Plans for marine aquaculture - Bornholm (Denmark)

The only place registered for land-based aquaculture production on Isle of Bornholm is AquaBaltic (before Bornholms Lakseklækkeri) in Nexø. The facility is a recirculation aquaculture plant. They are mainly producing fish for research projects and are registered as a freshwater closed aquaculture facility (recirculation), hatchery/nursery with a production of 3,200 kg trout per year. It is possible to use saltwater from the sea in the facilities as well. Bornholms Lakseklækkeri produced salmon (Salmo salar, 1995-2000) and cod (Gadus morhua, 2007-2009) for national stocking/re-stocking enhancement measures. The wild salmon broodstock originated from Sweden and the stocking area for the 500,000 smolts was the coast of Bornholm. The wild cod broodstock originated from the Baltic Sea and the stocking area was Bornholm basin.

Additionally, there are 3 “put and take” lakes on the Isle of Bornholm. The fish used for out and take are primary trout raised and imported from outside the island.

Currently, there are no offshore aquaculture production sites around the Island of Bornholm. Permissions have not been given for years, but there is more political will nowadays and permissions will probably be given.


Five potential areas for aquaculture sea cages have been selected around Bornholm and should be investigated further. They do not have any plans for the selected areas around Bornholm to combine wind and aquaculture.

There are more detailed plans for one of the five areas just 2-3 nautical miles from the coastline east of the harbour of Nexø and of the hatching station at the harbour, AquaBaltic. They do not expect any problems to establish sea cages around Bornholm as there is only a few costal fishing vessels left today. The cages will be placed outside 2-3 nautical miles from the coastline and they will not disturb tourists or other costal interests. The area outside Nexø is so deep and the water flow so high that this area alone should be able to produce 15,000 tones of salmon. There is water depth of 30-40 meters there. Bornholm is not included in the nitrogen quotas for other Danish areas because it is so small compared to the farming industry and other sources.

The possible production area near Nexø is well investigated for fish farming – the four other mentioned areas are less and some of them just suggestions. The largest problem is to get a licence (the environmental approval) to produce.

As soon as they have an environmental permission to produce fish at sea, they are able to build a farm, they claim. It is a political decision and no one knows how long time it can take. This place should be an ideal place for sea cages concerning the direction of the wind and reduced risk of ice at wintertime. Salinity at Bornholm is around 6 per thousand, up to 9 per thousand when we get a lot of new saltwater into the Baltic Sea. The salinity is much lower compared with the oceans conditions e.g. in Norway and that makes it possible to put the fish to sea at a smaller size and there are no problems with sea lice – because they cannot live in such low salinity. They actual calculate with 10 to 15 % more growth in lower salinity because the fish uses less energy to get rid of salt. During a whole year they have a 10 month growth period compared to 7 months in Norway because the water is warmer. They want to focus on another salmon that they produce in Norway. It could also be an organic salmon.

They actually do not see so many problems to start fish farming at sea as long as they just get the license from the authorities to do it. They have very good connections to the largest producer at sea in Denmark, Musholm on Zealand, and they will assist them with help in a starting period. They can make 400,000 fry (very small Salmon) and ongrow them to parr at AquaBaltic, but they probably would need to build another facility on shore to ongrow the parr to a suitable size (smolt). The smolt will finally be transferred to sea cages.

Start up can be 500 tonnes in 2014 and a prospective is 15,000 tonnes in a few years around Bornholm. The Danish aquaculture association claims that the perspective for the whole Baltic Sea is an annual production of 200,000 tonnes of salmon.

Currently, they plan to make a report of impact on the environment (in Danish a “VVM” report) for a fish farm north of Nexø. That will take 2 months and cost about ½ million DKK. When they have the report they will send it to the authorities and then they think they soon will get a “yes” to start up.

There is an idea to sell “folk stocks” (a very little share of the fish farm). Then local people will be more committed and better accept/support the activities.

They also test farming of sea weed as well at the moment to compensate for the nitrate from the fish production at the farm. They do not know if the sea weed can be produced close to the fish farm or it has to be done closer to the shore in more protected areas. Mussels cannot be cultivated here because they become too small. The share of protein compared to the content of shells is simply too low even to be used as feed in the agriculture sector.


2. Plans for marine aquaculture - Saaremaa (Estonia)

The Isle of Saaremaa is situated in the open part of the Baltic Sea and has less human activity, higher waves, higher salinity and lower nutrient concentration than a lot of other Estonian coastal areas.

Ösel Harvest OÜ Company started in 2009 and has a hatchery with a recirculation aquaculture system for growing small portion trout. Additionally, the company has brood stock and nursery grow out of crustaceans for human consumption. The company has the idea to grow the fry on land and try out the net cage breeding in the coastal waters of Saaremaa. The building of a sump is planned to have in two stages. The first part will take place in the vicinity of Veere harbour, where the permission for growing 200 tonnes of fish has been applied. The scheme and the bearings of the location are seen on the picture below.

Later, when the business and the technologies will be proved successful, a plan to expand the activity in high sea to increase the capacity up to 1,000 tonnes will be considered. The company Ösel Harvest OÜ has RAS which can be suitable for 150-200 tonnes fish for pre-growing.

Unfortunately, the development of sump grow is hindered by Estonian legislation that requires the appliance of a building title for placing sumps. Seabed is public property and the particular permission can only be given by government. The administrative process of placing sumps that is considered equal to building of wind farms and harbours will obviously be quite long.

However, the Estonian AQUAFIMA partners can make a proposal for getting the process more simplified. In June 2013 they prepared a permission requests for the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications.


3. Potential land-based aquaculture locations – the county of Mecklenburg Lake District (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania/Germany) The county of Mecklenburg Lake District is situated in the southern part of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania. It is the largest German county by area with 5,496 square kilometres. Currently, there are 8 aquaculture plants in this region (of total 22 in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania). The actual aquaculture plants are ponds, artificial basins or a combination of both.

The federal state Mecklenburg-West Pomerania explicitly supports new land-based aquaculture locations and investments. The site research in the county Mecklenburg Lake District was done to offer a variety of suitable locations to potential investors. This can facilitate investments and speed up authorization procedure. The report includes 20 potential locations for partial or full warm water recirculation plants based on areas currently free or in near future free of utilization. Each of these locations was assessed relating to dimension of the area, ownership structures, compliance with planning law, state of development and site-specific features.

Fig. 2: Potential aquaculture locations in the county of Mecklenburg Lake (source: Landgesellschaft Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (2013): Ermittlung potentieller Aquakulturstandorte im Landkreis Mecklenburgische Seenplatte.)


Tab. 4: Potential aquaculture locations in the county of Mecklenburg Lake District (source: Landgesellschaft Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (2013): Ermittlung potentieller Aquakulturstandorte im Landkreis Mecklenburgische Seenplatte.)

number post code and location dimension owner compliance with planning law

state of development

1 17153 Stavenhagen 1,5 ha privat developed trade and industrial area

complete developed

2 17153 Stavenhagen 3,8 ha City of Stavenhagen

developed trade and industrial area

complete developed

3 17153 Basepohl up to 50 ha Institute for Federal

Real Estate

conversation area to developed

complete developed

4 17139 Malchin

up to 12 ha City of Malchin trade area complete developed

5 17034 Neubrandenburg

up to 127 ha

Commune Trollenhagen

trade and industrial area

partly developed


8,78 ha City of

Neubrandenburg

and Municipal

Corporation


complete developed


12,54 ha OVVD trade and industrial area

complete developed

8 17348 Woldegk

9,54 ha contact via UBW Consulting


complete developed

9 17235 Neustrelitz

6,36 ha contact via city council Neustrelitz

industrial area complete developed

10 17235 Neustrelitz

8,0 ha Public Services Neustrelitz

trade area, special area horticulture production

complete developed

11 17235 Neustrelitz

2,39 ha City of Neustrelitz industrial area complete developed

12 17209 Leizen

up to 18 ha Commune Leizen and privat


complete developed

13 17207 Röbel

up to 4,0 ha

City of Röbel (Müritz)


complete developed along the street

14 17213 Malchow

13 ha City of Malchow trade and industrial area

complete developed along the street

15 17091 Rosenow

up to 5 ha OVVD trade and industrial area

complete developed

16 17258 Conow

1,5 ha Gut Conow according to § 35

Town and Country

Planning Code

partly developed

17 17111 Kletzin

0,74 ha CARGO Lagerverwaltungs GmbH (liquidate)

trade area complete developed

18 17192 Torgelow am See

10,11 ha private, partly commune area

according to § 35

Town and Country

Planning Code

partly developed

19 17192 Alt Gaarz

2,09 ha Commune Neu Gaarz, private

inner area partly developed

20 17192 Alt Schönau

4,50 ha MVA Neu Schönau GmbH

according to § 35

Town and Country

Planning Code

partly developed


A specification and recommendation to a special kind of aquaculture production was not done in the study because of the very special standards, e.g. water quality or temperature, for different aquaculture species and to avoid constraints for potential investors.

Potential investors and operators of aquaculture plants recommended to include areas less than 1 ha, too. Recirculation plants could also build in smaller dimensions.

It is difficult to get information about conditions regarding purchasing, leasing and water prices on study purposes. Owners and providers prefer direct negotiations with potential investors. Some locations have high effective wastewater treatment plants. The possibilities and costs for wastewater in other locations depend on its quality. There could also be the possibility to direct leading-in wastewater in receiving waters depending on its quality. Providers will try to find a suitable solution for potential investors.

Depending on quantity and quality of mud accumulates in the aquaculture plants it could be used by surrounding farmers.

Some locations have already heat capacity, e.g. heating, biomass heating or biogas plants. The combination of aquaculture in closed recirculation plants and biogas plants is making sense from the technical point of view and is economically interesting.


Summary

The interaction and collaboration of stakeholders, policymakers, scientists and environmental institutions is a necessary step in the implementation of a sustainable regional development in the field of aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region. The AQUAFIMA project aims to assist with this process.

Marine aquaculture in the Baltic Sea Region exists until now only on a very low level, because of an overall lack of sites with suitable hydrological conditions and low salinity. But there are potentials for the further development of aquaculture of this region for instance in the field of sea-ranching. Aquaculture can develop in offshore or remote areas with less environmental effects. Such possibilities are tested in several smaller projects.

In the recent past there is a strong increase of rules throughout the EU. Strategic Guidelines for the sustainable development of EU aquaculture name the four priority areas for EU aquaculture development: administrative procedures, coordinated spatial planning, competitiveness and a level playing field.

Promoting a sustainable and resource efficient aquaculture establishes the confidence of consumers in regional produced aquaculture products. Increasing demand of regional produced fish stimulates investors to build aquaculture farms in the Baltic Sea Region. Through spatial, infrastructural and environmental planning potential aquaculture sites can be determined and offered to investors. This leads to employment within aquaculture and ancillary activities.

The use of natural surface waters for aquaculture farms is nearly excluded and mostly forbidden due to environmental protection regulations and spatial conflicts in some regions. Therefore one might seek to introduce aquaculture systems that are land-based. Land-based systems offer the chance to raise fish close to markets.


References

BRÄMICK, U. 2011. Jahresbericht zur Deutschen Binnenfischerei 2010. Institut für Binnenfischerei e.V. Potsdam-Sacrow. Landgesellschaft Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (2013).Ermittlung potentieller Aquakulturstandorte im Landkreis Mecklenburgische Seenplatte.

FAO: A global assessment of offshore mariculture potential from a spatial perspective. FAO FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE TECHNICAL PAPER, 549.

http://agrifish.dk/home.aspx?ID=16472

http://aquabaltic.dk/

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Aqua-N2000%20guide.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/aquaculture/official_documents/com_2013_229_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/documentation/studies/documents/economic_effects_maritime_spatial_ planning_en.pdf

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/maritime_affairs_and_fisheries/index_en.htm

https://chr.fvst.dk/chri/faces/frontpage?_adf.ctrl-state=z2mij1l4m_15 (15 July 2013) http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/111111111/27600/1/jrc_g04_fishreg_eapi%20final.pdf

https://www.destatis.de


http://www.aqua.dtu.dk/English/Research/Aquaculture.aspx

http://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/fiskeri-og-akvakultur.aspx

http://www.eurofishmagazine.com/magazine, Eurofish Magazin 4/2013, pp. 31-33.

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_denmark/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_estonia/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_germany/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_lithuania/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_poland/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_russiafed/en

http://www.fao.org/fishery/facp/LVA/en

http://www.lawa.de/documents/Gewaesserbelastung_Fischhaltung_5e8.pdf

http://agrifish.dk/home.aspx?ID=16472

http://aquabaltic.dk/




http://www.aqua.dtu.dk/English/Research/Aquaculture.aspx

http://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/fiskeri-og-akvakultur.aspx

http://www.eurofishmagazine.com/magazine

http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_estonia/en


http://www.mst.dk/English/Industry/aquaculture

http://www.partiseapate.eu. Presentation Workshop Gdansk 2013 “Baltic Sea Farming: An Industry Perspective” - Karl Iver Dahl-Madsen and Lisbeth Jess Plesner, Danish Aquaculture.

http://www.portal-fischerei.de/

http://www.statistik-mv.de http://www.statistik-nord.de/uploads/tx_standocuments/CVI1_Aquakultur_2011_S.pdf

http://www.vet.agri.ee/static/body/files/1620.Fish%20farms%20EE_en_08_03_2013.pdf

http://www.vet.agri.ee/static/body/files/1621.Crustacean%20farms_EE_en_08_03_2013.pdf KAPETSKY, J.M., AGUILAR-MANJARREZ, J. & JENNESS, J. (2013): A global assessment of potential for offshore mariculture development from a spatial perspective. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 549. Rome, FAO. 181 pp. PAAVER, T., TOHVERT, T. & KANGUR, M. (2001): History of aquaculture research in Estonia. Proc. Estonian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ecol., 2001, 50, 3, pp. 211–221.

Umweltministerium Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (1998): Netzgehege-Produktion von Fischen in den Küstenge- wässern Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns – internes Dokument.

WU, R. S. S. (1995): The Environmental Impact of Marine Fish Culture: Towards a Sustainable Future. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 31, Nos 4-12, pp. 159-166.

http://www.partiseapate.eu/

http://www.partiseapate.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/LisbethKarl_Baltic-Sea-Farming_130416_Dansk-Akvakultur.pdf

http://www.vet.agri.ee/static/body/files/1621.Crustacean%20farms_EE_en_08_03_2013.pdf

titel kann auch über zwei zeilen – titel titel

Documents