6. AQUACULTURE MANAGEMENT AREAS

The designation and operation of an aquaculture management area (AMA) lies at the heart of the ecosystem approach to aquaculture. It is at this level of organization that collective farm and environmental management decisions are made that can more broadly protect the environment, reduce risk for aquaculture investors, and minimize conflict with other natural resource users.
There are activities that are amenable to area management that often fail to be effective when implemented at the individual farm level.

Examples include the coordination of cropping cycles for sales and marketing purposes; synchronicity of treatments in disease management; environmental monitoring that ensures the cumulative effects of multiple farms are not unduly harming the environment; waste treatment and management; collective negotiation of input (e.g. feed supply) and service (e.g. monitoring) contracts; collective certification and marketing of products; the ability to implement a comprehensive biosecurity and veterinary plan; and provision of collective representation to the government and with other stakeholders. The key steps in the definition and management of AMAs are:
(i) delineation of management area boundaries with appropriate stakeholder consultation;
(ii) establishing an area management entity involving
local communities as appropriate;
(iii) carrying capacity and environmental monitoring of AMAs;
(iv) disease control in AMAs;
(v) better management practices;
(vi) group certification; and
(vii) essential steps in the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of a management plan for an AMA.

 

6.1 Delineation of management area boundaries

with appropriate stakeholder consultation Within a defined aquaculture zone, AMA boundaries can be based on biophysical, environmental, socioeconomic and/or governance based criteria that, by overlapping, result in one geographical area with an identifiable physical/ecosystem base. For ease of regulation, AMAs should ideally be within one governance administrative unit (e.g. municipal, state, district, region). The AMA should be large enough to make a real difference in the ability of the components to increase their operating efficiency, but small enough to be functional and easily managed.
Without specific governmental interference, farms and farmers will often self-organize around areas that are good for aquaculture. Their designation as aquaculture management areas simply allows for more formal and better overall management.
The most common means to delineate an AMA is related to disease, in particular disease transfer, which is spread through a common water source. Since diseases move through water and environmental loading is a function of the outflow of nutrients and wastes from all farms within a given area, it would be typical for the AMA to be delineated by the water surface/supply that is shared by all farms within it. Ensuring that all users of a common water source are in the same AMA creates incentives for cooperation in maintaining good water quality and in coordinated disease management.
In cases where it is not obvious how water flow and diseases move from farm to farm, it may be necessary to develop a hydrological (freshwater) or hydrodynamic (marine water) map of the area.
Such a map would identify major water sources, or tides and currents, that effect water movement or flows, and will assist in determining where the AMA boundaries should be located.
It is important that all farms within a designated AMA cooperate. Failure by one or a few farms to participate fully and to find solutions to problems when they occur may result in farmers who do participate becoming discouraged with a resultant loss of interest in cooperating. This is potentially wasteful in terms of time and energy on the part of the government seeking to sustainably develop aquaculture.
It is not always the case that farms in close physical proximity necessarily share a common water supply.
In these circumstances, due to their close proximity, it may increase the likelihood of a disease transfer through other means (e.g. sharing workers, predation of diseased stock by birds that are then dropped into the neighbouring farm), and these farms should be extra vigilant in managing how they interact to minimize the overall risks.
Broadly, designating physical boundaries for cage aquaculture in a lake or embayment is relatively straightforward (Figure 5a). Pond aquaculture systems are more complex, as it is often difficult to spatially arrange ponds in any meaningful way; for example, in a river delta where the catchment (and therefore the water source) may be significantly larger and more dispersed than the aquaculture activity using that water. Nonetheless, attempts should be made to delineate AMAs for freshwater pond systems (e.g. Figure 5b), and then to undertake periodic assessments to ensure they function correctly. It is much easier to organize AMAs before aquaculture becomes well established, and therefore difficult to move, rather than later when farms are already operating and unable to relocate. Nonetheless, the rewards from better management, perhaps increased production, better coordination of shared resources and reduction of risk, mean that even where farms are long established the development of an AMA system is worth the time and effort.
It is not necessary that an AMA is specific to a single kind of aquaculture system or to a single species. For example, IMTA provides the by-products, including waste, from one aquatic species as inputs (fertilizers, food) to another.
Farmers combine fed aquaculture monitoring (e.g. fish, shrimp) with inorganic extractive (e.g. seaweed) and organic extractive (e.g. shellfish) aquaculture to create balanced systems for environment remediation (biomitigation), economic stability (improved output, lower cost, product diversification and risk reduction), and social acceptability (better management practices).
IMTA is most appropriate at the landscape level, and it is thus very relevant for an AMA. The delineation of management area boundaries should be done in consultation with all relevant stakeholders.
A consultation process is an opportunity for stakeholders to obtain information as well as give feedback. Stakeholders can use the opportunity to educate about the local context, raise issues and concerns, ask questions, and potentially make suggestions for the delineation of the management area. Therefore, a planned participatory process with consultation with all relevant stakeholders needs to be in place, commencing with clear objectives about what is to be achieved.