|
May 2000 |
EIFAC/XXI/2000/Inf.11 |
to main page
|
EUROPEAN INLAND FISHERIES ADVISORY COMMISSION |
|
TWENTY-FIRST SESSION |
|
Budapest, Hungary, 1-7 June 2000 |
|
AQUATIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN EUROPEAN AQUACULTURE |
A study report by the EIFAC
Ad hoc Working Party on Aquatic Resources Management in AquacultureCompiled by the Convener Professor Hans Ackefors
Dept. of Zoology Stockholm University
S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
E-mail: [email protected]; tel: +46-8-164020 ; fax: +46-8-167715PREAMBLE
At the nineteenth session of the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission in Dublin, Ireland, 11-19 June 1996 the convener, H. Ackefors presented the Summary Report of the First ad hoc Meeting of the Working Party on Aquatic Resources Management in Aquaculture held 8-9 May1995, in Rome. The report addressed (i) proposed Terms of Reference, (ii) cooperation with the ICES Working Group on Environmental Interactions of Mariculture, (iii) formats proposed for the preparation of country reports, and (iv) suggestions for future activities of the Working Party. The Commission considered the proposed Terms of Reference, which were approved (Report of 19th Session, paragraph 64; see FAO, 1996).
The above-mentioned Summary Report of the First ad hoc Meeting had been sent in summer 1995 to all EIFAC National Correspondents, inviting them to identify experts and to encourage them to join the efforts of the Working Party. On this occasion, a suggested questionnaire/format for country reports was distributed. Responses were requested to be returned to the Convener by April 1996.
During an ad hoc Meeting (15 June 1996) the Working Party recognized that the questionnaire was too comprehensive, and that proper treatment of the questions would require considerable time and effort. It was therefore decided to proceed gradually, focussing first on problems of water supply for aquaculture.
It was agreed that the questionnaire be revised by the Convener so as to focus primarily on water supply aspects in aquaculture, and that efforts be undertaken to encourage participation in the Working Party of experts from the United Kingdom and Ireland as well as Eastern and Southern European countries. The Commission recommended that all data and information on water supply aspects in aquaculture be compiled and sent to the Convener at the latest by 31 March 1997. Later the schedule was changed.
The questionnaire (Appendix 1) was divided into two parts. The first one to be finalized by September 1997 and the second part to be finalized by January 1998. Only ten countries gave rather comprehensive reports and one country reported only on questionnaires in part 2. Another few countries gave incomplete reports which have not been included in this report. About ten countries did not respond at all. For this reason there will not be a complete overview over the conditions in Europe.
The convener of the Working Party wants to thank those scientists and others from member countries who have responded to the questionnaire. It was necessary to shorten the contributions when doing this compilation of facts. I apologize for that.
The complete questionnaire (on the subject " Water Management within Aquaculture and Interactions with Other Users") is attached as Appendix 1 to this report. Eleven countries have reported, viz. Czech Republic (only part 2), Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden and UK. The countries represent various geographical parts of Europe:
- Eastern Europe (Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland)
- Western Europe (Ireland and United Kingdom)
- Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden and Finland))
- Baltic States (Estonia and Lithuania)
- Israel
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am very grateful for facts and information given by the following EIFAC correspondents:
Frantisek Vácha Czech Republic
László Váradi Hungary
Andrzej Karpinski Poland
Christopher Moriarty Ireland
Phil Hickley and Helena Tompkins United Kingdom
Leif Lykke Nielsen Denmark
Martii Rask, Unto Eskelinen and Markku Pursiainen Finland
Bo Holmberg and Hans Ackefors Sweden
Lauri Vaaja Estonia
Vytautas Vaitiekunas Lithuania
Dan Mires Israel
Summary *
1. Introduction *
2. Water supply for aquaculture and other users *
2.1 Introduction *
2.2. Amount of available water per capita *
2.3. Allocation of water to various activities *
2.4. Extraction and paying for water *
2.5.Water sources for aquaculture *
3. Aquaculture technology *
3.1. Introduction *
3.2. Practiced technology in Europe *
3.3. The farming technique *
4. Interactions with other users of water *
4.1. Introduction *
4.2. The competition with other users of water and sites *
4.3. The impact of water pollution from other activities on aquaculture *
5. Water quality *
5.1. Acidification *
5.2. Radioactivity problems *
5.3. Pesticides *
5.4. Industrial waste and eutrophication *
6. Water management within the farm *
6.1. Introduction *
6.2. Oxygen *
6.3. Metal concentration *
6.4. Fish ponds as treatment units for polluted water *
6.5. Treatment of ponds *
7. Discharge of water *
7.1. Introduction *
7.2. Examples from various countries *
7.3. Conclusions *
8. Water management of processing plants *
9. Aquaculture water management for the benefit of society *
10. The status of inland aquaculture in Europe *
10.1. Historical notes *
10.2. The importance of aquaculture *
10.3. The production in various countries *
10.4. The inland production versus marine production *
10.5. Employment and income in remote areas *
11. The species composition in inland aquaculture *
11.1. Introduction *
11.2. The species composition in various countries *
12. Stock enhancement *
12.1 Introduction *
12.2. Stocking program in various countries *
13. Sport and recreational fisheries *
14. Institutional and legal framework governing aquaculture and water use *
15. Regulation of discharged water *
16. Records of the operation *
17. Diseases in aquaculture *
18. Research activities *
19. Farmers and their organisations- public opinion on aquaculture *
20. Conclusions *
21. References *
Appendix 1. Questionnaires *
Appendix 2. Species occurring in freshwater aquaculture *
Appendix 3. Working Party Contact Details *
In Europe the supply of freshwater varies between countries, depending on different precipitation and climate conditions. Higher temperatures in the middle and southern parts of Europe increases the evapotranspiration and this might create a water deficit. Generally speaking the amounts of surface water and ground water for aquaculture and other activities therefore vary from north to south. In addition, the available water quantity per capita is a function of the population size.
A comparison of the use of water in the countries investigated shows that in many of these most of the water goes to the industrial sector. In only a few countries more water is being used for domestic or agricultural purposes.. In Denmark aquaculture uses a lot of water (in this case calculated as the river flow) while in most countries usually aquaculture industry uses less water than other functions in the societies.
Extraction of water is usually regulated by national laws and in some countries farmers have to pay for water use. The aquaculture industry uses mostly surface water (rivers and lakes), but well water and ground water is also used to some extent.
The aquaculture technology put into practice varies from pond cultures in eastern Europe, the Baltic states, and Denmark to cage culture in the UK and Sweden. In Finland both types of technology are applied. In most countries except Hungary and Israel, flow-through systems are used. Poland, UK and Finland report on raceways systems. The latter country also refers to indoor aquaculture as a common method. Closed systems (recirculating systems) are practiced in Denmark and Israel to a large extent although they are in use also in most other countries.
Large pond areas (10,000 to 50,000 ha) are reported from Lithuania, Hungary and Poland. In other countries with cage cultures, incomplete statistics do not reveal the size of such cultures except for Sweden. In Sweden more than 1,000 cages are used with a capacity of 368, 000 m3.
Interaction or competition with other water users are generally of minor importance although there might be problems with the tourist industry and in some urban areas. There is a negative impact on aquaculture from bad water quality, this being cause mainly by acidification, eutrophication, industrial wastes and humic acids. Pretreatment at the site of supplied water is common. Ponds are treated with lime for two reasons, i.e. to raise pH due to the influence by acidification and to disinfect pond bottoms. The industry also reports on gas problems, and too high iron and manganese concentrations in the water.
The discharge of water from aquaculture operations can be a problem which might be alleviated by various treatment procedures. There are regulations on discharge in most countries and the farmers must reduce the nutrients and organic material emanating from farming operations. Methods to limit pollution are sedimentation ponds, whirl separators, mechanical filter systems as triangle filter, drum and plate filters. Recently, systems aimed at collecting waste waters in cage culture have been designed.
The importance of inland aquaculture in Europe is obvious. In 1996 aquaculture harvest in eastern Europe was 57.1% of the total aquatic production (77,046 versus 134,958 tonnes) and the corresponding figure for western Europe was 66.8% (252,888 versus 378,360 tonnes). Thus the aquaculture production is higher than the yield from capture fisheries.
The inland aquaculture production compared to marine aquaculture production is rather high in some countries with a long coast, e.g. Sweden and Denmark (38.5% and 81.2%, respectively of the total aquaculture yield).
Inland aquaculture contributes to storage of water and improved microclimate. Agriculture and power industries have a mutual in terest to store water, which can serve as enclosures for aquaculture operations. Aquaculture contributes very much to sport and recreational fisheries. It creates employment and income in remote areas.
Species cultivated in eastern Europe are dominated by cyprinids (carps) and in western Europe by salmonids (mainly rainbow trout). The diversity of fish species cultivated is larger in the latter area.
In most countries a comprehensive network of acts and ordinances is the basis for rules and regulations for the aquaculture industry. Applications accompanied by EIA have to be sent to relevant authorities. Site, operation size, water extraction, fish species and strains, are stipulated in connection with licences given. In some cases feed input, feed quality and maximum feed conversion ratios are regulated.
The farmers are usually obliged to make daily records on their operations regarding movement of fish, mortality and diseases. Disease problems do exist although in many cases vaccines have prevented disease outbreaks at least with regard to furunculosis and vibriosis.
Institutes and universities dealing with aquaculture research are reported by all countries.
Farmers� associations are seen as necessary for promoting aquaculture and to some extent to protecting farmers from unreasonable rules and regulations being issued by the authorities.
1. Introduction
The supply of freshwater is limited in the world. This is also true for some countries in Europe. One way of measuring the supply of freshwater is to calculate cubic meters of waters available per capita (Gardner-Outlaw and Engelman 1997). Eighteen European countries have a water supply less than 10,000 cubic meters per capita, figures calculated for 1995. Of those countries, the available water supply is less than 1,700 cubic meters in four countries, which is considered to be the limit for water stress.
In addition to water quantity, the water quality must be assessed. Acidification, radioactive substances, pesticides, industrial pollutants and eutrophication are real problems in some areas. This is the reality, which people have to face in Europe with an increasing population and more and more demand of water for domestic uses, agriculture, forestry, fishery and aquaculture as well as industrial production.
This report refers mainly to inland aquaculture although some comparisons are made with other human activities. EIFAC and its Working Party on Aquatic resources management in Aquaculture want to elucidate the present situation of freshwater resources in some parts of Europe as a mean for aquaculture production. The current aquaculture production is in focus in relation to available water resources.
The above mentioned questionnaires, which were sent to all national correspondents (Appendix 1) deal with quantitative and qualitative aspects, water management, aquaculture technology, farming technique, water management of discharged water from farms and processing plants. Further on it was the ambition to give a picture of the present status of inland aquaculture, particularly production, fish diseases, stocking management for commercial aquaculture and recreational fisheries. Particular questions on legal framework, authorities, research, farmers� association were also asked.
On behalf of the Working Party I have the pleasure to present the results from those eleven countries which have reported about their aquaculture and water management.
2. Water Supply for Aquaculture and Other Users
Rainfall varies between countries in this report. For example, Ireland has an annual average value of 1,250 mm with areas on the west-coast with rainfall over 2,000 mm. In the UK the average value is 1,200 mm annually with value around 1,400 in Scotland. In Israel average rainfall in the northern mountains is 800-1000 mm but only 100-200 mm in Northern Negev desert. In Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Estonia, Czech Republic and Poland the average rainfall is in the range of 500-800 mm.
Apart from variation in precipitation, the potential evapotranspiration, i.e. the "thirst of the atmosphere", varies significantly between countries in Europe. High temperatures in the southern parts of Europe, for instance, mean that the return flow of rain back to atmosphere is much more rapid as compared to the areas in the northern parts of Europe where temperatures are relatively lower. The low precipitation in Israel and the high potential evapotranspiration implies that there is a water deficit in large parts of the country during a large part of the year. In Sweden, the precipitation is generally larger than the potential evapotranspiration. There are, however, areas that occasionally have a water deficit. This is for instance the case in the south eastern part of Sweden.
In addition to the variations in rainfall and evapotranspiration, as discussed above, differences in landscape topography, drainage structure, rainfall mean that the amount of surface waters and ground waters vary considerably between the various countries.
The various countries have also different hydrological cycles and the amount of surface waters and ground waters vary considerably. Finland and Sweden have lots of lakes. In Sweden 9.3% of the country is covered by lakes. There are 92 400 lakes comprising an area of 42,000 km2. Three lakes are larger than 1,000 km2. In Finland there are 188,000 lakes larger than 0.5 ha and about 10% of the country is covered with lakes, viz. 34,000 km2. In Estonia the lake area is 2115 km2 and the average Estonian lake is eutrophic. The lakes are small; about 50% are up to 3 ha , 30% from 3- 10 ha, 20% 10-100 ha and only 3.9% bigger. In Lithuania the lakes constitute 882 km2 and there are 2,827 lakes in Lithuania which are larger than 0.5 ha. The total lake area in Hungary is 750 km2. However, the total surface areas of natural waters are about 1,400 km2. In addition to that there are 230 km2 fish ponds. In UK there are 3,700 lakes larger than one ha. In Scotland and Wales the lakes are mostly oligotrophic and in England mesotrophic. In Israel there is only one lake; Lake Kinnereth (Lake Tiberias) which is 168 km2.
2.2 Amount of available water per capita
In Poland the groundwater resources are estimated to be 14.9 km3. The amount of renewable resources of water is estimated to 43.3-49.3 km3 which corresponds to 1,100-1,300 cubic meters of freshwater per inhabitant. There are tremendous differences between the available amount of water per capita (Table 1). Hungary, Ireland, Finland and Sweden have large amounts of water available per capita and the least amounts are available in Poland, Denmark, UK and Israel. According to Malin Falkenmark (pers. communication), Sweden, countries with less than 1,700 m3 water vailable per capita suffer from water stress. In our report this is obvious for Poland, UK and Israel. Denmark are close to water stress with 2,489 m3 water available per capita. In Europe four countries have less water available than 1,700 m3 and 18 countries less than 10,000 m3 per capita.
However, the above mentioned figures might be deceptive. The reported figure for Hungary is 11,870 cubic metres per capita has only statistical significance, since 114 km3 water is just flowing through the country, mainly out of the growing season, without utilization. Since 95% of the surface waters are coming from neighbouring upstream countries, Hungary is relying on the water uses in these countries. During critical periods in the dry summer months, most of the water is withheld by these countries, which sometimes creates serious water shortage in Hungary.
Table 1
The amount of water available to various countries in 1995 according to Gardner-Outlaw and Engelman (1997)
Area/country
Water availability
(m3/capita)Number of people in millions in 1995
East Europe
Czech R.
5,671
10.2
Hungary
11,874
10.1
Poland
1,458
38.6
West Europe
Ireland
14,100
3.5
UK
1,222
58.0
Nordic states
Denmark
2,489
5.2
Finland
22,126
5.1
Sweden
20,482
8.8
Baltic states
Estonia
11,828
1.5
Lithuania
6,478
3.7
Near East
Israel
389
5.5
2.3 Allocation of water to various activities
Let us now look at how countries allocate their water resources to various activities (Table 2). Denmark reports on huge amounts of water, which flow through their fish culture ponds. Some countries like Hungary and Poland use most of their water supply for the industry. UK uses half of its water supply for domestic use.
The amount of water used in industry has probably decreased in many countries the last 30 years. From Sweden it is reported that the industry used probably about 5 km3 water in the 1960�s. Nowadays the industry uses only 2.4 km3 water, although the production is much higher than in the 1990�s. The pulp and paper industries in Sweden use one km3 while the chemical industry and iron industry use about the same quantity together.
Table 2
The water use in some European countries. No reply = N, A = Domestic use; B = industry
C = Agriculture, D= Fish culture. E. Agriculture + Fish culture. F = other, G = Total.
All figures in km3/year
Area/country
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
1.1
5.7
0.3
0.5
7.6
Poland
2.6
8.1
1.2
11.9
West Europe
Ireland
0.25
0.1
0.6
UK
7.6
0.4
5.9
1.6
0.4
15.9
Nordic states
Denmark
800
800+
Finland
0.4
5.8
0.4
1.8
8.4
Sweden
0.6
2.4
0.18
n.a.
n.a.
0.35
3.5
Baltic states
Estonia
0.1
1.3
0.1
0.2
1.7
Lithuania
0.1
Near East
Israel
0.5
0.12
1.4
0.1
2.12
2.4 Extraction and paying for water
In most countries the proprietors have to ask for permission when extracting waters for use in fish farms. There is usually well-defined legislation which regulate the water use. In addition to that there is also legislation for water discharge from aquaculture operations.
Some countries get their water free for aquaculture use under certain conditions as Estonia and Poland. In Lithuania and Hungary they have two types of charges for the use of water resources from (1) surface waters and (2) sub-surface waters. The charge for sub-surface water in Lithuania is greater than for surface water. Charges for industry users are higher than for human needs. The charge also differs between various users. Panevezys city (Lithuania) users pay more charge than hydropower electricity stations and aquaculture.
In Hungary the water resources are divided into six categories depending on the level of protection needed. For example , the lake Balaton region falls in 1st category, since this is a major tourist area, where the fairly good water quality is exposed to human interventions. The charge in the first category is the highest among the six categories. High priority is given to drinking water supply. For this reason other users pay fees.
In countries like Finland and Sweden most farmers have their own water sources and hence do not pay anything for the water. Using water from other sources means that you have to pay for the water. Municipality water in e.g. Sweden is quite expensive as it is treated first. In such cases you also pay for the discharged water. This means that no farmers can afford to use this type of water.
In some European countries there are thus limited resources of waters. This will influence the attitude towards water resources. In some countries there is an increasing competition for water among different users (aquaculture, agriculture, industry, urban areas etc). Some farmers have to pay for their use of water.
The most elaborate system is reported by Hungary. In this country there are two elements of the water fee:
1) charge for the availability of water resources, and
2) charge for the water supply.
The charge on the former case is calculated according to the following formula:
Ca = A x Q x g x m,
where :
- is charge for the availability of water resources in Forint/m3,
Ca
- is the basic charge in Forint/ m3 (which was 1.2 in 1997),
A
- is the amount of used water in m3,
Q
- is a factor depending on the regional category and the type of water use,
g
- is 1 if the amount is measured and it is 1.2 if the amount is estimated.
"m"
The "g" factor may vary from 2.3 to 0.02. The charge for sub-surface waters is calculated in a similar way to that of the surface waters. There are different values for extracting the water for a) public purpose, b) for economic purpose, c) irrigation, d) aquaculture and rice production, and e) hydropower. Most aquaculture is under category "other economic purpose" where the "g" value varies from 1.0 to 2.3. Aquaculture operations pay about 10 times more for their water than water used for irrigation and 20 to 25 times more than hydropower stations etc.
The farmers fees vary in different regions of the country.
In Poland surface or well water used for aquaculture purposes is exempted from any fees as well for intake or discharge. However, all other users must pay according to a specific tariff system. In Ireland aquaculture uses natural river water for the most part and does not pay either, although other users pay. In other countries covered in this report aquaculture units have their own systems for water supply and do not pay for the water. In Sweden some farmers practicing indoor aquaculture and using municipality water have to pay one fee for the volume of water and another fee for the destruction of water discharge as all other inhabitants in Sweden.
2.5 Water sources for aquaculture
The picture is very diversified with regard to water use from various sources. Well water is used to a great extent by Poland, UK, Estonia, Finland and Israel. Nearly all counties use surface water of different kinds, while only a few countries (UK, Sweden, Finland and Israel) report that they are very much dependant on ground water (Table 3).
It is interesting that only one country (Finland) reports that they are using wetlands to a great extent in their aquaculture. About 50% of natural rearing pond area is constructed by damming wetland.
Many countries report that they use rivers as water supply for their aquaculture operations. In Finland 70-80% of the inland flow through farms use river water as the main source. Lakes are also used in many aquaculture ventures, especially in the Nordic countries as Denmark, Finland and Sweden but also in some other countries as Ireland, UK and Lithuania.
Drainage water from farmland is only used to a very marginal extent in a few countries. Israel stresses the importance of drainage water from other areas i.e. fish ponds.
Table 3
The water supply for aquaculture. Results are summarized according to the following procedure; not used at all =0, rare=1, Occasionally=2, Common=3, very common=4. A =Well water; B =Surface water, C =Ground water, D= Wetlands, E= Rivers, F= Lakes, G= Drainage water from agriculture, H= Drainage water from other areas:
Area/country
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
1
4
1
0
0
0
2
2
Poland
3
0
0
0
4
2
0
0
West Europe
Ireland
2
2
2
0
4
3
0
0
UK
3
4
3
1
4
3
1
1
Scandinavia
Denmark
x
x
x
x
4
4
x
x
Finland
3
4
3
4
4
4
0
0
Sweden
2
4
3
0
3
4
0
0
Baltic states
Estonia
4
4
1
0
4
2
1
2
Lithuania
1
4
1
0
4
3
2
2
Near East
Israel
4
4
4
0
2
0
1
4
In principle there are three different types of aquaculture technologies with regard to the use of water; 1) Still water systems, 2) flow through water systems and 3) Closed recirculating systems. However, if you want to distinguish between various technologies in more detail, it is clear that you have to separate between many types of aquaculture methods (Table 4).
Table 4
An overview of the various aquaculture technologies with regard to technical and biological aspects according to Ackefors (1999)1.1. Technical aspects with regard to water use
1.1.1. Stillwater systems
1.1.2. Flowthrough water systems
1.1.2.1. Ponds, raceways, tanks (landbased)
1.1.2.2. Cages (lake and sea based)
1.1.2.3 Large offshore units (sea based)
1.1.2. Closed recirculating systems
1.1.2.1. Tanks (landbased)
1.2. Technical-biological aspects
1.2.1. Extensive systems; no feeding or fertiliser
1.2.1.1. Ponds, (landbased)
1.2.1.2. Mussel and oyster operations (sea based)
1.2.1.3. Seaweed operations (seabased)
1.2.2. Semi-intensive systems; feeding or fertiliser
1.2.2.1. Ponds (landbased)
1.2.2.2. Raceways (landbased)
1.2.3. Intensive systems; feeding
1.2.3.1. Cages (lake and seabased)
1.2.3.2. Raceways (land and seabased)
1.2.3.3. Silos and tanks (landbased )
1.2.4. Integrated systems (landbased)
1.2.4.1 Agriculture- aquaculture
1.2.4.2. Industrial wastes- aquaculture
1.3. Biological aspects; mono- or polyculture
1.3.1. Monoculture
1.3.1.1. Herbivorous (land, lake or seabased)
1.3.1.2. Omnivorous (land, lake or seabased)
1.3.1.3. Carnivorous (land, lake or seabased).
1.3.2. Polyculture
3.2 Practiced technology in Europe
In freshwater still water systems are usually ponds with stagnant water which is very common in Israel. Most countries indicate that they have flow-through water systems, e.g. ponds and raceways. Closed systems in the form of recirculation operations are common in Denmark and Israel. But many countries indicate that they have aquaculture operations which use this technique for eel cultivation, e.g. Sweden. It is likely that Norway uses this technique in some cases to raise salmon smolts.
With regard to cage culture this method is only frequently used in freshwater in western Europe viz. in Ireland, UK, and Sweden, while countries like Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Estonia and Lithuania use ponds mainly. Two countries (Estonia and Sweden) indicate that the use of basins on land is quite common . Two countries (Poland and UK) report that raceways are very common but that technology is also used in other countries. Only one country indicates that indoor troughs and basins are quite common, viz. Finland.
Table 5
Type of aquaculture technology used in various European countries. Results are summarized according to the following procedure; 0= not used at all, 1= rare, 2= Occasionally, 3= Common, 4=Very common. A = Flow through system; B = Closed system, C = Cages, D = Ponds,
E = Basins, F = Raceways, G = Indoor (troughs, raceways), H= other technology
Area/Country
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
0
0
0
4
1
0
1
0
Poland
4
2
0
4
2
4
0
0
West Europe
Ireland
4
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
UK
4
2
4
3
1
4
2
2
Nordic states
Denmark
4
3
0
4
0
0
0
0
Finland
4
1
4
4
0
3
3
0
Sweden
4
1
4
2
3
1
0
3
Baltic states
Estonia
4
0
2
3
3
0
1
1
Lithuania
4
1
0
3
0
1
0
2
Near East
Israel
2
4
0
4
1
2
0
1
The most common technique for farming is the pond system (Table 6). This is true for eastern Europe, the Baltic states and Denmark, Finland, Sweden and U.K. Common size varies from country to country. The system is generally flow-through ponds but Hungary and Israel report on still water ponds. Only Sweden, Ireland and U.K assert that cage culture is common in inland waters. Flow-through systems are common in most countries but closed systems are rare. The latter system is used mainly for eel cultivation mainly in Denmark and Sweden. One country (UK) reports that raceways are very common and the common size is 100 m3. Other enclosures are also mentioned as oxbow lakes, e.g. Hungary. Indoor technique is very rare except for recycling systems.
Table 6
The number of cages and volume in 1000 m3, numbers of ponds and area in 1000 m2 (or m3) and number of basins and volume in 1000 m3. No figures but the technique is considered as common (=xx) or occurs occasionally (= x)
Area/country
Cages
Ponds
Basins or raceways
Number of cages
volume
(1000 m3)Number of ponds
surface
(1000 m2)No. of basins or raceway
volume (1000 m3)
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
200,000
5
Poland
517,200
2.5
West Europe
Ireland
xx
UK
xx
xx
xx
Nordic states
Denmark
x
xx
Finland
x
xx
x
Sweden
1,160
368
149
211
454
5
Baltic states
Estonia
1.2
4,370
47.5
Lithuania
105,040
x
Near East
Israel
30-50 (m3)
4. Interactions with Other Users of Water
In many European countries aquaculture is a new industry. This industry now competes with other established activities. This is especially typical for aquaculture operations in the coastal zone. The prime interest might be sites but also the competition for clean water. In freshwater inland areas aquaculture operations also compete for sites but in general the resistance against aquaculture has been strong from owners of leisure houses and tourism which use the lake for other purposes such as bathing.
4.2 The competition with other users of water and sites
The conflict with other interests is still a problem in many freshwater areas (Table 7). Conservation is nowadays an important aspect, which might prevent farmers from getting licences. Leisure life including boat sport, water skiing and beaches for bathing are activities which might be in conflict with aquaculture operations. This is especially common between owners of leisure houses and farmers in aquaculture. Conflicts appear sometimes between professional fishermen and aquaculture farmers.
4.3 The impact of water pollution from other activities on aquaculture
Aquaculturists may suffer very much from activities in the lake and/or land. Water skiing and boats may interfere with cage farming. A lake surrounded by agriculture and forestry may cause problems due to drainage from land consisting of water polluted with pesticides and fertilizers. Nearby urban areas and industries may discharge water with harmful substances. Polluted waters from aquaculture activities upstream may provide problems for farmers downstream. This is especially obvious in e.g. Denmark.
The results from the present investigation do not indicate large problems in the countries which have responded to the questionnaire. Estonia and Hungary indicate that pollution from agriculture in some areas is a problem. There is no example of interactions with forestry. Countries like Hungary have limited water resources and for this reason aquaculture is not permitted in some areas.
In general aquaculture is not popular in tourist regions. In Hungary and Estonia this problem has sometimes been solved by converting extensive rearing ponds into angling areas and providing special conditions for recreational and eco-tourism. In addition to that sewage from tourist areas is treated in earthen ponds. The excess sewage load in the peak tourist season coincides with the fish growing season. The use of fish and crayfish ponds as a tourist attraction is nowadays very popular in e.g. Sweden. Hungary indicates, as does Estonia, that there are some conflicts between aquaculture and urban and industrial areas around cities.
Table 7
Interaction (competition) with other water users in various countries. Results are summarized according to the following procedure; no reply = x or 0 =no problem , 1= rare, 2= increasing problems, 3= limited problems, 4= very common, 5= positive interactions. A = Aquaculture,
B = Agriculture, C = Forestry, D= Drinking water, E = Tourism and hotels,
F = Urban areas, G = Others
Area/country
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
0
2
0
3
4
4
0
Poland
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
West Europe
Ireland
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
UK
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nordic states
Denmark
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Finland
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
Sweden
0
0
0
0
3
0
4
Baltic states
Estonia
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
Lithuania
0
1
0
0
5
0
0
Near East
Israel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
In most areas water quality does not raise any problems for the farmers but in some areas there might be problems (Table 8) One reason may be that aquaculture is not established in areas with bad water quality. Acidification is however, a problem in countries like Sweden, Denmark and Poland. Sweden has suffered very much from acidification through acid rain especially the western parts of the country where fish and crayfish have been killed or are not able to reproduce. Reproduction of fish like pike and freshwater crayfish is impossible in certain parts. There are still lakes with pH values around 5.
Another source of acidification is traffic. Sulphur is the dominant compound in acid rain (mainly SO3-1 ion) and together with emission from motor vehicles. This means that no aquaculture operations in freshwater can be established in such areas. The alkalinity levels in Sweden are also very low and thus the buffer capacity negligible. Liming of lakes is a common practice in Sweden.
From Poland it is reported that some areas are influenced by acid rain. Mountain and submountain impounding reservoirs and stream located in the southern part of Poland, are strongly influenced by acid rain. Acidification is the main reason of closure of one of the oldest Polish brook trout hatcheries. The oldest Polish hatchery in Wisla-Czarne founded in 1867 had to cease its activity when pH of water dropped to 4.0-6.6. and aluminum reached levels within the range of 277-500 ug Al/L and mortality of larvae reached 100%.
After the Chernobyl accident in 1986 the freshwater fish in large areas of northern Sweden accumulated very high concentration of Caesium 137. The freshwater fish from such lakes were not allowed to be sold. However, aquaculture operations were not affected, probably due to the fact that the aquaculture fish are fed manufactured feed produced from " clean" substances.
From Lithuania it is reported that only Ignalina Branch of the State Pisciculture Centre is close to the atomic electric power stations. Researchers have found that the level of radioactivity never exceeded permissible administrative values in water and in fish.
Pesticides do not seem to be a problem in the countries which responded to this questionnaire. Some countries reported on the total use of pesticides and herbicides in forestry, agriculture and horticulture. In Poland e.g. 19,000 tonnes are used annually.
Some reported that this problem is not investigated.
5.4 Industrial waste and eutrophication
Industrial wastes including nutrient enriched water seem to be a great problem in some countries. Poland reported that the quality of surface water is low. The runoff from industry and agriculture, is estimated at 87,100 tonnes of nitrogen and 10,700 tonnes of phosphorus. 35-38% of that quantity is discharged into inland waters. But it is also reported that according to current environmental legislation and standards 75% of domestic and industrial waters are treated. Of these water masses 42% were treated mechanically, 50% biological treatment and only 6.7% chemically. State Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) have classified the water quality of the rivers from Vistula basin. 35% of the rivers investigated were "out of range" using physico-chemical criteria and 85.6% when the coliform index was additionally applied. An even worse situation has been found in waters flowing in Oder basins where about 60% and 98% of the studied rivers were classified as highly unsuitable and fall into the class " out of range".
Table 8
Water quality problems in aquaculture. Quality of water used in inland areas; no data or problems=0, occasional problems=1, increasing problems 2, limited problem or problems in the past 3, serious problem=4, positive interactions=5. A= Acidification, B=Radioactive substances, C=Pesticides, D=Industrial pollutants, E=Eutrophication, F=Humic acids, G=Gas problems
Area/country
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
East Europe
Czech R.
Hungary
1
0
2
3
4
3
3
Poland
3
0
0
4
4
0
4
West Europe
Ireland
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
UK
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
Nordic states
Denmark
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Finland
3
0
0
3
3
3
3
Sweden
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
Baltic states
Estonia
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
Lithuania
0
0
0
x
3
3
x
Near East
Israel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6. Water management within the farm
Pretreatment of water to improve the water quality is quite common. Degassing and aeration is practised by many farmers, especially those who get their water from bore holes. Too high carbon dioxide is usually found in well water and degassing is necessary. Aeration of smaller still water ponds and raceways by means of paddlewheels is very common. But also liquid oxygen is used in many farms.
Rule of thumb for oxygen concentration in flow-through ponds for salmonids in Ireland is for one tonne biomass 3 l per second at a temperature of 4oC to 20 l per second at 18oC. The amount of oxygen consumed is a function of individual fish weight and temperature. For this reason salmonid farms in Sweden are using the following scheme (Table 9).
Table 9
The amount of water (95% saturated with dissolved oxygen) required in intensive salmon culture systems as a function of fish size (individual weight) and temperature. Liters of water per minute and per kg fish.
Weight (g)
4oC
10oC
14oC
18oC
0.1
0.4
1.2
1.8
2.8
1.0
0.3
0.8
1.2
1.8
10
0.2
0.5
0.8
1.2
100
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.8
1 000
0.05
0.2
0.3
0.5
Some farmers have to get rid of too high concentrations of iron and manganese by using sand filters with oxygen supply (e.g. in Sweden). In Sweden as well as in other countries like UK the water quality inside the farm is improved by using drum filters, and sedimentation basins. Occasionally aquatic plants for absorbing nutrients and metals are used as well as integrated techniques with other animals.
6.4 Fish ponds as treatment units for polluted water
It is interesting to note that in Hungary fish ponds have traditionally been used as treatment units. The waste water from other animal production system (mostly duck and pig production) is transferred to fishponds and the nutrients were thus transformed into flesh or trapped in the sediment. An elaborated system to use the enormous amounts of swine manure produced after the Second World War in Hungary was developed by Dr Elek Woynarovich. His technique to enhance the production of carp by using swine manure became famous.
Within the farm, treatment of the ponds is common e.g. liming in Poland, Hungary and Denmark. Quick lime (CaO) is sometimes applied twice a year. Treatment with lime in early spring is believed to boost primary productivity of the pond by enhancement of availability of phosphates and increasing the carbon dioxide reserve (Poland). The second treatment aimed at disinfection of ponds takes place after harvesting (before winter) and is spread directly over the pond bottom. To enhance the productivity of the ponds, animal manure is applied, particularly in juvenile ponds.
In most countries there are restrictions for discharge of water from fish farms and other activities. The farmers are usually obliged to treat the outgoing water. Depending on the farming technique various treatment methods are used, e.g. sedimentation, mechanical treatment, filter systems, polishing ponds, artificial wetlands. Water discharge from quarantine is usually sterilized e.g. by storing water for 24 hours and raising pH up to 12 in the water.
7.2 Examples from various countries
In Lithuania regulation on water discharge may include maximum temperature not exceeding +30oC in discharge water, colour test, smell, turbidity, and toxic tests, effluent mineralisation not exceeding 2 g/l and pH 6.5-8.5.
In Poland only sedimentation ponds are used and no other treatments are applied for discharge water from fish ponds. However, conditions have improved during the 1990s as farmers have changed from wet feed with FCR ratios of 6-10 to fabricated feed with FCR ratios of 1.1-1.2.
In Hungary and in Czech Republic no effluent treatment is used in pond fish farms and this is the case also in intensive production plants. However, experimental works are carried out in Hungary to develop recycling techniques to minimize the amount of discharged wastes.
In Ireland regulation for abstraction of water used in the fish farms is aimed to minimize problems from effluent. Applicants for fish culture licences are required to limit their production to maximum quantity dependent on the available water supply. The standard minimum requirement is 5 liters per second per tonne annual production for rainbow trout.
The effluent water quality from salmon smolt- rearing units in Ireland is estimated to be equal to half the concentration of rainbow trout farms. Table 10 shows the increase in pollutant concentration when half the river water is abstracted by rainbow trout farms.
Table 10
Typical effluent quality (mg l-1) from rainbow trout farms in Ireland and increase in levels in receiving water when half the volume is abstracted.
Effluent
Increase in receiving water
Suspended solids
6
3
BOD
2.5
1.25
Total ammonia(N)
0.6
0.3
Unionised ammonia
0.016
0.008
Total phosphorus(P)
0.1
0.05
These low concentrations of pollutants in the effluents, combined with the fact that fish farms in any river are widely separated from one another, explain the fact that no flow-through fish farms in Ireland incorporate effluent treatment facilities.
The conclusions from this investigation are: In flow-through ponds on land no treatment methods are applied in some countries, in others sedimentation ponds are used. Whirl separators are usually installed in old fish farms in Finland with flow-through systems. There are countries which rather strict legislation (Denmark, Finland and Sweden) which regulate the amount of discharged organic matter from a fish culture operation. Fish farms on land have to use various mechanical filter systems to separate phosphorus and nitrogen from the outgoing water.
Triangelfilter, drum and plate filters are applied. Recycling systems in Sweden for eel production are combined with large sedimentation ponds. The accumulated discharged water is later transferred to farmland for production of various crops of cereals or potatoes. No country has reported on any treatment systems for cage culture in freshwater, which are applied in some marine farms, e.g. Lift-Up systems.
8. Water Management of Processing Plants
Effluent discharges from processing plants are usually regulated by legislation. Special slaughter plants are required. Water has to be treated to remove fats and suspended solids (U.K.). If the water is discharged to rivers the effluent must contain less than 20 mg l-1 BOD and less than 30 mg l-1 suspended solids (Ireland). In Czech Republic the processing units have to be equipped with efficient cleaning system with mechanical and biological treatment.
9. Aquaculture Water Management for the Benefit of Society
The storage of water in some areas is of importance for agriculture, groundwater and microclimate. Water reservoirs for hydropower plants and agriculture are used in many countries for fish and crayfish culture. Juvenile fish and crayfish produced may also be stocked in this type of reservoir.
Flow-through ponds and water reservoirs built by farmers improve the water quality. In Sweden it is reported that water flowing through fishponds has a higher pH value when it leaves the water impoundment. In many cases the ponds also serve as nutrient traps, which means that nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations are lower in the water when leaving the water body.
10. The Status of Inland Aquaculture in Europe
Farming of carp dates back 2,000 years in southern Europe. Carp farming was common in monasteries at least in the 15th century. In most countries freshwater aquaculture started to be established in last century in European countries when rainbow trout was introduced from America. The enhancement of other salmonids and e.g. pike was of great interest for many fisheries societies aiming at improving sportfisheries.
But the commercial aquaculture in freshwater was also introduced in the last century. Many new species started to be cultivated as tench, Chinese carps, crucian carp, whitefish and catfish. In general there were pond rearing systems. This type of technology was the most common one in this century until the 1970�s in freshwater. From that time and onwards more and more cage culture was implemented in European freshwater, although pond rearing is still the dominating technology in many countries.
10.2 The importance of aquaculture
Total aquaculture food production in freshwater is usually rather high compared to harvest from fisheries and in some countries inland aquaculture contribute relatively large quantities compared to marine aquaculture. Locally this freshwater sector produces a lot of fish, especially rainbow trout and other fish species both as food and for sport fishery .
Hungary has reported that aquaculture is a small but special sector in the country, which is not merely food production, but provides services for anglers and tourism, contribute to the maintenance of biodiversity, and has positive effects on water management. This complex nature of aquaculture is not well understood by the public (neither by many policy makers), therefore the sector makes efforts to inform public opinion on the value of aquaculture.
Many countries report on the importance of sport- and recreational fisheries. Nowadays there are many types of e.g. salmonid fishes cultivated to promote tourism. In urban areas there are special centers for e.g. crayfish, where people can catch and enjoy the festivals with crayfish and other types of food. In certain areas this is of great importance for the income of urban people in remote areas.
The importance of aquaculture production in freshwaters varies very much in different regions of Europe. The statistics are sometimes difficult to compare. In some areas the harvests are just performed by the farmers, in other areas the anglers are fishing in the pond and their catches are lumped together. The total amount of fish produced in all countries in freshwater aquaculture according to an estimate by EIFAC and presented at its twentieth Session is presented in Table 11 Figures in tonnes.
Table 11
The production in inland fisheries and aquaculture in Europe in 1986 and 1996 (from EIFAC/XX/98/Inf.4; 20th EIFAC Session, 1998).
Eastern 1986
Eastern 1996
Western 1986
Western 1996
Capture
69,275
57,912
119,308
125,472
Aquaculture
127,233
77,046
173,151
252,888
Total
196,508
134,958
292,459
378,360
It is obvious that both capture fishery and aquaculture have declined in Eastern Europe while it is the opposite in Western Europe. In Eastern Europe only Poland has reported an increase. In western Europe major increases in aquaculture production come from France, Italy, Denmark and Spain.
The total production for individual countries varied in 1996 very much. In Western Europe France, Italy, Germany, Denmark, Spain and UK all produced more than 15,000 tonnes with France as number one or 63,530 tonnes. The rest of the countries produced less than 5,000 tonnes. In Eastern Europe; Poland, Czech Republic, Romania and Hungary produced more than 8,000 tonnes, with Poland as number one producing 27,700 tonnes.
10.3 The production in various countries
The report from individual countries with regard to production in this sector is obvious from Table 12. Denmark and Poland are the biggest producers with more than 25,000 tonnes. Czech Republic, U.K. and Israel produce more than 15,000 tonnes, while the other produce less than 1,000 tonnes.
Table 12
The total harvest from freshwater aquaculture in various countries expressed as tonnes. Figures from individual national correspondents.
Area/country
1994
1995
1996
East Europe
Czech R.
18,655
18,648
18,200
Hungary
15,687
15,552
13,518
Poland
24,500
25,111
27,700
West Europe
Ireland
1,250
UK
15,226
Nordic states
Denmark
33,626
Finland
3,044
Sweden
2,938
3,092
3,184
Baltic states
Estonia
272
Lithuania
2,962
Near East
Israel
14,671
15,373
15,715
10.4 The inland production versus marine production
The inland production versus marine production in aquaculture is obvious from Table 13. The author has estimated the extent of inland aquaculture compared to the total aquaculture in percentage. It was necessary to use different years for each country (1994,1995 or 1996). Figures for total production are derived from FAO (1998). It is obvious that in landlocked countries as Hungary and Czech Republic, freshwater aquaculture makes up 100%. But it interesting to note that countries with a coastal zone also may have a substantial part of the production in inland waters as Denmark, Sweden and Israel. UK and Finland have about 17% of their production in inland waters.
Table 13
The inland aquaculture versus marine aquaculture expressed as percentage of the total aquaculture production.
Area/country
Inland aquaculture as percentage of total aquaculture
Total aquaculture production in tonnes in 1996
East Europe
Czech R.
100%
18,200
Hungary
100%
13,518
Poland
100%
27,700
West Europe
Ireland
3.6%
34,925
UK
17.7%
109,901
Nordic states
Denmark
81.2%
41,428
Finland
17.2%
17,662
Sweden
38.5%
8,267
Baltic states
Estonia
100%
272
Lithuania
??
1,537
Near East
Israel
89.5
17,568
10.5 Employment and income in remote areas
The activity has a great importance for local people. Aquaculture is sometimes located in remote and beautiful areas in the country side. The aquaculture operation creates employment in itself but it also supports sport fishing tourism. Put and take fishery is one activity which is very popular and the value of this angling activity for the people in the area is usually high. The indirect income exceeds the value of fish by 10-20 times. Fish and crayfish farmers arrange excursions and social parties for private people or companies. This has led to a good income for the farmers. This type of recreation seems to be increasing. The rearing ponds attract wildlife including birds, which improve the hunting expectations in some areas. In other countries like Israel they serve as sanctuaries for birds.
11. The Species Composition in Inland Aquaculture
The species composition in aquaculture varies between Eastern and Western Europe very much (Table 14). EIFAC summarized this for 1996 for all countries. It is obvious that cyprinids (mainly carp species) dominate in Eastern countries while salmonids (mainly rainbow trout) dominate in western countries. It is conspicuous that the species diversity is much higher in Western than in Eastern countries.
Table 14
The percentage species production for Eastern and Western countries
were reported by EIFAC in 1998.
Species Eastern Europe
Percentage
Species western Europe
Percentage
Cyprinids
85.01
Salmonids
82.43
Salmonids
12.41
Cyprinids
8.84
Wels(=Som)catfish
0.22
European eel
2.92
European eel
0.11
Catfishes
1.42
Northern pike
0.09
Crayfishes
0.92
Pike-perch
0.08
Flathead grey mullet
0.72
European perch
0.02
Northern pike
0.32
Fishes n.e.i.
2.06
Perches
0.22
Sturgeons
0.17
Tilapias
0.14
Largemouth black bass
0.04
River prawns
0.03
Gobies
0.02
European seabass
0.01
Fishes n.e.i.
1.81
11.2 The species composition in various countries
The number of species produced in freshwater aquaculture is rather large in some countries. Usually very few species are produced in high quantity. In Table 15, the production figures are summarized. Israel is the only country which reported on a large production of ornamental fish (it is not included in the table). However, for ornamental fish as well as for some other species, private companies usually do not report to the official statistics in various countries. And ornamental fish species are produced nowadays in some European countries.
It is obvious that rainbow trout is the most cultivated species in inland waters in the western countries although it is looks like this is also the case in eastern Europe. In Eastern countries carp cultivation still dominates but is declining. In Nordic countries the rainbow trout production dominates very much as well as in UK and Ireland. In the former countries the production of brown trout is also large. In Israel carp, rainbow trout and catfish are all important species.
Table 15
The species produced in freshwater aquaculture is summarized in the following way: (1) common carp, (2) other carp species, (3) crucian carp, (4) Tilapia, (5) rainbow trout, (6) brown trout, (7) arctic charr, (8) eel, (9) tench, perch, pike perch, pike, (10) catfish, (11) Grey mullet and hybrid bass, (12) sturgeon, (13) others. xx = production is larger than 1 000 tonnes and
x = production is lower than 1000 tonnes.
Area/country
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
East Europe
Czech R.
xx
x
x
x
x
Hungary
xx
xx
x
x
x
x
x
Poland
xx
x
xx
x
x
x
West Europe
Ireland
xx
x
UK
xx
xx
x
Nordic states
Denmark
xx
Finland
xx
Sweden
xx
x
x
Baltic states
Estonia
x
x
x
Lithuania
xx
x
x
x
Near East
Israel
xx
x
xx
xx
x
Stocking of fish aims to increase the stocks taken in commercial and/or sport fisheries. In some cases stocking is necessary to preserve the species e.g. the salmon stock in the Baltic. Unfortunately the statistics in this area are rather bad. All countries report on stocking but probably rather incompletely.
12.2 Stocking program in various countries
It is obvious that some countries have a comprehensive stocking program (Table 16.) With regard to species pike is very important in three countries, viz. Poland, Estonia and Lithuania. Coregonids (white fish, vendace) are stocked very much in waters of Finland and Poland. Pike-perch are produced in great quantities for stocking in lakes in Lithuania. Salmon smolts are produced to a large extent in Finland and Sweden and stocked in the Baltic. The production of rainbow trout for sport fisheries is important in Czech Republic and Sweden as well as brown trout in UK. In Israel stocking of mullet and Tilapia is important. The stocking of eel in inland lakes is nowadays necessary to keep the fishery for eel in the Baltic.
Table 16
The production of juveniles for stocking and ranching in various countries. The number in million specimens of fry, juvenile or adolescent individuals (0+-2+): (1) Salmon (2) Rainbow trout (3) Brown trout and Sea trout (4) Coregonids (5) Grayling (6) Pike (7) Pike-perch (8) Eel (9)Cyprinids, mainly carp. In certain cases species mentioned without any production figure are denoted with x. For Israel Tilapia is put in column 1 and Mullet in column 2.
Area/country
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
East Europe
Czech R.
0.4
x
x
1.3
2.4
Hungary
x
x
Poland
0.23
1
15
0.02
35.8
West Europe
Ireland
0,10
0.48
UK
x
Nordic states
Denmark
Finland
8
50
Sweden
2
0.7
x
x
x
x
x
Baltic states
Estonia
0.03
0.9
0.02
6.5
0.1
2
Lithuania
0.3
0.1
23.5
4.1
0.1
Near East
Israel
2-3
<1
13. Sport and Recreational Fisheries
An important part of the stocking program is aimed for sport or recreational fisheries in some countries. In Lithuania not less than 28.5 million juveniles were stocked in 1996 comprising goldfish, carp, pike, pike-perch, whitefish, salmon, and zanthe (vimba). In the same year 36, 500 ha of water bodies were available for the anglers. The catch that year was estimated to 300 tonnes.
In Czech Republic 10.2 million fish were stocked in 1995; 2.4 million carps, 2 million brown trout, 0.4 million rainbow trout, 0.1 million grass carp and lots of other fishes as pike, pike-perch etc., altogether about 25 species. A lot of people are sport anglers. More than 300 000 people belong to various Unions for sport fishing
Recreational fisheries in Sweden are very important in freshwater (both in natural waters and in waters stocked with fish) as well as in marine waters. About 2.2 million people between 16-74 years old have been fishing on at least one occasion in 1995. Stocking of reared fish is common in freshwater. In total the Swedish anglers in 1995 caught close to 80 000 tonnes. About 40% of this catch comes from inland waters. The majority of the fish were caught in "natural waters". The total expenditure for recreational fisheries was estimated at 4,300 million SEK.
In England and Wales approximately 1 million licences for recreational fisheries are sold annually. The great majority of anglers target non-salmonid fish, which are usually returned to the water. Most anglers fish "natural" waters, but heavily stocked commercial fisheries are becoming increasingly popular. Similarly, commercial put and take trout fisheries are very popular. These fisheries are intensively managed and fish are stocked at a rate equivalent to which they are removed by anglers.
It is very obvious from Hickley and Tompkins (1998) that recreational fisheries are important in some European countries, particularly Finland, Norway and Sweden where the recreational fishermen make 21-42% of the total population. The trend is stable that recreational fishery is very popular and sometimes increasing. Management measures are being undertaken to increase the fishery:
An increasing area of ponds, dam reservoirs, and other water bodies (e.g. France, Hungary and Poland) managed as "put and take" fisheries
Effective liming in acidified systems (Sweden and Norway)
Improving water quality and successful rehabilitation schemes (Denmark, Czech Republic)
Privatisation of the former state fishery enterprises (Poland)
EU development funds (Ireland)
Increasing diversification in the use of lakes (UK)
Establishment of fishery management areas (Sweden)
14. Institutional and Legal Framework Governing Aquaculture and Water Use
In most countries there are central agencies which deal with legislation and particularly water use. Ministries of Environmental Protection are sometimes responsible, in other countries Ministries of Agriculture deal with water use. There are usually regional agencies which deal with environmental protection and water use.
Legal framework
Legal framework governing aquaculture embraces:
Licences system for farming
Regulation of water uses on land e.g. extraction of water from rivers, lakes and groundwater
Regulation of discharged water
Control and surveillance systems including sanctions
The systems vary from country to country but in general there are central, regional and local agencies which regulate the aquaculture industry. In addition to that the private sector may be involved in decision-making, policy, planning and legislation.
Licences and regulation of land and water use, some examples
Sweden. In Sweden applications shall be sent to the relevant County Board. The application should contain following information:
Name and address of the applicant
The site of the farming operation
Water area (coastal water, lake or running water)
Type of technology and its source of water support
Details on production and the calculated amount of feed
A sketch of the farming operation and treatment technology for discharged water
Fish processing
Fish health control
Nearby farming operations
The use of land and water in nearby activities
Environmental conditions a) lake volume , secchi depth etc. ; b) bottom type; c) concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen; d) concentrations of the same compounds in the water supply
Calculated environmental impact by the farming operation
Consultation and information to various authorities and to the general public.
This type of application is necessary if the farmer wants to cultivate more than 10 tonnes or overwinter more than 500 kg crayfish. "Small farmers" need only inform the County Board on their farming operations.
The County Board sends all this information to the nearest Fishery Officer and referrals to a lot of other authorities as the Local Authority, State Veterinary Institute, Swedish National Board of Fisheries etc.
The central authority for the environment, the Swedish National Board of Environmental Protection, has outlined the general rules for aquaculture operations. They have issued a booklet on the regulation of aquaculture.
The County Administration examines applications in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act and the Nature Conservancy Act. Occasionally, an application for aquaculture has to be dealt with according to the provisions of the Water Rights Act.
Ireland. In Ireland the application for fish culture is quite simple. If the proposal is for a unit producing more than 99 tonnes per year , an Environmental Impact Statement must also be submitted which deals with;
a specification, by means of a map or otherwise, of boundaries or limits of the place or waters in relations to which licence is granted;
the amount of feed input
annual or seasonal limits on stock input, outputs and standing stock on sites;
operational practices, including the fallowing of sites;
the reporting of incidences of diseases and the presence of parasites;
the disposal of dead fish;
measures for preventing the escape of fish, and
arrangements for reporting escapes;
monitoring and inspection of the aquaculture carried out pursuant to the licence;
the keeping of records by the licensee
the protection of the environment and the control of discharges;
appropriate environmental, water quality and biological monitoring
Hungary. The New Fisheries Act has been in place in Hungary since 1997, which provides appropriate legal framework for the responsible use and protection of water resources. The fishing right belongs to the State except for enclosed waters owned by private individuals. Fishing rights are granted by the State to various users such as fisheries cooperatives , municipalities, angling associations, state and private organisations, and private persons. The main fisheries authority is the Game and Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, which is carrying out its administrative work through 19 regional fisheries inspectors (one in each county) employed in regional agricultural officies.
In Hungary the licencing is a three-step procedure:
Submit documents which show land ownership, lay-out map, description of technology and facilities. Basic conditions for water supply and effluent disposal must be available to the Regional Water Authority, which gives the preliminary licence for water use.
Various authorities must be approached to get a licence for construction of the farm.
After the construction of the farm an official check-up survey is made and after consulting authorities the final licence for water use can be received.
Poland. In Poland there is no aquaculture law concerning water use. However, farmers with salmonid aquaculture or any other fish culture with a pond surface area larger than 10 ha are obliged to provide an environmental impact assessment plan.
Czech Republic. In Czech Republic The Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Environment are the highest authorities for aquaculture. The National Water Authority is responsible within the ministry. There are regional agencies which control water quality and environmental protection. According to local regulations each district has professional officer who is responsible of environmental policy.
15. Regulation of Discharged Water
Poland. The maximum loads of pollutant in effluent water are not allowed to exceed the border limit for first class water in Poland. These values are ; SS < 20 mg/l, BOD <4.0 mg O2/l, COD 25.0 mg O2/l, phosphate (PO4-P) < 0.065 mg/l and nitrates (NO3-N) < 1.129 mg/Ll
Hungary. In Hungary there is a network of water quality monitoring stations. There are limit values for water quality parameters of the effluent, that are different in six surface water categories. The quality of the effluent water is checked at least twice a year. The water users are fined if the concentrations of certain pollutants in the effluent exceed a limit value.
Denmark. In Denmark a Statutory Order on Freshwater Fish Farms was implemented in 1989. The main purposes of the order is to ensure fulfillment of the quality objectives laid down for water courses and lakes affected by fish farming. Another purpose was to limit the discharge of nutrients to the sea by establishing requirements for the design and operation of fish farms. These requirements include; 1) waste water treatment, 2) maximum allowable feed consumption for each farm, 3) maximum feed conversion ratio for all farms, 4) maximum allowable water quality discharged from each farm , 5) quality of fish feed, 6) emission standards.
It is necessary to enforce strict regulations of the operations as many farms may be located downstream or upstream of the same water course. In 1994 in Denmark the total production in 485 farms was 35,150 tonnes (mainly rainbow trout). The total feed consumption was 34,964 tonnes. Thus feed conversion ratio (FCR.) corresponds roughly to one. In 1989 the corresponding value was 1.25.
A typical fish farm producing 100 tonnes of rainbow trout uses a water flow of 3-400 L/sec and the amount of water discharged must not exceed the capacity of the settling ponds.
Diseases are sometimes serious problems for the farmers. For this reasons a legal system is in operation in many countries to prevent disease agents from spreading between farms. Usually there are very severe restrictions when importing live material from one country to another. However, within a country there must be strict control of sellers and buyers and their activity both from disease and genetic points of view. In certain countries like Sweden farmers delivering stocking material to other farms are under very strict control. They are checked twice a year by a certain agency with regard to sanitary conditions and disease occurrence.
In UK registration of fish farms must be made. The farmers are obliged to record continuously about their operations:
1) in respect of each live movement on to site:
- date of movement;
- species
- number or weight
- size of fish
- development stage
- source
- supplier; and
- name and carrier2) in respect of observed mortalities
3) in respect of each live movement from the site, for stocking other waters (e.g. other fish farms or angling waters):
- date of movement
- species
- number or weight
- size of fish
- development stage
- destination, and
- name of carrierSome countries have reported on the disease problems in aquaculture. Disease problems are sometimes serious problems for the farmers. For general information on potential disease agents the Swedish report for 1997 is given below in Table 17.
Table 17
Diseases reported from inland farms in Sweden for 1997.
Number of new cases and approximate prevalence.
Contagious diseases
New cases in 1997
Appr. Prevalence%
ILA
Not yet identified in Sweden
IHN-V
Not yet identified in Sweden
VHS-V
Not yet identified in Sweden
SVC-V
Not yet identified in Sweden
IPN-V
0
0
BKD
1
<2
Furunculosis
2
4
Yersinios
1
4
In Finland and Sweden the M74 syndrome of Baltic salmon has been very serious some years. BKD and furunculosis cause most problems in Sweden at present. In inland aquaculture only 31 kg antibiotics (pure substance), corresponding to 6-7 gram per tonne produced fish, were applied in 1997 in Sweden.
In Denmark with a production ten times higher than in Sweden the corresponding figure was 4,028 kg. Other information from Denmark tells us that they use 8,908 Copper sulphate, 9,457 kg Chloramine T, 145,212 kg Formaline (30%) and 2,082 tonnes Lime. The lime is used to disinfect pond bottoms.
From Finland it is reported that there are no viral diseases, Bacterial infections of Aeromonas salmonicida (furunculosis) and flavobacteria (Flexibacter columnaris and F.psycrophilus) have caused some production problems in appr. 10-20% of hatcheries of farms annually. With the rapid development of oil based vaccines against furunculosis and vibriosis, the problem has decreased. Formalin and salt are the most commonly used methods against ectoparasites.
Research seems to have been one of the big losers when eastern European states changed from centrally planned economy to market economy. The financing has been dramatically reduced. In Hungary for example, the R & D expenditures decreased below 0.7% of the GDP, while this is 1.5-3.0% in developed countries. In the reply from the various countries it was difficult to distinguish between freshwater and marine aquaculture research.
Hungary. The core institution for research and development in Hungary is the Fish Culture Research Institute (HAKI) at Szarvas. The institute is implementing multidisciplinary research work that provides scientific basis for the development of fish culture technologies under various conditions, and for the optimal use and protection of aquatic resources. The main research fields are: aquatic ecosystem management; fish physiology; fish genetics and fish breeding; aquaculture systems.
Poland. In Poland the main scientific and research activities in the field of fisheries and aquaculture carried out by Inland Fisheries Institute in Olsztyn (culture of cyprinids, salmonids, sturgeon, genetics, water quality, fish biology, production of stocking material. Other research bodies are the Polish Academy of Sciences in Golysz (culture of carp, introduction of warm water species as tilapia and African catfish), Agriculture University of Kraków (fish reproduction), University of Agriculture and Technology in Olsztyn (fish biology, genetics, production of stocking material), Agricultural University in Poznan� (research on fish feed) and Agricultural University in Szczecin (feed quality, fish flesh quality, use of heated discharges, testing of new species in Polish aquaculture).
Lithuania. In Lithuania the core institutions for research and development are the following: Institute of Ecology in Vilnius (pond fishery, carp selection, bream, salmon, trout, sea trout, vimba, cod, crayfish); Fishery Research Laboratory in Klaipeda (marine and coastal fisheries; Vilnius University (inland fishes); Klaipeda University (salmon, trout, sea trout); Institute of Chemistry (Department of Ecological Chemistry) (treatment of waste water).
Estonia. In Estonia the following institutes work with aquaculture research: Department Fish Farming of Estonian Agricultural University (genetics, feeding, diseases); Estonian Marine Research Institute, Inst. of Zoology and Hydrobiology of Tartu University (fisheries and fish biology); Vortsjärve Limnology Station (fisheries, fish biology).
United Kingdom. In the UK there are many universities/polytechnics in the country which have various departments dealing with biological subjects related to aquaculture. MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fishing and Food) have one particular institute working with fish diseases, and aquaculture, mainly marine fish and shellfish species.
Ireland. In Ireland there are research institutes dealing with various aspects of aquaculture and water use from various disciplines: 1. Geological Survey of Ireland > (Geology); 2. Marine Institute (Sedimentology); 3. Geological survey of Ireland, Office of Public Works, Environmental Protection Agency (Hydrology); 4. Marine Institute, Zoology Departments Universities of Cork and Galway (Biology); 5. Marine Institute (Microbiology); 6. Marine Institute (Chemistry); 7. Board Iascaigh Mhar (Sea Fisheries Board), Marine Institue (Technology).
Sweden. In Sweden the main institute for aquaculture is Aquaculture Department of the Agricultural University in Umeå dealing mainly with salmonids; salmon, trout and arctic charr. Recently interests have also been focussed on freshwater fishes as perch and others. Aspects of biology, reproduction, nutrition are dealt with. There is a special Veterinary Institute dealing with research in fish diseases and a special body " Fisk Hälsan" , which combats fish diseases. All universities are involved in subjects which may be related to aquaculture. E.g. Stockholm University, Department of Zoology and Department of Systems Ecology deals with crayfish research.
Finland. In Finland there are various institutes dealing with aquaculture research: 1. Finnish Environment Institute (sedimentology); 2. Finnish Environment Institute, Limnological and Hydrobiological Institutes of Universities (in Helsinki, Kuopio, Jyväskylä, Turku) (Hydrology); 3. Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Helsinki and Tampere Universities of Technology (Technology); 4. Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute (Biology); 5. National Veterinary and Food Research Institute (Microbiology); 6. Finnish Environment Institute (Chemistry)
19.Farmers and their Organisations- Public Opinion on Aquaculture
In this section we deal with farmers� organisation and the general attitude towards aquaculture in the various countries. The associations of fish farmers are important to promote aquaculture and to explain to the general public the importance of aquaculture. The associations are links to professional scientific bodies as well as to various authorities. The negative attitude towards aquaculture in some countries has prevented the development of the aquaculture industry. A negative public opinion has been created by people in the green movement, some university people, environmental protection agencies and others. This is typical especially in western countries. In other countries people are not conscious at all about aquaculture. In the third category you find countries where the people have a positive attitude to aquaculture.
In Poland Polish Fisheries Society (PFS) and its branch Trout Farmers Association together with professional people who are engaged in fisheries and aquaculture try to promote the industry and PFS publish bi-monthly a periodic Fisheries Review. However, in general the people in the fisheries sector (fishery enterprises, anglers association, fish processing plants, technical school, agricultural universities, research institute) do not draw special attention of public opinion. It is only at Christmas when 80-90% of annual production of table carp is sold, when the majority of Polish society realizes that aquaculturists and especially carp farmers do exist at all. Even poaching or a sudden loss of cultured fish can draw the attention to fish farmers when such events are highlighted by media. There is no special pressure from different environmental group directed against aquaculturists.
Aquaculture in the Czech Republic is nowadays carried out predominantly in the private sector. Former state farms have been transformed and the Fish Farmers Association was established in 1991. Privatisation of former state fish farms was finished before 1995. From total 51 000 hectares of ponds, 32 000 hectares are now private and the farmers became members of Fish Farmers Association. There have been problems to get capital and farmers are missing subsidies for development of the freshwater fish industry. Market guarantees have not existed for long, beneficial bank credits are not there, all features typical for postcommunist countries of the East Europe.
Estonian Fish Farmers Association was established in 1989. The members are farmers from larger enterprises but also scientists and government officials working in the sector of aquaculture. The main task of the Association is to promote aquaculture by education and exchange of information and to represent the fish farmers in the government. The fish farmers in Estonia are well educated, most of them have university or technical high school education.
In Finland fish farms in the rural area are often very important for the municipality and thus the relationships are objective and practical. Public opinion in Finland considers that aquaculture is nationwide a risk for recreational uses of water. This opinion has not much to do with facts on environmental impacts of the industry. The main reason for the conflict is the interest to the same areas with totally opposite expectations. The farmers� relationship to scientists is based on confidence and mutual understanding of problems. Farmers often are dissatisfied with the speed at which research problems are solved.
In Sweden the Swedish Aquaculture Society ("Vattenbrukarnas Riksförbund") organises most of the farmers. Earlier we had a special society in southern Sweden, which organized mainly the crayfish farmers. This society will now merge into Vattenbrukarnas Riksförbund. The Society publishes one journal, Svenskt Vattenbruk,- about 10 issues per year. The Society is a link to the authorities and the National Fishery Board of Sweden. At the yearly meeting, relevant and up to date issues are discussed.
In Ireland the Irish Salmon Growers Association (ISGA) represents the interests of Irish salmon farmers. The ISGA advances its members� interests though dialogue with those whose decisions are important to the industry. It also organizes an annual salmon farming conference and trade exhibition.
There is a National Federation of Fish Producers in Hungary, which plays an active role in the safeguarding of interests of fish producers. The Federation has 32 members, which operate about 13,000 ha fish ponds (65% of the total fish pond area). The Fish Product Council and the newly established Carp Breeding Branch have also been affiliated to the Federation.
Eleven countries in Europe including Israel contributed with information to this report.
Finland and Sweden have large lake areas and The Baltic States have comparatively large lake areas with regard to the size of those countries. They have also large amounts of available water per capita
Except for Ireland and Hungary countries in the in the middle and western Europe have less amounts of water per capita.
In most countries industries and domestic uses take the greatest share of freshwater resources.
The main source for aquaculture is surface water- lakes and rivers.
The most common aquaculture technology is flow through system. Cages and /or ponds are the most common enclosures.
Interaction (competition) with other water users seem to be little.
The largest water quality problem is eutrophication followed by acidification.
Pretreatment of water supply is common as well as treatment of pond bottoms
Measures for treatment of discharged water are common and restrictions for water discharge appear in most countries.
In some cases aquaculture ponds are used for cleaning water from other activities.
Freshwater aquaculture is beneficial for society by producing more freshwater fish than capture fisheries, create employment, store water as reservoirs for e.g. agriculture and favour microclimate.
Freshwater aquaculture is important even in countries with coastal waters, e.g. Denmark, Sweden and UK.
The main species produced in eastern Europe is carp and in western Europe rainbow trout.
The production of juveniles for stocking and ranching is important in many countries.
Legal framework and licence system are rather comprehensive in many countries.
Regulation of discharged water exists in most countries.
Disease problems do not seem to be serious. Preventive measures and treatment of diseases are common.
Research on aquaculture is common in most countries, but usually of minor extent.
All countries have farmers� associations to promote aquaculture and support farmers.
Ackefors, H., 1999. Environmental impact of different farming technologies, pp. 145-169. In N. Svennevig, H. Reinertsen and M. New (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Sustainable Aquaculture Oslo, Norway, 2-5 November 1997. Rotterdam, Balkema.
EIFAC, 1998. Analysis of European Catch and Aquaculture Statistics, 1984-1996. Twentieth EIFAC Session, Praia do Carvoiero, Portugal, 23 June - 1 July 1998. EIFAC/XX/98/Inf.4: 18 p.
FAO, 1996. Report of the nineteenth session of the European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission. Dublin, Ireland, 11-19 June 1996. FAO Fisheries Report , No. 541. Rome, FAO. 62 p.
Gardner-Outlaw, T. and Engelman, R., 1997. Sustaining Water, Easing Scarcity: A second Update. Population Action International from internet.
http://www.populationaction.org/why_pop/water/water97.pdfHickley, P. and Tompkins, H. (eds.),1998. Recreational Fisheries. Social, Economic and Management Aspects. Fishing News Book, 310 p.
EIFAC Working Part on Aquatic Resources Management in Aquaculture
Questionnaire sent to all national correspondents within EIFAC
Part 1
(To be finalized by March 1997 )
A. Water supply in the country
1. Water supply for aquaculture and other users
1.1. Rainfall - average value in mm.
1.2. A short description of the hydrological cycle
1.3. Catchment area (drainage area) outside and inside the country (km2)
1.4. Lake arae (km2), number of lakes larger than 1 ha, types of lakes.
1.5. Main rivers, flow in m3 /year.
1.6. Any special characteristic data for your country.
2. The use of water by various users (industry, agriculture, domestic use and other users) in km3.3. Water supply for aquaculture in km3 /year.
Rough estimate of the water sources used (very common, common, occasionally, rare)
3.1. Well water
3.2. Surface water
3.3. Ground water
3.4. Wetlands
3.5. Rivers
3.6. Lakes
3.7. Drainage water from agriculture
3.8. Drainage water from other areas
4. Type of aquaculture technology used (qualitative estimate as above)
4.1. Flow through system
4.2. Closed system
4.3. Cages
4.4. Cages common size (area and volume)
4.5. Ponds including total covered area
4.6. Ponds; common size
4.7. Basins
4.8. Raceways
4.9. Raceways;
4.10. Other enclosures
4.11. Vallicoltura
4.12. Indoor (troughs, raceways etc.)
5.If you have got data on water use, please indicate for each technology above.6. Please, indicate the yield in inland aquaculture, if possible for each technology.
7. The concept of paying for water (per m3 used and destruction fee per m3)
7.1. Aquaculture
7.2. Agriculture
7.3. Industry
7.4. Urban areas
7.5. Tariff systems for various usersB. Interaction (competition) with other water users
Location of aquaculture operations in relation to the water resources system and the effect on level of intercation with other resource users:
1. Aquaculture operations upstreams and downstreams
2. Agriculture and animal husbandry
3. Forestry
4. Drinking water sources
5. Tourism and hotels
6. Urban areas
7. OthersC. Water quality and problem areas
Quality of water used in aquaculture-problem areas:
1. Acidification and release of metal ions.
2. Radioactive substances (water pollution and values in Bequerel per kg fish)
3. Pesticides (conc. in weater and animals etc.)
4. Industrial pollutants (conc. in water and animals)
5. Eutrophication (N and P conc. in water, values during winter period)
6. Humic acids
7. Gas ProblemsD. Water management within the farm
Pretreatment of water and various techniques to improve the water quality during culture:
Sedimentation basins
Aeration
UV-treatment
Ozonation
Liming
Sandfilters
Aquatic plants for absorbing nutrients and metals
Integtared technique with other animals.
Various techniques and their requirements for water:
Amount of water per production unit
Still water ponds
Flow through ponds
Recirculation water in ponds and pumping syustems
More sophisticated recirculating systems with tanks.
Part 2
(To be finalized by January 1998)
F. Water management of outgoing water
Sedimentation
Mechanical treatment
Biological treatment
Various types of filter system
Polishing ponds
Artificial wetland
Polluted water pay principle
G. Water management of processing plants
Harvest and slaughter
Dressing
Filleting
Smoking
PackageH. Aquaculture water management for the benefit of the society
Converter of wastes from other users
Water reservoirs
Fishing ponds
Recreational areas e.g. artificial wetlands
MicroclimateI. Product quality in relation to external influences
The influence by pesticides on flesh quality and the hazards for consumers.
Environmental impact from discharges from urban areas, e.g. bacteria and virus
Product quality in relation to sanitary regulations
Product quality in relation to aerial pollution
Depuration plants
J. The status of inland aquaculture 1994-1995
1. Production figures for commercial aquaculture
1.1. Species
1.2. No. of farms
1.3. No. of cages - volume, 1000 m3
1.4. No. of ponds- area, 1000 m2
1.5. No. of basins- volume, 1000 m3
2. Stock enhancement
3. Recreational fisheries
4. Disease problems
5. Use of disease agents, antibiotics etc.
K. Institutional and legal framework for governing the water use
1.Authorities
(a) Central agencies
(b) Regional agencies
(c) Local regulations
(d) Participation of the "Private " sector analysis of their roles at following levels:
decision-making process with regard to planning and policy relating water management in general, and to aquaculture, in particular.
implementation of policies and planning decisions
enforcement of legislation (laws and regulations) relating water-aquaculture
2.The legal framework governing aquaculture
(a) Application procedure and license system for farming
(b) Regulation for water uses: priority given to aquaculture, charges, etc.
(c) Regulation for discharge of water
(d)Control and surveillance system: sanctions3. Impact of legal and institutional framework
To what extent is the legal and institutional framework hampering/ enhancing development, resolving/ creating conflicts among water users, integrating aquaculture into general aquaculture into general water management.
L. Research institute and people dealing with various aspects of aquaculture and water use from various disciplines
Geology
Sedimentology
Hydrology
Technology
Biology
Microbiology
ChemistryM. Farmers and their associations
Do not forget the farmers!
The farmer and his understanding of environment
The farmer and the municipality
The farmer and the public opinion
The farmer�s relation to local authority
The farmer�s relation to regional authorities
The farmer�s relation to scientistsN. Concluding remarks on prospects for inland aquaculture
SWOT analysis of national prospects
1. Strength
2. Weakness
3. Opportunities
4. Threats
Appendix 2
Species occurring in freshwater aquaculture
Family
Latin Name
English name
Salmonidae
Salmo salar
Salmon
Salmonidae
Salmo trutta
Brown tout
Salmonidae
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Rainbow trout
Salmonidae
Salvelinus fontinalis
Brook trout
Salmonidae
Salvelinus alpinus
Arctic charr
Coregonidae
Coregonus spp.
Whitefish, vendace, cisco
Cyprinidae
Cyprinus carpio
Carp
Cyprinidae
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix
Silver carp
Cyprinidae
Aristichthys nobilis
Big head carp
Cyprinidae
Ctenopharyngodon idella
Grass carp
Cyprinidae
Tinca tinca
Tench
Carassius carassius
Crucian carp
Claridae
Clarias gariepinus
African catfish
Siluridae
Silurus glanis
Wels, catfish
Esociade
Esox lucius
Pike
Percidae
Stizostedion lucioperca
Pike-perch
Percidae
Perca fluviatilis
Perch
Anguillidae
Anguilla anguilla
Eel
Astacidae
Astacus astacus
Noble crayfish
Astacidae
Pacifastacus leniusculus
Signal crayfish
Cambaridae
Procambarus clarkii
Red swamp crayfish
Appendix 3
Working Party Contact DetailsList of participants attending the First ad hoc meeting 8-9 May 1995
Hans Ackefors (Convenor and Chairman)
Department of Zoology
Stockholm University
S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
Tel: +46-8-164020
Fax: +46-8-167715
E-mail: [email protected]Rajmund Trzebiatowski
Academy of Agriculture
Kazimierza Królewicza 4
71-550 Szczecin, Poland
Tel: +48-91-231064
Fax: +48-91-231347Paolo Melotti
Centro universitario di ricerca e didattica in acquacoltura e maricoltura
Universitá Degli Studi di Camerino
Lungomare Europa, 6
63039 S. Benedetto del Tronto (AP), Italy
Tel/Fax: +39-735-780474Alessandra Roncarati
Centro universitario di ricerca e didattica in acquacoltura e maricoltura
Universitá Degli Studi di Camerino
Lungomare Europa, 6
63039 S. Benedetto del Tronto (AP), Italy
Tel/Fax: +39-735-780474Leif Lykke Nielsen
Ribe Amt
Sorsigvej 35
DK-6760 Ribe, Denmark
Tel: +45-75424200
Fax: +45-75424911Harald Rosenthal (ICES Observer)
Institut für Meereskunde an der Universität Kiel,
Düsternbrooker Weg 20
2300 Kiel, Germany
Fel: +49-431-5973917
Fax: +49-431-565876Markku Pursiainen
Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute
Saimaa Fisheries Research and Aquaculture
Laasalantie 9
FIN-58175 Enonkoski, Finland
Tel: +358-57-345500
Fax: +358-57-3455059
E-mail: [email protected]László Váradi
Fish Culture Research Institute
5541 Szarvas
P.O. Box 47, Hungary
Tel: +36-66-312311
Fax: +36-66-312142
E-mail: [email protected]EIFAC Secretariat:
Albert Tacon
Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service
FAO Fisheries Department
Via delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy
Tel: +39-06-570-56470
Fax: +39-06-570-53020Annick Van Houtte
Legal Office
FAO Development Law Service
Via delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy
Tel: +39-06-570-54287
Fax: +39-06-570-54408
E-Mail: [email protected]
Uwe Barg (Technical Secretary)
Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service
FAO Fisheries Department
Via delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy
Tel: +39-06-570-53454
Fax: +39-06-570-53020
E-Mail: [email protected]