HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 616

BYRepresentatives Haugen, S. Wilson, Zellinsky and May

Regulating aquaculture to minimize its environmental impact.

House Committe on Environmental Affairs

Majority Report:     The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (11)

     Signed by Representatives Rust, Chair; Valle, Vice Chair; Brekke, Ferguson, Jesernig, Lux, Pruitt, Schoon, D. Sommers, Sprenkle and Walker.

House Staff:Karl Herzog (786-7271)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

FEBRUARY 4, 1988

BACKGROUND:

Aquaculture industries have operated in Washington State for over one hundred years. Until recently, aquaculture consisted primarily of oyster and clam growing. Over the last two decades there has been a diversification in aquaculture practices and technologies, including the development of mussel farming, seaweed cultivation, and salmon net pen rearing.  Many questions have been raised concerning the environmental, economic, and aesthetic impacts of these new forms of aquaculture.

Federal, state, and local laws currently regulate the aquaculture industry.  Federal regulation, under Section 10 of the Clean Water Act, requires a permit for any construction in navigable waters.  State requirements include a lease of public lands from the Department of Natural Resources, a hydraulic project permit from the Department of Fisheries, and a statement of consistency with the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, issued by the Department of Ecology.

Local governments generally regulate aquaculture under local Shoreline Master Plans.  Substantial development permits are required for projects valued over $2500.  Local governments also require completion of an environmental checklist pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act.  Environmental impact statements may be requested in some cases.  Currently, several local governments have established moratoriums on salmon net pen development.

Legislation enacted in 1985 established policies to encourage the development and expansion of aquaculture within the state. Certain special permit requirements for aquaculture industries were removed, and aquaculture was recognized as a branch of the agriculture industry for the purpose of applying state laws that provide for the advancement and protection of agriculture.

In 1987, the legislature allocated $150,000 to the Department of Fisheries to draft an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the salmon net pen industry. The EIS should be completed by April 1, 1989. A report containing interim guidelines for the salmon net pen industry was completed by a Department of Ecology contractor in December, 1986.  Because these interim guidelines have not been formally adopted, they are not strictly enforceable.

SUMMARY:

SUBSTITUTE BILL: The Department of Ecology must 1) adopt guidelines for aquacultural uses utilizing specified criteria; 2) establish requirements for baseline and operational monitoring of environmental conditions of aquaculture sites; and 3) adopt rules requiring consideration of the combined or cumulative impacts of the water and land-based components of aquaculture proposals.

The Department of Fisheries must prepare a report to the legislature on the economic impact of salmon net pen aquaculture to the state's commercial fishing industry by July 1, 1989.

Local jurisdictions must 1) require site characterization studies on aquaculture facilities before application for each substantial development permit; 2) require that applications include information on the handling and processing of aquacultural products and on any land-based aquacultural activities; and 3) incorporate the policies and provisions of this act into local shoreline management plans.

Applicants for experimental aquaculture projects by private, for-profit enterprises are subject to the same guidelines and criteria as non-experimental projects.

The act will terminate upon the effective date of any legislation passed in 1989 that implements a mediated agreement among the affected parties.

SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL: Language was deleted requiring the Department of Ecology to adopt rules establishing a preference scale for aquaculture practices. New language in the substitute bill requires the Department of Ecology to adopt guidelines for aquaculture uses. A section requiring local jurisdictions to classify projects with potential for adverse impact, including salmon net pen farming, as secondary, conditional uses was deleted. A section requiring the Department of Ecology to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement on salmon net pen farming was deleted. The deadlines for local governments to amend local shoreline management plans and for the Department of Fisheries to prepare a report on the economic impacts of salmon net pen aquaculture were extended to July 1, 1989. A new section was added to terminate the act upon any passage of legislation in 1989 that implements a mediated agreement among the affected parties.

Fiscal Note:    Requested January 26, 1988.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:     Representative Harriet Spanel; Representative Mary Margaret Haugen; Representative Sim Wilson;  Carol Ehlers; Dale Fisher, Kiket Bay Organization; Robert Hull, North Discovery Bay Organization; Arthur Whiteley, Marine Environmental Consortium; Elizabeth Tabbutt, Washington Environmental Council;  Steve Arbaugh, Puget Sound Gillnetters Assocation.

House Committee - Testified Against: Bill Taylor, Olympia Oyster Growers Association; Pat McElroy, Department of Natural Resources; Dan Swecker, Washington Fish Growers Association.

House Committee - Testimony For:     Salmon net pen farming will hurt the existing fishing industry by inhibiting navigation and diluting the gene stock.  Negative aesthetic impacts on property owners and the tourism industry will result if new aquaculture industries develop. The environmental impacts of aquaculture industries are not fully known, and the interim salmon net pen guidelines are not sufficient. Aquaculture should have its preferred status deleted; it should not be favored over other water-dependent uses. Local interests are bypassed in the state regulatory process.

House Committee - Testimony Against: Existing Washington state aquaculture guidelines are some of the world's most restrictive, and have been adopted as models by other agencies. Studies have shown that salmon net pen environmental impacts are minimal if the pens are sited and operated correctly. The state's waters are for the benefit of all citizens; water-dependent uses are a state priority. Monitoring regulations in the bill would destroy traditional aquaculture industries.