SENATE BILL REPORT

SB 5020

BYSenator Metcalf

Promoting certain aquacultural practices.

Senate Committee on Environment & Natural Resources

Senate Hearing Date(s):February 13, 1989; February 27, 1989

Majority Report:  That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5020 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.

      Signed by Senators Metcalf, Chairman; Amondson, Vice Chairman; Benitz, Owen, Patterson.

Senate Staff:Vic Moon (786-7469)

                  January 30, 1989

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES, FEBRUARY 27, 1989

BACKGROUND:

There has been considerable controversy concerning the location of floating aquaculture net pens in the state of Washington.  The discussion has involved questions of water pollution from aquaculture, as well as diseases bred by fish raised in this setting.  The location of aquaculture pens also has been criticized by upland property owners from an aesthetic standpoint.

SUMMARY:

Carefully regulated aquaculture has a potential for benefit to the state if properly sited and managed.  The Legislature finds that it is necessary to give preference to forms of aquaculture that provide the least potential for adverse impact to the environment.  Aquaculture is at its early stages in the state of Washington and further environmental information, site monitoring, field studies and research are necessary to evaluate the aquaculture industry and to minimize adverse environmental impacts.  While some forms of aquaculture represent an economic benefit, other forms may cause environmental costs and may displace existing industries.

Aquaculture may be considered preferred use of the shorelines of the state only if it is consistent with the maintenance of water quality, the control of pollution and the prevention of adverse environmental impact and does not displace or adversely interfere with existing or present potential uses of the aquatic environment.  Aquaculture is a preferred use if the projects do not substantially interfere with navigation or navigational access of upland property owners; does not interfere with wildlife habitat; and does not impair the aesthetic quality of the shoreline and aquatic environment.

The department will adopt rules to establish a preference scale of aquacultural practices, taking into account aesthetics, navigation, use of pesticides and antibiotics, impact on water quality, interference with benthic organisms, potential for interference with marine mammals and other wildlife, interference from commercial and sport and recreational uses of the shoreline, interference with public use of the shorelines, and methods of harvesting and processing aquacultural products.  Aquacultural practices that have little or no potential for adverse impact shall be considered preferred uses under the Shoreline Management Act.

The Department of Ecology will adopt rules to establish requirements for baseline and operational monitoring of the environment of aquacultural sites.  A site characterization study shall be required by each local jurisdiction prior to the approval of a substantial development permit under the Shoreline Management Act.  Applicants for experimental aquaculture projects will be subject to the same guidelines that apply to non-experimental projects.  The Department of Ecology will draw up rules requiring consideration of the combined or cumulative impacts of water-based elements of the aquatic proposal.

The department will prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement that addresses the cumulative impacts of salmon net pen farming in Puget Sound by July 1, 1990.  By July 1, 1990, the local governing bodies will draft amendments to their shoreline management plans to incorporate the policies of this act.

EFFECT OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE:

Aquaculture is limited by definition to saltwater salmon net pens, herring culture and seaweed culture.

Appropriation:    none

Revenue:    none

Fiscal Note:      requested February 7, 1989

Senate Committee - Testified: Mike Schwisow, Department of Agriculture (con); Ernest Chaffee (pro); Dan Swecker, Washington Aquaculture Association (con); Lee Bonacker, Washington Aquaculture Council (con); Margaret Johnson and Joe Miller, Marine Environmental Consortium (pro)