37 



nancial incentives, technical information and marketing assistance, 

 and third, estabHsh a friendly regulatory environment and consist- 

 ent public policy. 



So, what specifically should NOAA do? First, the regulatory and 

 permitting structures that govern marine aquaculture need to be 

 reexamined with a view toward simplification without loss of envi- 

 ronmental protection. The Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture, or 

 JSA, should be charged with designing a streamlined planning and 

 permitting process for marine aquaculture that emphasizes local. 

 State, and Federal coordination. NOAA could provide some of the 

 leadership and funding to make this possible. 



Second, NOAA itself should play a much more proactive role in 

 the development of marine aquaculture. While the U.S. Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture is the overall lead Federal agency for aqua- 

 culture, the NRC committee recommended that NOAA take on spe- 

 cific responsibilities for marine aquaculture. For example, the Na- 

 tional Sea Grant Program should be charged with leadership in 

 support of research and extension programs on marine aquaculture 

 related topics. Among the candidate research areas identified were 

 environmentally safe technology, methods, and systems for cultur- 

 ing marine species. 



The committee further identified the National Marine Fisheries 

 Service as the agency to take the lead regarding the potential use 

 of aquaculture to enhance marine fishery stocks. The committee 

 suggested that NMFS develop a comprehensive national policy to 

 direct marine stocking efforts and consider the potential roles of 

 the private sector in marine stock enhancement. This is extremely 

 important since fully 73 percent of the coastal States foresee one 

 or more roles for private aquaculture in enhancement of coastal 

 recreational and commercial fisheries. 



The 1993 NOAA strategic plan reflects the NRC committee's rec- 

 ommendations. Acceleration of the growth of U.S. aquaculture was 

 included as one of seven strategic actions that NOAA should take 

 to build sustainable marine fisheries. In addition, a recent work- 

 shop concluded that NOAA should become the advocate for ocean 

 aquaculture, should develop policy and cost-effective technologies to 

 support aquaculture in Federal waters, and investigate uses of 

 aquaculture for creating habitat in offshore areas. 



What remains now is for these recommendations and the NOAA 

 strategic plans to actually be put into action, and this will require 

 that NOAA place a much higher priority on marine aquaculture 

 programs and funding than it has previously. The NRC committee 

 recommended a $12 million national R&D initiative for marine 

 aquaculture; NOAA would be a good place to start with some of 

 this funding. 



In conclusion, marine aquaculture is an effective tool to restore 

 depleted species, help rebuild and enhance coastal habitats, 

 produce high-quality seafood to meet escalating consumer demand 

 and reduce reliance on imports, protect water quality, and create 

 jobs and economic development opportunities. NOAA is the prin- 

 cipal marine agency in this country, and its authorization legisla- 

 tion and its appropriations should clearly spell out marine aqua- 

 culture development as one of its priority missions, and one that 



