38 



cuts across its fisheries, habitat, and environmental stewardship 

 responsibiHties. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



[The prepared statement of Dr. Sandifer follows:] 



Prepared Statement of Paul A. Sandifer, Ph.D 



Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am pleased to be here today to 

 testify on behalf of marine aquaculture and the importance of Federal support for 

 this industry. My name is Paul Sandifer, and I am director of the Marine Resources 

 Division of the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department. The Ma- 

 rine Resources Division's facilities include its headquarters at Fort Johnson on 

 Charleston Harbor and the Waddell Mariculture Center, which is among the most 

 significant marine aquaculture experiment stations in the country. The state of 

 South Carolina has a rich history of leadership in the development of marine aqua- 

 culture, beginning in the 1940's with efforts of the late Dr. G. Robert Lunz at the 

 Bears Bluff Laboratories, and today marine aquaculture remains very important to 

 us. Personally, my background includes more than 2 decades of active participation 

 in research, development, extension and education related to marine aquaculture in 

 SC. Recently, I was privileged to serve as a member of the Committee on Assess- 

 ment of Technology and Opportunities for Marine Aquaculture in the United States 

 of the Marine Board, which is a standing board of the National Research Council, 

 National Academy of Science. 



My purposes today are to underline the importance of marine aquaculture to the 

 United States, describe some of the major factors inhibiting its development, empha- 

 size the necessity for close industry-govemment-university ties for its enhancement, 

 and provide some recommendations as to how the Federal government in general 

 and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in particular might im- 

 prove the climate for expansion of marine aquaculture here. 



WHY IS MARINE AQUACULTURE IMPORTANT 



Today the United States imports over 60 percent of its fish and shellfish, and 

 these imports of fishery products — some $9 billion worth per year — are the largest 

 contributor to the US trade deficit among agricultural products, and the second larg- 

 est, after petroleum, among all natural resource products. Annually, foreign-grown 

 aquaculture products constitute some $800 million of the fisheries products 

 consumed in this country. 



On a world-wide basis, commercial fisheries stocks are threatened by overfishing, 

 and catches of many species have leveled ofi", are declining, or in some cases have 

 essentially disappeared. Neither the world's oceans nor our 200-mile exclusive eco- 

 nomic zone can continue to produce more and more fisheries products, and many 

 fishery scientists think that humans have already reached, and are perhaps exceed- 

 ing, the potential yield from the oceans. This is where aquaculture comes in — it can 

 produce additional seafood, with resultant positive impacts on wild stocks and our 

 country's huge trade deficit. 



WHAT IS THE SITUATION IN THE US TODAY 



In the US, aquaculture production has increased an average of 20 percent by 

 weight annually since 1980, and it is the fastest growing segment of US agriculture. 

 However, freshwater aquaculture still accounts for roughly three-quarters of total 

 US aquaculture production. Of the approximately 25 percent contributed by marine 

 and estuarine aquaculture, some 80 percent comes from oyster culture, with the re- 

 maining 20 percent made up principally of clams, mussels, salmon and shrimp. 

 Thus, coastal aquaculture in the US is a relatively small industry. Yet many people 

 consider it vital, since most of the huge deficit in fishery products comes from impor- 

 tation of marine, not freshwater, seafood. To put it another way, most of the fishery 

 products that consumers want come from salt waters. 



Two years ago, a committee of the Marine Board of the prestigious National Re- 

 search Council concluded that a number of benefits would accrue to the US via the 

 development of "an economically viable, technologically advanced, and environ- 

 mentally sensitive healthy marine aquaculture industry." According to this commit- 

 tee's report,! these benefits would include "providing wholesome seafood to replace 



1 National Research Council, 1992. Marine Aquaculture, Opportunities for Growth. Report of 

 the Committee on Assessment of Technology and Opportunities for Marine Aquaculture in the 



