Cage fight: the looming tension over offshore aquaculture in the Gulf – Sun Sentinel

Offshore Aquaculture Development in the Gulf of Mexico: An SDG-Focused Analysis

The development of offshore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico represents a complex intersection of economic opportunity, environmental risk, and food security challenges. Initiatives led by companies such as Ocean Era and Manna Fish Farms aim to establish finfish farms in federal waters, a move that directly engages with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes the proposed projects through the framework of the SDGs, examining the potential contributions and inherent conflicts related to sustainable development.

Economic and Food Security Implications

Contribution to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

Offshore aquaculture is positioned as a critical solution to meet growing global food demands while alleviating pressure on wild fish stocks, which are increasingly pushed to the brink of collapse.

• Addressing Food Demand: With over half of all seafood consumed globally now originating from farmed sources, aquaculture is essential for future food security.
• Sustainable Production Methods: Proponents argue that offshore aquaculture offers a low-impact method for producing protein, aligning with the principles of sustainable production under SDG 12.
• Reducing Import Reliance: The United States currently imports approximately 80% of its seafood, creating a significant trade deficit. Domestic offshore aquaculture aims to enhance national food sovereignty and promote responsible consumption by providing a local, regulated source of seafood.

Alignment with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth)

The expansion of the aquaculture industry is projected to stimulate economic growth in coastal communities.

• Market Growth: U.S. aquaculture sales reached over $1.96 billion in 2023, indicating a robust and growing sector.
• Job Creation: The establishment of commercial-scale fish farms is expected to invigorate local economies that currently rely on seasonal commercial fishing, thereby creating stable employment opportunities.
• Federal Support: Government initiatives, including executive orders aimed at reducing regulatory burdens and identifying “aquaculture opportunity areas,” are intended to foster industry growth and enhance American seafood competitiveness.

Environmental Sustainability and Marine Conservation

Challenges to SDG 14 (Life Below Water)

Despite its potential benefits, open-ocean aquaculture poses significant environmental risks that challenge the objectives of SDG 14. Concerns are primarily focused on the potential for pollution, disease transmission, and disruption of marine ecosystems.

1. Nutrient Pollution: Fish farms release significant amounts of waste, including feces and uneaten feed, which are high in nitrogen and phosphorus. This nutrient loading can fuel harmful algal blooms, such as the red tide events common in the Gulf, and contribute to the expansion of oxygen-depleted “dead zones.” The Ocean Era pilot project alone is permitted to discharge up to 55,000 pounds of waste annually.
2. Disease and Parasite Transmission: The high density of fish in net pens creates an environment where diseases and parasites, such as sea lice, can spread rapidly and potentially infect wild fish populations.
3. Genetic and Ecological Disruption from Escapes: Storms or operational failures can lead to mass escapes of farmed fish. As seen in Washington state’s 2017 salmon farm breach, these events can lead to genetic hybridization with wild populations, altering their fitness and resilience.
4. Impact on Marine Wildlife: The physical infrastructure of fish farms, including nets and mooring lines, poses an entanglement risk to protected and endangered species such as sea turtles, dolphins, and whales.

Mitigation Strategies for Sustainable Production (SDG 12 & 14)

Experts and industry leaders assert that these environmental risks can be managed through a combination of advanced technology, careful planning, and robust regulation.

• Strategic Siting: NOAA’s identification of Aquaculture Opportunity Areas is intended to site farms in locations with appropriate depth and currents to effectively disperse waste and minimize ecological impact.
• Advanced Engineering: Companies like Ocean Era are developing submersible net pens designed to be lowered beneath the surface during hurricanes, reducing the risk of storm damage and mass escapes.
• Responsible Management Practices: Strategies include stocking fish at lower densities to reduce disease risk and farming native species like red drum to minimize the ecological harm of any potential escapees.

Regulatory Framework and Stakeholder Engagement

Governance and Policy Landscape

The primary obstacle to the development of offshore aquaculture in the U.S. is a complex and fragmented regulatory environment.

• Regulatory Hurdles: Hopeful aquaculturists face a difficult, expensive, and years-long permitting process involving multiple federal agencies, which deters investment and slows progress.
• Federal Initiatives: The federal government has made efforts to streamline this process through executive orders and the pursuit of legislation like the Marine Aquaculture Research for America (MARA) Act, which aims to establish a clear regulatory framework.
• Economic Viability: The high costs associated with navigating regulations and implementing environmentally safe technologies mean that successful operations will likely require significant corporate investment.

Stakeholder Perspectives and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

The successful and sustainable implementation of offshore aquaculture requires collaboration and consensus-building among diverse stakeholders, a core principle of SDG 17.

• Industry Proponents: Companies and advocacy groups view offshore aquaculture as an essential and responsible method for meeting food demands and argue that environmental impacts can be effectively managed.
• Environmental Organizations: Groups like Healthy Gulf and Suncoast Waterkeeper express deep concern over the potential for pollution and ecological damage, advocating for stringent oversight and questioning the precedent of further industrializing the Gulf of Mexico.
• Commercial Fishers: Local fishing communities have raised concerns about a lack of transparency, potential displacement from traditional fishing grounds, and the cumulative impact of multiple large-scale farms.
• Scientific Community: Experts confirm that sustainable aquaculture is technologically feasible but stress that it requires rigorous environmental regulations, which may be at risk if the permitting process is streamlined without sufficient safeguards.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on offshore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico addresses and connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by exploring the balance between food production, economic development, and environmental protection.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: The article directly connects to this goal by presenting aquaculture as a solution to meet the increasing global demand for seafood, especially as “wild-caught fisheries are pushed to the brink of collapse” and the “global population continues to rise.” It focuses on increasing food production through sustainable farming practices.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The potential for open-ocean aquaculture to “invigorate coastal economies” is a key argument made by proponents. This aligns with promoting sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth and productive employment. The article mentions total U.S. aquaculture sales reaching over $1.96 billion in 2023, indicating its economic contribution.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: The article highlights innovation in the aquaculture industry, such as the development of “submersible net pen design which allows a cage to bob beneath the surface during a hurricane.” The entire discussion revolves around building a new, resilient, and sustainable infrastructure for food production in the open ocean.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The core theme is shifting from potentially unsustainable wild-caught fishing to farmed seafood. The article notes that “over half the seafood eaten by people is now farmed.” It also addresses the U.S. seafood deficit, where “Roughly 80% of the seafood Americans consume is imported,” suggesting a move towards more localized and sustainable production patterns.
• SDG 14: Life Below Water: This is the most critically discussed SDG. The article extensively details the potential negative impacts of aquaculture on marine ecosystems, including pollution from fish waste (“high in nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen”), the risk of worsening “red tide” and the “Gulf Dead Zone,” threats to native species from disease and entanglement, and the genetic impact of escaped farmed fish on wild populations. It explores the challenge of conserving and sustainably using the oceans and marine resources.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s discussion, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems… The entire premise of Neil Sims’s vision for offshore aquaculture is to create a sustainable and “very, very low impact” method of seafood production to meet growing demand.
2. Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation… The development of offshore aquaculture represents a diversification of coastal economies, and the article explicitly mentions technological innovations like submersible pens designed to withstand hurricanes.
3. Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. The push for aquaculture is framed as a response to the over-exploitation of wild fish stocks, with the article stating that “wild-caught fisheries are pushed to the brink of collapse.” This represents an attempt to manage seafood resources more sustainably.
4. Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution. This target is central to the environmental concerns raised. The article highlights the risk of pollution from fish farms, noting that one project is permitted to “produce up to 55,000 pounds of waste — mostly uneaten food, dead fish and feces — every year,” which contains nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen that can cause harmful algae blooms.
5. Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts… The concerns of environmentalists about how fish farms could “further damage an already polluted Gulf,” threaten native species, and impact the ocean bottom directly relate to this target.
6. Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing… The article provides context for the rise of aquaculture by mentioning the history of overfishing red drum in the Gulf, which led to a ban on commercial harvesting. Aquaculture is presented as an alternative to harvesting wild stocks.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress.

• Proportion of food supply from aquaculture: The statement that “over half the seafood eaten by people is now farmed” is a direct indicator of the global shift towards aquaculture, relevant to Target 2.4.
• Economic value of aquaculture: The figure “Total U.S. aquaculture sales in 2023 reached over $1.96 billion, up 3.8% from 2018” is a clear economic indicator for measuring progress under SDG 8.
• National food self-sufficiency/trade balance: The statistics that “Roughly 80% of the seafood Americans consume is imported” and the seafood trade deficit is “more than $20 billion” are indicators for Target 12.2, measuring reliance on domestic vs. foreign production.
• Pollution load from aquaculture facilities: The permit allowing the Ocean Era project to “produce up to 55,000 pounds of waste… every year” is a specific, measurable indicator of potential nutrient pollution, relevant to Target 14.1. Measuring the actual levels of nitrogen and phosphorus around the farm would be a direct way to track its impact.
• Frequency and extent of harmful algal blooms: The article’s concern that fish farms could worsen “noxious red tide” and the “Gulf Dead Zone” implies that the size, duration, and frequency of these events are key environmental indicators for Target 14.2.
• Number of escaped farmed fish: The reference to the 2017 incident where a “quarter million non-native salmon” escaped into Puget Sound serves as a stark example of an indicator for measuring the environmental risks and operational failures of aquaculture, relevant to Target 14.2.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: sun-sentinel.com