DEVELOPING A ROADMAP FOR TURKISH MARINE AQUACULTURE

TCP/TUR 3101 Project

COMMITTEE ON AQUACULTURE Working Group on SITING and CARRYING CAPACITY

21- 23 October 2008 Crete,  Greece

STATUS OF MARICULTURE IN STATUS OF MARICULTURE IN TURKEYTURKEY

In 2007 total production from the fisheries was In 2007 total production from the fisheries was 772,000 mt; 772,000 mt;

Aquaculture consisted of 18% - 80,840 (10.5%) Aquaculture consisted of 18% - 80,840 (10.5%) marine and 59,033 (7.5%) mt freshwater;marine and 59,033 (7.5%) mt freshwater;

340 farms, 108,000 mt annual production 340 farms, 108,000 mt annual production capacity;capacity;

20 hatchery with annual production capacity of 20 hatchery with annual production capacity of 220 million fry220 million fry

Aquaculture provides 25,000 jobs. Aquaculture provides 25,000 jobs.

General FeaturesGeneral Features

Trends of Aquaculture ProductionTrends of Aquaculture Production

45.450

63.000

79.94367.244

61.165

94.010

118.277

79.031

56.700

128.943 139.873

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

Species ProducedSpecies Produced

• Seabass• Seabream• Trout• Mussel• New species

41.900

33.500

2.740

1.100

1.600

Marine 80.840

Freshwater 59,033

GRAND TOTAL 139,873 mt

Number of Farms

Production systemsProduction systemsNo. of No. of FarmsFarms

Capacity Capacity (mt/yr)(mt/yr)

Cage FarmsCage Farms 236236 98,65098,650

Land-based (Ponds)Land-based (Ponds) 100100 3,1223,122

Rafts/Long-linesRafts/Long-lines 33 1,6251,625

Mobile (ship)Mobile (ship) 11 4,8004,800

TOTALTOTAL 340340 108 197108 197

Farms by Seas

16 (5%) 14 (4%)4 (1%)

305 (90%)

Med.

Aegean

Marmara

Black Sea

Distribution of Farms by Provinces

Provinces Number Capacity

Antalya1 8 4,570

Aydin3 15 526

Balikesir2 1 30

Canakkale2 3 656

Edirne2 1 100

Hatay1 1 561

İzmir3 70 20,880

Mersin1 4 600

Muğla3 207 63,593

Ordu4 6 1,160

Rize4 4 750

Trabzon4 3 2.900

1: Mediterranean; 2: Sea of Marmara; 3: Aegean Sea; 4: Black Sea

Major Provinces

(5%)

(4%)

(1.1%)

(90%)

Farms by EnvironmnetFarms by Environmnet

56%

14%

29%

0%1%Near shore

Offshore

Ponds

Rafts

Ship

Farms by Species and Production Farms by Species and Production CapacityCapacity

SpeciesFarms

(%)

Sea bass and Sea bream 89

Trout and Sea bass 2,8

Bass, Bream and New Species 2,5

Tuna 2,2

Trout 1,8

Shellfish (mussel) 0,9

Sea bass 0,6

Mussel and Sea bass 0,3

Production Capacity

%

≤ 50 42

51-100 18

101-250 16

251-500 6

501-1000 11

1001 6

DEVELOPING A ROADMAP FOR TURKISH MARINE AQUACULTURE SITE SELECTION

AND ZONING USUNG THE ECOSYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT

TCP/TUR 3101 PROJECT

Background

Pressures from certain media, summer house owners, some politicians, tourism sector, NGOs

Environmental Law was amended to exclude marine cages from environmentally sensitive areas, enclosed bays and near shore areas on 26 April 2006.

Based on amendment in Environmental Law a new decree entitled “Notification on determination of sensitive enclosed bays and gulfs areas where fish farms excluded - No: 26413” was issued on 24 January 2007.

Those fish farms in the sensitive areas should evaluate their situation according to criteria (see Table) and report the Ministry of Environment and Forestry before May 1, 2007.

Those cage farms cannot meet the criteria (see Table) will be closed before May 13, 2007 (this date has not been applied due to Supreme Court decision).

Unfortunately amendment in the law and Notification issued without proper consultation with stakeholders and the definitions in the bill are considered somewhat vague.

In addition duration given farmers to move new sites was very short and unrealistic.

Background

Parameters and criteria for sensitive areas where cage fish farms can not be set:

Parameters Criteria

Water depth ≤ 30m

Distance from coastline ≤ 0.6 mile

Current speed ≤ 0.1 m/sec

Fish farms also cannot be established on natural and archaeological areas.

Assesment of Eurtrophication Risk: Interpretation of the Trix Index (TI):

TRIX Index (TI) Explanation

TI < 4 No eutrophication risk

4 ≤ TI ≤ 6 High eutrophication risk

TI > 6 Already eutrophic

BackgroundBackground

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA) (MARA) of Turkey of Turkey asked FAO technical assistance;asked FAO technical assistance;

FAO technical assistance has been considered key FAO technical assistance has been considered key to the success of this project, as the organization to the success of this project, as the organization can play its natural role as neutral agency with can play its natural role as neutral agency with technical capacity in aquaculture as well as in the technical capacity in aquaculture as well as in the provision of policy guidance and stakeholder provision of policy guidance and stakeholder coordination; coordination;

In addition In addition FAO and GFCM are the only FAO and GFCM are the only international organizations which are currently international organizations which are currently collaborating in aquaculture with all countries of the collaborating in aquaculture with all countries of the MediterraneanMediterranean..

Minister for Environment and ForestryMinister for Environment and Forestry

Measures Taken as SolutionMeasures Taken as Solution

Identification of new zones and sitesIdentification of new zones and sites (Izmir, (Izmir, Mugla, Aydin, Mersin)Mugla, Aydin, Mersin); ;

Regulatory studiesRegulatory studies

Discussions on implementing strategic EIADiscussions on implementing strategic EIA

TUBITAK ProjTUBITAK Projectect

FAO-TCP ProjFAO-TCP Project (ect (TCP/TUR 3101))

Mugla – Gulluk Gulf

TCP/TUR 3101 Project

Main objectiveMain objective to technically assist the Government of to technically assist the Government of Turkey in the development of firstly a roadmap for Turkey in the development of firstly a roadmap for sound marine aquaculture site selection and secondly sound marine aquaculture site selection and secondly a zoning plan for marine aquaculture following the a zoning plan for marine aquaculture following the pan-Mediterranean guidelines for fish farmers.pan-Mediterranean guidelines for fish farmers.

Main Partners:Main Partners: FAO and MARA (Ministry of FAO and MARA (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs)Agriculture and Rural Affairs)

Major beneficiaries:Major beneficiaries: MARA, MEF (Min. of Env), Min. MARA, MEF (Min. of Env), Min. oof f Culture and Tourism, Yachting clubs, fish farmers, Culture and Tourism, Yachting clubs, fish farmers, local governments, tourism sector,local governments, tourism sector,

Duration:Duration: December 2007 – September 2008),December 2007 – September 2008), Startup meeting: 10-11 July 2008, Ankara 10-11 July 2008, Ankara

Expected Outputs

Recommendations to Government for clarifying the current situation on siting of marine aquaculture.

Marine aquaculture farmers and governmental decision makers trained in the application of commonly agreed upon site selection criteria and identification of relocation options, using the ecosystem approach to aquaculture management.

A draft pilot zoning plan for one selected location prepared. Increased awareness and social acceptability of other

stakeholders active in the coastal marine environment on the rightful place of aquaculture within coastal area development and management.

An advocacy brochure on the place of marine aquaculture within the coastal environment and other leaflets as required in the process.

A roadmap and project for developing sound mariculture siting and management built in a multi-stakeholder environment using participatory approaches.

A new project proposal to seek funding as UTF or other funding mechanisms prepared.

Major Activities 1: Startup Meeting(10 -11 July 2008, Ankara)(10 -11 July 2008, Ankara)

VVisitisitss and meetings held at:and meetings held at: - Ministry of Agriculture and Rural AffairsMinistry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs: : the the

Directorate of Agricultural Production and Directorate of Agricultural Production and Development (GDAPD) Development (GDAPD)

- Ministry of Environment and ForestryMinistry of Environment and Forestry: : the General the General Directorate of Environmental ManagementDirectorate of Environmental Management and and the the General Director of Environmental Impact General Director of Environmental Impact Assessment and PlanningAssessment and Planning..

It was prepared and conducted and by a FAO team (National and international Consultants plus an FAO FIMA officer) together with Ministry (MARA) personnel;

Attended by 37 participants from 22 national ministries, institutions, farmer groups, companies and NGOs;

The expected output was developing a draft roadmap towards ecosystem approached management of Turkish marine aquaculture;

The first part of the activity consisted of 6 presentations made by the FAO team and the MARA. .

Major Activities 2: 1st Stakeholder Workshop (16 -17 July 2008, Izmir)(16 -17 July 2008, Izmir)

1st Stakeholder Workshop

A facilitation approach was used and participants were divided in groups and were asked to write out 2-3 major issues/problems of marine aquaculture in Turkey.

Various issues raised gathered under group headings (including environmental impacts, R&D, education and training, investment and credit, farm management, mariculture management and coastal zone management).

The sources of the problems and proposed solutions were also asked the groups.

The final part of the exercise consisted of prioritising the solutions and actions and placing them in a time frame

First Workshop, IzmirFirst Workshop, Izmir

1st 1st Stakeholders Stakeholders WorkshopWorkshop

Stake Holders Defining The Problems….

Road MapRoad Map

– Immediate ActionImmediate Action– Action plan 1 year to 3 yearsAction plan 1 year to 3 years– Action plan 3 years to 5 yearsAction plan 3 years to 5 years

Identifying the problems Identifying the problems - - 11

Management and AdministrationManagement and Administration– Coordination gap between MinistriesCoordination gap between Ministries– Legislative conflictsLegislative conflicts– Bureaucracy for permittingBureaucracy for permitting– Need for DNeed for DGG for for Fisheries and Fisheries and

AquacultureAquaculture– Need long term planningNeed long term planning– Need Need identifying identifying zones for aquaculturezones for aquaculture

Identifying the problems Identifying the problems - - 22

Site selection and logisiticsSite selection and logisitics– Need to identify new sitesNeed to identify new sites– Conflict between MinistriesConflict between Ministries– Insufficient jettiesInsufficient jetties– Insufficient shore basesInsufficient shore bases

Other problems Other problems

Poor image of aquaculturePoor image of aquaculture Lack of market orientated approachLack of market orientated approach Need for streamlined Credit and Need for streamlined Credit and

financefinance High sea rental costsHigh sea rental costs Lack of vocational trainingLack of vocational training Lack of researchLack of research Conflicts with other coastal usersConflicts with other coastal users

One conflict area: Gerence Bay -One conflict area: Gerence Bay -IzmirIzmir

Bodrum, Mugla: Summer Houses Bodrum, Mugla: Summer Houses and Cagesand Cages

Field study of Gerence Bay-IzmirField study of Gerence Bay-Izmir

2nd Stakeholder Workshop (10 -10 -11 August 11 August 2008, Mugla)2008, Mugla)

Fees

YerYer Fee for per 1000 mFee for per 1000 m2 per year per year İzmirİzmir : 2100 Euro: 2100 Euro MuğlaMuğla : 800: 800 MersinMersin : 275: 275 AntalyaAntalya : 275: 275 Black SeaBlack Sea : 400: 400

2nd Workshop2nd Workshop

AAttended by 62 participants belonging ttended by 62 participants belonging to 5 national institutions, 16 fish farmer to 5 national institutions, 16 fish farmer companies, 6 aquaculture support companies, 6 aquaculture support industries, 3 farmer associations. industries, 3 farmer associations.

PPresentations were given by the resentations were given by the coordinator, international and national coordinator, international and national consultants. consultants.

Questions arising were answered at the Questions arising were answered at the end of each session.end of each session.

2nd Workshop: Presentations2nd Workshop: Presentations

Benefits to the producers by undertaking EIAs and monitoring Benefits to the producers by undertaking EIAs and monitoring of the environmentof the environment,,

Offshore and Open Sea Farming TechnologyOffshore and Open Sea Farming Technology,, Offshore and Open Sea Farming Ancillary equipmentOffshore and Open Sea Farming Ancillary equipment,, Offshore and Open Sea Farming ManagementOffshore and Open Sea Farming Management,, Financial requirements Offshore vs Open SeaFinancial requirements Offshore vs Open Sea,, Minimising RisksMinimising Risks,, New speciesNew species,, New technology for Offshore and Open SeasNew technology for Offshore and Open Seas,, Regulations for aquaculture license, EIA and monitoringRegulations for aquaculture license, EIA and monitoring Process for setting up a fish farmProcess for setting up a fish farm,, Role of the Ministries in regulating aquacultureRole of the Ministries in regulating aquaculture,, Site selection CriteriaSite selection Criteria,, PProposed road map for moving offshoreroposed road map for moving offshore

2nd Workshop: Identifying Major 2nd Workshop: Identifying Major Problems and Potential SolutionsProblems and Potential Solutions

The participants were asked to identify fundamental problems and potential solutions. Following the discussions of the first day the problems were classified under 3 main categories:

1. Management and Administration: Total 35% - Coordination gap among Ministries – (legislation, authority and

responsibility conflict) 9% - Legislative chaos – (each organization has a different legislative

implementation related to marine aquaculture) 7% - To steamline the bureaucracy relevant to Aquaculture

Certification and Licensing Requirements 7%. - To establish a separate General Directorate for Fisheries and

Aquaculture since authority in MARA is divided among the various General Directorates in this issue 5%.

- Lack of long-term mariculture development plans 3.5%. - The need to define mariculture zones in the coastal zone 3.5%.

.... Identifying Major Problems .... Identifying Major Problems and Potential Solutionsand Potential Solutions

1. 1. Site Selection and Logistic SupportSite Selection and Logistic Support:: Total 26% Total 26% A –A – Site Selection, 15.5%Site Selection, 15.5%

– Defining new potential sites, 7%.Defining new potential sites, 7%.– Conflict among the Ministries, 5%.Conflict among the Ministries, 5%.– Fry nursery site located inshore 3.5%.Fry nursery site located inshore 3.5%.

B – Logistic Problem 10.5 %B – Logistic Problem 10.5 %– Lack of Jetties.Lack of Jetties.– Land-based office (multipurpose – nets, food Land-based office (multipurpose – nets, food

storage, temporary accommodation, basic fish storage, temporary accommodation, basic fish processing).processing).

.... Identifying Major Problems .... Identifying Major Problems and Potential Solutionsand Potential Solutions

3. 3. Other ProblemsOther Problems:: Total 39.5%. Total 39.5%. - - Image promotion, 9%. Image promotion, 9%. - - Lack of a market oriented approach in marine Lack of a market oriented approach in marine

aquaculture in Turkey, 5.5%.aquaculture in Turkey, 5.5%. - - Credit and financing, high rental prices, assurance 9%.Credit and financing, high rental prices, assurance 9%. - - Problems related to operations of off-shore conditions, Problems related to operations of off-shore conditions,

5.5%.5.5%. - - Lack of well trained technicians, 5.0%. Lack of well trained technicians, 5.0%. - - Inadequate Research and Development (R&D) and Inadequate Research and Development (R&D) and

where there is R&D existing the results not reaching where there is R&D existing the results not reaching the producer, 3.5%. the producer, 3.5%.

- - Conflicts among the users of the coastal zone, 2.0%.Conflicts among the users of the coastal zone, 2.0%.

From old farms to new farmsFrom old farms to new farms

Old Style Cages

New style

The The Road mapRoad map

Strengthening Institutional OrganisationStrengthening Institutional Organisation– Contribute to the creation of a General Contribute to the creation of a General

Directorate (GD) for Fisheries and AquacultureDirectorate (GD) for Fisheries and Aquaculture– Capacity building for Ministry Departments at Capacity building for Ministry Departments at

provincial levelprovincial level– Creation of a Special Commission for Creation of a Special Commission for

Mariculture Development (SCMD)Mariculture Development (SCMD)– Formation of an Integrated Coastal Management Formation of an Integrated Coastal Management

Board (ICMB) under the Prime MinistryBoard (ICMB) under the Prime Ministry

Proposed InstitutionsProposed Institutions

Inter-Ministerial Agreement for the development of

aquaculture

Special Commission for Aquaculture Development

Ankara

Provincial Commissions for

Aquaculture Development

Provincial Development

Agencies

Work

together

Prime Ministry

Integrated Coastal Management Board for

Mariculture , Ankara

Provincial ICM Boards Cooperate

together

Planning Mariculture DevelopmentPlanning Mariculture Development

There is a need for a thorough review of mariculture There is a need for a thorough review of mariculture planning and the through integration of mariculture planning and the through integration of mariculture into the coastal zone development. However, this into the coastal zone development. However, this will require time and funding. will require time and funding.

Review of zoning for maricultureReview of zoning for mariculture Review of the integration of mariculture into Coastal Review of the integration of mariculture into Coastal

PlanningPlanning Data collection of essential parameters for open Data collection of essential parameters for open

sea site selection sea site selection Expand the strategic aquaculture development Expand the strategic aquaculture development

plan:plan: Review models that can be used for production Review models that can be used for production

carrying capacity estimationcarrying capacity estimation

Managing Mariculture DevelopmentManaging Mariculture Development

Review aquaculture legislation and regulations and role of Review aquaculture legislation and regulations and role of aquaculture Ministries/Institutionsaquaculture Ministries/Institutions

Review present institutions responsible for mariculture Review present institutions responsible for mariculture development development

Review and recommend revisions of mariculture regulations Review and recommend revisions of mariculture regulations and legislationsand legislations

Review regulations on Environmental IssuesReview regulations on Environmental Issues Review EIAs for maricultureReview EIAs for mariculture Review regulations on monitoringReview regulations on monitoring Review of decision making process for mariculture Review of decision making process for mariculture

developmentdevelopment Review of permit procedures and requirements for Review of permit procedures and requirements for

transportation and exportationtransportation and exportation Review of leasing and permitting proceduresReview of leasing and permitting procedures Review animal welfare issuesReview animal welfare issues

Support for Support for MMariculture ariculture DDevelopmentevelopment

PR to encourage fish consumption and enhance the image of mariculture

Credit and finance guidelines Insurance Guidelines Training needs assessment, draft training curriculum and

identify Faculties and Institutes Research needs assessment Improved technology transfer, and access to global

information and technology in mariculture Establish an aquaculture extension service Additional Fish Health Laboratories Establishment of Quarantine facilities Promotion and Marketing services

Aquaculture Zoning Aquaculture Zoning PPlan for Izmirlan for Izmir

OutputOutput:: A draft pilot zoning plan for one selected location which will be A draft pilot zoning plan for one selected location which will be included short, medium and long term options for present and future included short, medium and long term options for present and future marine aquaculture enterprise in support of a sustainable sector marine aquaculture enterprise in support of a sustainable sector development.development.

Moving cage farms offshoreMoving cage farms offshore: : According to Aquaculture Regulation According to Aquaculture Regulation following requirements should be met in site: following requirements should be met in site:

Space/area should be large enough for rotation and should not be Space/area should be large enough for rotation and should not be less than twice of the actual area occupied by cages. less than twice of the actual area occupied by cages.

Distance between tuna cage farms, and tuna and other fish farms can Distance between tuna cage farms, and tuna and other fish farms can not be less than not be less than 22 k kmm, and less than , and less than 11 k kmm between other fish farms. between other fish farms.

Minimum annual production capacities of farms are set Minimum annual production capacities of farms are set as as a cage a cage farm is 250 mt/y. farm is 250 mt/y.

On offshore, open coast and outside the enclosed bays and gulfs On offshore, open coast and outside the enclosed bays and gulfs cage sites should have minimum 40 m water depth. However, cage sites should have minimum 40 m water depth. However, Aquaculture Department may allocate sites for cage farming less than Aquaculture Department may allocate sites for cage farming less than 40 m taking into account capacity of farm, water depth, current speed 40 m taking into account capacity of farm, water depth, current speed and intended production system/technology. and intended production system/technology.

Gerence Bay - IzmirGerence Bay - Izmir

Planned cage farms in Gerence Bay

Before moving cages

Production capacityThere are 14 farms planned for Gerence Bay with a total capacity of 4,900 tonnes. Of the 14 farms planned only 4 have approved EIAs at the present time.

Example of Potential Zoning of Aquaculture in Gerence and Ildir Bays

New Aquaculture Zones in Izmir

New Aquaculture Zone in Izmir

Identification of new aquaculture zones based on absence of conflicts

There needs to be data collection for these new areas and they need to be re- assessed

on the basis of the site selection criteria

There should be a rThere should be a review of the needs eview of the needs for logistic support for offshore farms for logistic support for offshore farms

Muğla: Zoning Problem Solved?Muğla: Zoning Problem Solved?

PR: PR: Advocacy Brochure Advocacy Brochure

PR: PR: Advocacy BrochureAdvocacy Brochure

Project Project PProposalroposal

Output 1 – Coastal zone planning for mariculture developmentOutput 1 – Coastal zone planning for mariculture development Review of new zones as to their suitability for aquacultureReview of new zones as to their suitability for aquaculture Identify potential new areas for open sea aquacultureIdentify potential new areas for open sea aquacultureOutput 2 – Mariculture production carrying capacityOutput 2 – Mariculture production carrying capacity Review models for estimating carrying capacityReview models for estimating carrying capacity Estimate finfish carrying capacity in two aquaculture zonesEstimate finfish carrying capacity in two aquaculture zonesOutput 3 – Aquaculture regulatory frameworkOutput 3 – Aquaculture regulatory framework Review of current legislation and identify conflict issues among Review of current legislation and identify conflict issues among

the Ministries and Institutesthe Ministries and Institutes Review scope and data collection for mariculture EIAReview scope and data collection for mariculture EIA Review monitoring requirements for assessing mariculture Review monitoring requirements for assessing mariculture

impactimpactOutput 4 – Support for mariculture developmentOutput 4 – Support for mariculture development Research needs assessment and prioritisationResearch needs assessment and prioritisation Training needs assessment and prioritisationTraining needs assessment and prioritisation

Project Project PProposalroposal

BBeneficiarieseneficiaries:: The direct targeted beneficiaries in the The direct targeted beneficiaries in the

project are MARA, MEF, fish farmers project are MARA, MEF, fish farmers and mariculture sector as whole. and mariculture sector as whole.

In addition companies providing In addition companies providing service, system and equipment, service, system and equipment, tourism sector and local fishermen will tourism sector and local fishermen will also benefit.also benefit.

Duration:Duration: 30-36, starting from 2009 30-36, starting from 2009 Budget: 2-3 million USDBudget: 2-3 million USD

The project team: Enjoying their dinnerThe project team: Enjoying their dinner

Thank You for Your Attention