Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council
  • Home
  • About Us
    • AmeriCorps
    • Annual Reports
    • Board of Directors
    • Employment Opportunities
    • Internship
    • Service Area
    • Staff
  • Our Waters
    • Great Lakes >
      • Lake Superior
      • Lake Michigan
      • Lake Huron
      • Lake Erie
      • Lake Ontario
      • Great Lakes Water Use and Diversions
      • Great Lakes Water Levels >
        • Historic, Current, and Projected
        • Influences on Great Lakes Water Levels
        • Frequently Asked Questions
        • International Upper Great Lakes Study
    • Groundwater
    • Inland Lakes >
      • Adams Lake
      • Bass Lake
      • Beals Lake
      • Lake Bellaire
      • Ben-Way Lake
      • Birch Lake
      • Black Lake
      • Burt Lake
      • Lake Charlevoix
      • Clam Lake
      • Clear Lake
      • Crooked Lake
      • Deer Lake
      • Dog Lake
      • Douglas Lake - Cheboygan County
      • Douglas Lake - Otsego County
      • Elk Lake
      • Ellsworth Lake
      • Lake Geneserath
      • Lake Geneva
      • Hanley Lake
      • Huffman Lake
      • Intermediate Lake
      • Lancaster Lake
      • Lance Lake
      • Larks Lake
      • Long Lake - Cheboygan County
      • Marion Lake
      • Millicoquins Lake
      • Mud Lake
      • Mullett Lake
      • Munro Lake
      • Nowland Lake
      • Paradise Lake (Carp Lake)
      • Pickerel-Crooked Lakes
      • Round Lake
      • Scotts Lake
      • Silver Lake
      • Sixmile Lake
      • Skegemog Lake
      • Spring Lake
      • St. Claire Lake
      • Susan Lake
      • Thayer Lake
      • Thumb Lake (Lake Louise)
      • Torch Lake
      • Twin Lake
      • Walloon Lake
      • Wildwood Lake
      • Wilson Lake
      • Wycamp Lake
    • Rivers and Streams >
      • Bear River >
        • Photos of Bear River
        • Bear River - Videos
      • Boyne River
      • Crooked River
      • Eastport Creek
      • Horton Creek
      • Jordan River
      • Kimberly Creek
      • Maple River
      • Milligan Creek
      • Minnehaha Creek
      • Mullett Creek
      • Pigeon River
      • Stover Creek
      • Sturgeon River
      • Tannery Creek
    • Watersheds >
      • Black Lake Watershed
      • Burt Lake Watershed
      • Cheboygan River Watershed
      • Lake Charlevoix Watershed >
        • Lake Charlevoix Watershed Advisory Committee
        • Lake Charlevoix Watershed Protection
      • Elk River Chain of Lakes Watershed >
        • ERCOL Watershed Plan DRAFT
        • ERCOL Watershed Committee
      • Little Traverse Bay Watershed >
        • Little Traverse Bay Shore Survey
        • Little Traverse Bay Watershed Committee >
          • LTBay-Survey
        • Road Stream Crossing Inventory
        • Little Traverse Bay Stormwater Basins
        • Little Traverse Bay Protection and Restoration Fund
      • Larks Lake Watershed
      • Mullett Lake Watershed
      • Pickerel-Crooked Lakes Watershed
      • Walloon Lake Watershed
    • Wetlands >
      • Types of Wetlands
      • Benefits of Wetlands
      • Wetland Losses and Threats
      • Wetland Flora and Fauna
      • Wetland Regulations
      • Wetland Permitting
      • Wetland Identification and Delineation
      • Wetland Resources
      • Wetlands Near You
  • Our Work
    • Watershed Management Plans >
      • Black Lake Watershed Stewardship Initiative
      • Burt Lake Watershed Management Plan
      • Cheboygan River Watershed Habitat Partnership Conservation Area Plan
      • Duncan-Grass Bay Watershed Plan
      • Elk River Chain of Lakes Watershed Management Plan
      • Grand Traverse Watershed Management Protection Plan
      • Lake Charlevoix Watershed Management Plan
      • Larks Lake Watershed Plan
      • Little Traverse Bay Watershed Protection Plan
      • Lower Black River Watershed Initiative
      • Mullett Creek Watershed Management Plan
      • Mullett Lake Watershed Management Plan
      • Paradise Lake Management Plan
      • Pickerel Crooked Lakes Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan
      • Stover Creek Watershed Management Plan
      • Tannery Creek Watershed Management Plan
    • Inventories and Surveys >
      • RSX Inventories
    • Monitoring Programs >
      • Comprehensive Water Quality Monitoring
      • Lake Monitoring >
        • Lake Characterization and Trophic Status
        • Volunteer Lake Monitoring Forms
      • Stream Monitoring >
        • Volunteer Stream Monitoring Forms
      • Avian Botulism Monitoring
    • Policy and Advocacy >
      • Federal Policy Initiatives
      • State Policy Initiatives
      • Local Policy Initiatives >
        • Bay Harbor Update >
          • History of Bay Harbor and East Park
          • Frequently Asked Questions
          • Contamination and Remediation Timeline
    • Restoration >
      • Road Stream Crossings >
        • Minnehaha RSX
        • Click Road/Stream Crossing Restoration
        • Tannery Creek Stream Crossing
        • Holms Road Stream Crossing
      • Small Dam Removal
      • Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Projects >
        • Zequanox Study
        • NCMC Stormwater Wetland Restoration
        • Bay View Rain Garden Initiative
      • Shoreline Restoration
    • GIS Data
    • Pharmaceutical Disposal Program (POD)
    • Low Impact Development (LID) >
      • Bioswale
      • Freshwater Center
      • Fertilizing Tips
      • Greenbelts
      • Green Roofs
      • Permeable Pavers
      • Rain Barrels
      • Rain Gardens >
        • Project Rain Garden >
          • PRG-Petoskey Photos
        • Native Plants for Wetter Conditions
        • Native Plants for Drier Conditions
        • Rain Garden Photo Gallery
        • Register Your Rain Garden
    • Stormwater Matters
    • Technical Services >
      • Wetland Determination
      • Project and Site Plan Review
      • Stormwater Studies and Management
      • Septic Evaluations for Shoreline Properties
      • Greenbelt Assessment and Design
      • GIS, Mapping, and Natural Resource Inventories
    • Youth Education >
      • Watershed Academy >
        • Student Presentations
  • HOT TOPICS
    • Aquaculture
    • Aquatic Invasive Species >
      • Alewife
      • Asian Carp >
        • How to Identify Asian Carp
        • Detailed Timeline
        • Recent Events
        • Court Cases and Legal Action
        • Asian Carp Studies and Reports
        • How You Can Help
      • Bloody Red Shrimp
      • Curly-Leaf Pondweed
      • Eurasian Ruffe
      • Eurasian Watermilfoil
      • European Frogbit
      • Flowering Rush
      • Giant Hogweed
      • Golden Mussels
      • Hydrilla
      • Invasive Knotweed
      • Killer Shrimp
      • New Zealand Mudsnail
      • Parrot Feather
      • Phragmites
      • Purple Loosestrife
      • Quagga Mussels
      • Rock Snot - Didymo
      • Red Swamp Crayfish
      • Round Gobies
      • Rusty Crayfish
      • Sea Lamprey
      • Spiney Waterflea
      • Starry Stonewort
      • Stone Moroko
      • Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia
      • Water Hyacinth
      • Wels Catfish
      • Yabby
      • Zander
      • Zebra Mussels
    • Avian Botulism
    • Beach Sanding
    • Clean Boating
    • Climate Change >
      • Preservation and Protection Tools
      • Stormwater Management and Green Infrastructure Tools
      • Wetland Management, Creation, and Restoration Tools
    • Coal-Tar Sealants and PAH Contamination
    • Great Lakes Wind Energy
    • Habitat Loss
    • Hydraulic Fracturing >
      • Michigan's Oil and Gas History
      • Hydraulic Fracturing - Concerns
      • Hydraulic Fracturing - Regulations and Exemptions
      • Hydraulic Fracturing - Baseline Testing
      • What we are doing to protect Michigan's Waters
    • Mercury in the Great Lakes
    • Microbeads
    • Native Plants
    • Pharmaceuticals in Our Waters
    • Pipelines >
      • Pipelines 101
      • Pipelines in Michigan
      • Enbridge Energy Line 5 >
        • Crude vs Oil Sands
      • Pipeline Risks
      • Pipeline Safety
      • Pipeline Regulations
      • Oil Spill Response
      • Pipelines - How Can You Help
      • Our Work on Pipelines
      • Northern Michigan Pipeline Symposium (2014) >
        • Video of Symposium
        • Presentation Summary - PHMSA
        • Presentation - Enbridge
        • Presentation - EPA
        • Pipeline Symposium FAQ
        • Participating Agencies - Pipeline Symposium
      • Northern Michigan Pipeline Workshop (2015) >
        • Video of Workshop
      • Pipeline Improvement and Preventing Spills Act
      • Additional Resources
    • Seiches
    • Septic Systems >
      • Septic Question
    • Sewer Overflow
    • Stormwater >
      • Stormwater For Kids
      • Stormwater Glossary
    • Swimmer's Itch
  • Get Involved
    • Volunteer >
      • Volunteer Lake Monitoring
      • Volunteer Stream Monitoring
    • Gifts and Donations
    • Advisory Committees
    • Aquavist Network >
      • Antrim County Aquavists
      • Charlevoix County Aquavists
      • Cheboygan County Aquavists
      • Emmet County Aquavists
      • Join the Aquavists
    • Attend an Event
    • Become a Member
  • News & Resources
    • Download Library
    • Current Reflections Newsletter
    • Press Clippings and News Releases
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
    • Watershed Protection Resources
    • Policy and Advocacy Resources
    • State and Federal Resources
    • Antrim County Resources
    • Charlevoix County Resources
    • Cheboygan County Resources
    • Emmet County Resources
  • Contact Us
    • AIS Reporting
    • Media Resources
    • Shop
    • Map

Aquaculture

Header Photo: Todd Marsee, Michigan Sea Grant
Aquaculture is the controlled cultivation of aquatic animals and plants. It refers to the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of plants and animals in all types of water environments, including tanks, ponds, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. Aquaculture is used for a variety of purposes including producing seafood for human consumption; enhancing wild fish, shellfish, and plant stocks for harvest; restoring threatened and endangered aquatic species; producing sportfish and baitfish for commercial and sport fisheries; and providing fish for aquariums.

Globally, aquaculture supplies more that 50 percent of all seafood produced for human consumption Worldwide, aquaculture has been the fastest growing segment of agriculture for the last decade. There is aquaculture in some form or another in all 50 states. The largest production states for marine aquaculture are Maine, Washington, Virginia, Louisiana, and Hawaii.  The largest states for freshwater aquaculture are Mississippi (catfish) and Idaho (trout).​
Picture
Brown Trout at Oden State Fish Hatchery. Photo Credit: Todd Marsee, Michigan Sea Grant

The aquaculture industry in the Great Lakes region is not large compared to other areas in the United States.  The aquaculture industry includes both private and public (state-owned) fish farms. Currently, Michigan's aquaculture industry is comprised of farms raising fish for use as bait, stocking ponds, fee fishing, and a small number growing fish for food production.   As of 2015, Michigan had 43 active registered aquaculture facilities including: 
  • 24 pond systems
  • 14 flow-through systems
  • 5 recirculating systems
Types of Aquaculture
Picture
Credit: NOAA
Net-Pen (Cage) Aquaculture 
Net-pen aquaculture is the practice of raising fish in an underwater net or structure that serves as a pen. Found offshore in coastal areas or in freshwater lakes, open net-pens or cages are considered a high-risk aquaculture method as they allow for free and unregulated exchange between the farm and the surrounding environment.
Picture
Oden State Fish Hatchery, Oden, MI. Credit Todd Marsee, Michigan Sea Grant
Flow-Through Aquaculture
Flow-through systems involve the continual flow of a high-quality water source through a tank or channel called a raceway. The constant flow of water helps provide oxygen into the system while removing wastes from the system.  Flow-through systems provide waste treatment as required, and then discharge the water rather than treating and recirculating it. 

Picture
Spring Valley Trout Farm in Dexter, Michigan
Pond Aquaculture Systems
​Pond cultures are the most common aquaculture production system. An aquaculture project can consist of only one pond, or hundreds of specially designed ponds. The size of the pond varies depending upon its purpose.  It is designed to meet the natural environmental requirements of the fish being raised and the natural growth of aquatic organisms provides a natural food for the fish and makes the pond an attractive habitat for other aquatic animals.
Picture
Credit: Todd Marsee, Michigan Sea Grant
Recirculating Aquaculture Systems
Recirculating aquaculture systems are indoor, tank-based systems in which fish are grown at high density under controlled environmental conditions.  Recirculating systems are the most expensive means of culturing fish, but also the most environmentally friendly.

Advantages of recirculating systems include:
  • Tight control of the temperature, flow, and water quality to ensure optimum rearing conditions
  • A high level of biosecurity, minimizing the chance of fish escaping into the wild
  • Disease prevention
  • Less water use than other aquaculture systems
  • Can be located in more areas and generate
    ​year-round production
Risks and Concern
Aquaculture, or “fish farming,” under the right conditions can be a viable part of the solution to the increasing pressure on our oceans’ resources and in meeting the demand for seafood by our growing population. The environmental impact of aquaculture depends on the species, the location of the farm, and how they are raised. When the environment is considered, strong management practices are implemented, and good practices are used, it is possible to raise sustainably farmed seafood. However, problems have already transpired and have been remediated in Michigan and throughout the U.S. and world. The following are the primary problems and concerns associated with aquaculture.
Picture
Nutrient Pollution
Nutrient pollution can be introduced into water bodies through wastewater from flow-through systems or from open water net-pen systems. Nutrient discharge from fish farming operations is organic and comes from two sources – fish excrement and uneaten fish food that drifts into the water column.  Both types of discharge contain nitrogen and phosphorus.

Phosphorus is often the limiting nutrient in aquatic systems, and very small changes in the level of it can lead to significant changes to aquatic ecosystems. In flow-through systems, discharges with excessive nutrients can lead to increases and shifts in algal communities, algae blooms, filamentous algae, less of some pollution intolerant aquatic invertebrates (like stoneflies, mayflies and caddisflies) and even less of certain stream fish populations.  Some research has documented brook trout density decreases with minor nutrient pollution. In open water net-pen systems, nutrients and waste would accumulate on the bottom, smothering benthic life, creating anoxic areas.  It could also stimulate dangerous Microcystis algae blooms that can render water unsafe for public use, like the one that shut down Toledo's drinking water source in 2014.

Fish Health and Diseases 
Crowded fish cages are breeding grounds for disease and parasites.  Large and dense fish concentrations increase the probability of disease and the severity of disease outbreaks. Managing disease risks at fish farms often involves applying antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals.  The addition of antibiotics and growth hormones to the fish food is similar to other large-scale meat production operations. 
However, because aquaculture in flow-through systems or open water net-pen systems uses public waters those antibiotics and growth hormones will be released into public waters where they can affect wild fish health and public drinking water supplies.

Escapes

Fish inevitability escape from aquaculture facilities. Fish escape from aquaculture operations for many reasons including human error, extreme weather events (e.g., ice sheet movement, storms, etc.), damage to nets, catastrophic gear failure, and even vandalism. The potential for these fish to escape exists at various stages in their life history, but tends to occur during handling or as a result of damage to infrastructure. The magnitude of escape events can vary from small releases which may go undetected for some time to large-scale releases. These escaped fish will compete with wild fish for food, disrupt their natural reproduction, and interfere with their genetic diversity.  These disruptions would erode our wild fish population’s ability to adapt and survive. 
​
In addition, escapes could lead to introductions of invasive species if nonnative species are raised in the net-pens.  As we have seen with a number of invasive species, they can result in complete ecological imbalances.  The perfect example is the Asian carp - a result of an insufficiently regulated aquaculture operation.
Net-Pen Aquaculture in Michigan
In 2014, the State of Michigan received proposals to establish privately owned net-pen fish operations in public waters of the Great Lakes – northern Lakes Huron and Michigan.  The proposals under consideration are for floating cages packed with thousands of fish to be installed at sites near Escanaba and Rogers City. ​

While Ontario has established net-pen operations in the North Channel and Georgian Bay in Lake Huron, there are no commercial net-pen aquaculture operations in Michigan’s open waters of the Great Lakes.  Ontario has six licensed net-pen operations: one in Parry Sound and five in the North Channel off the Manitoulin Island.  Three other aquaculture operations are conducted by First Nations, which are not licensed by Ontario.

Picture
Ontario net-pen operation. Credit: NOAA
To determine how to proceed and respond to the proposals, a scientific advisory panel was established by the Michigan departments of Natural Resources (MDNR), Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD).  The panel was to look into the scientific, environmental, economic, and regulatory considerations regarding potential Great Lakes aquaculture.

The following reports were produced as part of the process:

Science-based review
  • Great Lakes Net-Pen Commercial Aquaculture: A Short Summary of the Science

Regulations-based review

  • A Regulatory Analysis of Proposed Commercial Net-Pen Aquaculture in the Great Lakes

Economics-based reviews

  • Overview of Natural Resource Values Potentially at Risk from Consequences of Net-Pen Aquaculture
  • Expected Economic Impact of Cage Trout Aquaculture on Michigan’s Great Lakes
  • Aquaculture Industry Report from IBIS World Industry Report 11251- Fish & Seafood Aquaculture in the US

Commercial Net-pen Aquaculture in the Great Lakes Public Input and Comment

Synthesis Report Regarding Net-pen Aquaculture in the Great Lakes. March 9, 2016

As a result of this research, the Michigan Quality of Life agencies do not recommend pursuing of commercial net-pen aquaculture in the Great Lakes at this time for the following reasons: 

  • Given the ecological and environmental risks and uncertainties, as pointed out by the Science Panel and with further information provided through public input, commercial net-pen aquaculture would pose significant risks to fishery management and other types of recreation and tourism. Furthermore, both collaborating management interests and tribal nation interests would likely not agree to Michigan moving forward and pose a significant challenge in any attempts to do so. 
  • The $3.3 million to implement a commercial net-pen aquaculture program by the State to protect the public’s interest in the Great Lakes and provide the stated expected service to the industry are not provided through any conventional funding models available to the QOL agencies. There would need to be a new funding stream identified for this industry effort to support initial costs as well as the $2.33 million needed annually to monitor and maintain the program and protection of the state’s resources. This level of public investment for an estimated return of $10 million (under the modeled scenarios for two facilities) does not appear to be a prudent use of the state’s resources at this time. 
  • Regulatory authority does not currently exist to issue registrations for commercial aquaculture in the Great Lakes. 

Michigan Attorney General Opinion 
In January of 2017, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette issued an opinion confirming that current state law does not allow for net pen operations in the Great Lakes.  State law allows for fish farm operations only in private waters, meaning only a farm or facility engaging in aquaculture in privately controlled waters can be registered as an aquaculture facility. The Great Lakes are not private, rather part of the public trust.  Therefore, current state law does not permit aquaculture in the Michigan waters of the Great Lakes.  

“Only operations that meet the definition of an “aquaculture facility” under the Michigan Aquaculture Development Act, 1996 PA 199, MCL 286.871 et seq., may be registered to engage in aquaculture in the State of Michigan. Under the Act, an aquaculture operation in the Michigan waters of the Great Lakes could not be registered to engage in aquaculture because the operation would not meet the current definition of an “aquaculture facility” since the Michigan waters of the Great Lakes are not “privately controlled waters” as defined in the Act.”

Click to read the full Attorney General Opinion

The Future of Aquaculture in Michigan 
While the Attorney General’s Opinion confirms that aquaculture is not allowed in Michigan’s Great Lakes waters, at any time, lawmakers could introduce legislation to change state law and allow net-pen aquaculture in the Great Lakes. In fact, bills were introduced previously to do just that. That’s why we must remain vigilant. We, along with other environmental and conservation partners, will keep an eye out for any such proposal and will do everything possible to stop it.
​
At the same time, we need to develop a clear regulatory framework to conduct aquaculture the right way in Michigan. Sustainable, on-land aquaculture systems that fully treat their wastewater should be fostered.
Picture
Aquaculture in the Great Lakes
Congressman Dan Kildee (MI-05) has taken steps to not only protect Michigan’s waters, but the entire Great Lakes and certain rivers with outstanding natural, cultural, and recreational values.  The Congressman introduced legislation to ban harmful aquaculture practices in both the Great Lakes and federally designated “Wild and Scenic Rivers.” 
Picture
AuSable River
The Ban Aquaculture in the Great Lakes Act (HR 961), which would ban aquaculture facilities in the Great Lakes, in an effort to protect water quality and wildlife habitat.  It would also end the current patchwork of state laws that attempt to regulate such commercial fishing.

The Preserving Fishing on Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (HR 962), which would ban aquaculture facilities on Wild and Scenic Rivers and its tributaries, such as the Au Sable River, unless such facilities are shown not to discharge pollutants into the river.
Michigan's 16 designated
"Wild and Scenic Rivers"

  • AuSable River
  • Bear Creek
  • Black River
  • Carp River
  • Indian River
  • Manistee River
  • Ontonagon River
  • Paint River
  • Pere Marquette River
  • Pine River
  • Presque Isle River
  • Sturgeon River (Hiawatha National Forest)
  • Sturgeon River (Ottawa National Forest)
  • Tahquamenon River (East Branch)
  • Whitefish River
  • Yellow Dog River

Michigan has approximately 51,438 miles of river, of which 656.4 miles are designated as wild & scenic—just a bit more than 1% of the state's river miles.  ​

OUR ORGANIZATION
Contact
About Us
Staff
Employment

Internships

Annual Reports
MEMBERSHIP & GIVING
Membership Donations
Give a Gift Membership
Make a Tribute Gift
Give to our Endowment
VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES
Stream Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Avian Botulism Monitoring
Youth Education/Outreach

Restoration Projects
​Aquavist Network
Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council
426 Bay Street
Petoskey, MI 49770 
Phone: 231-347-1181
Fax:      231-
347-5928
info@watershedcouncil.org


Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. 
426 Bay Street, Petoskey, MI 49770

Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information herein; however, it cannot be guaranteed. 
Unless otherwise noted, all contents of this website are property of Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council © 2018. All rights reserved.

Contact Webmaster
✕