Title 8 - Chapter 13 - Shellfish · Title 8 - Chapter 13 - Shellfish ... shellfish
Strategies for Use and Protection of the Marine Environment Perceptions of Acceptability of...
-
Upload
draven-ake -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
1
Transcript of Strategies for Use and Protection of the Marine Environment Perceptions of Acceptability of...
Strategies for Use and Protectionof the Marine Environment
Perceptions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture in Parks Canada’s
Proposed Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area (NMCA)
Dr Rick RollinsDepartment of Tourism and RecreationMalaspina University-College
David E. McCallumMA Candidate, Department of Geography, UVic
Purpose of this Study:
• To examine compatibilities and conflicts between:
• This type of social science research is useful for coastal planning and to prevent conflict and confrontation before they are created.
Marine Protected Areas
Shellfish Aquaculture
Recreational Boating
Part of a Larger Study:
1. (2002) Perceptions of marine tourists regarding similar issues
• Intercept Visitors’ Survey
2. (2003) Perceptions of shellfish growers towards marine protected areas (MPAs)
• Focus Groups
3. (2004) Perceptions of scientists regarding indicators of health of the Gulf Islands marine environment
• Email Survey
4. (2004 - 2005) This study - Perceptions of Gulf Islands residents
• Random household survey
Methods:
Random selection of residents from 3 Gulf Islands that have existing shellfish aquaculture facilities nearby:
» Thetis Island n=51 (N=211)
» Salt Spring Island n=201 (N=5017)
» Saturna Island n=50 (N=278)
Methods Continued:
• Sample size of 302, resulting in a margin of error of plus or minus 5.48% at a 95% confidence level.
• Overall response rate – 73.8%
• Data were collected between June and September 2004.
Questionnaire:
Strategies for Use and Protection of the Gulf Islands Marine Environment
A Survey of Residents of the Gulf Islands – Summer, 2004
Research Conducted By:David E. McCallumDepartment of Geography, UVic
Most Important Values (Q.3)
0.3
0
0
1.3
3
0.7
6.6
5.6
9.3
4.3
10.6
16.6
20.5
15.2
0
1
2.3
2.6
3
5.3
4.3
10.6
8.6
13.9
8.3
5.6
8.6
19.9
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Other
Cultural
Historic
Learning
Economic
Subsistence
Spiritual
Therapeutic
Intrinsic
Future
Recreation
Aesthetic
Life Sustaining
Conservation
Percent (%) Responding First or Second Most Important Value
First Choice: Second Choice:
Perceived Impacts from Industry (Q.4)
39.4
39.1
19.5
56.3
20.5
36.1
55.3
20.9
25.5
41.4
19.5
20.9
42.4
11.3
50.7
40.4
24.5
61.3
57.9
46.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Visual impact of shellfish aquaculture
Runoff from agriculture
Chemical spills from commercial cargo vessels
Noise from commercial vessels (e.g. freighters, tugs)
Threat to wild salmon from finfish aquaculture
Visual impact of logging
Impact of garbage on beaches
Over fishing due to commercial fishing
Pollution from pulp mills
Loss of habitat due to residential development
Percent (%) Responding "Moderate" or "Serious" Impact
Moderate Serious
Perceived Impacts from Marine Recreation (Q.4)
30.5
39.4
43.7
33.1
49.3
39.1
62.6
53
7
19.5
19.2
31.1
15.9
31.1
10.9
28.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Damage to the ocean floor from anchors
Visual impact of shellfish aquaculture
Over fishing due to sport fishery
Petroleum spillage from overfills or bilges
Disturbance of shorebirds from boating
Disturbance of whales from whale watching
Noise from recreational vessels (e.g. yachts)
Loss of habitat due to other shoreline development (e.g.marinas)
Percent (%) Responding "Moderate" or "Serious" Impact
Moderate Serious
Perceived Contributing Sources of Sewage (Q.4)
39.4
28.8
38.1
35.1
27.2
19.5
32.8
27.5
30.8
39.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Visual impact of shellfishaquaculture
Sewage from commercialvessels
Sewage from Gulf Islandscommunities
Sewage from recreationalvessels
Sewage from Vancouver Islandcommunities
Percent (%) Responding "Moderate" or "Serious" Impact
Moderate Serious
Support for Potential Solutions for Managing Sewage from Recreational Boats (Q.7)
42.4
49.7
48.7
48
79.1
23.3
21.5
23.2
30.1
11.3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Designation of specific “no go”areas that apply to recreational
boats and other vessels
Introduction of voluntary “nodischarge” restrictions in some
areas
Subsidised (no fee charged)holding-tank pump out stations
Private (fee charged) holding-tankpump out stations
Introduction of compulsory “nodischarge” regulations in some
areas
Percent Responding "Somewhat Support" and "Strongly Support"
Somewhat Support Strongly Support
Shellfish Aquaculture – Booth Bay, Salt Spring
Abandoned Shellfish Aquaculture – Boot Cove, Saturna
Mussel Lease (Background) at Same Site as Finfish Facility (Foreground) – Yeo Pt, Salt Spring
Beach Oyster Culture – Thetis Island
Visual Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)Pristine Background Photo Sequence (n = 221)
Photo A Photo B Photo C
Photo D Photo E Photo F
Visual Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)Developed Background Photo Sequence (n = 81)
Photo A Photo B Photo C
Photo D Photo E Photo F
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo A – No Aquaculture
2.4
11.1
2.5
2.5
21
60.5
1.2
0.5
1.4
2.3
94.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
No Response
Very Unacceptable
Somew hatUnacceptable
Not Sure
Somew hat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo B – One Row of Shellfish Aquaculture
1.2
19.8
18.5
3.7
38.3
18.5
1.4
15.4
8.1
1.8
43
30.3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
No Response
Very Unacceptable
SomewhatUnacceptable
Not Sure
Somewhat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo C – Two Rows of Shellfish Aquaculture
2.5
40.7
22.2
8.6
16.1
9.9
1.8
24.9
18.6
5.4
35.3
14
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
No Response
Very Unacceptable
Somewhat Unacceptable
Not Sure
Somewhat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo D – Three Rows of Shellfish Aquaculture
2.5
71.6
9.9
2.5
8.6
4.9
1.8
45.7
27.6
5.9
14.9
4.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
No Response
Very Unacceptable
SomewhatUnacceptable
Not Sure
Somewhat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo E – Four Rows of Shellfish Aquaculture
2.5
82.7
4.9
2.5
3.7
3.7
1.3
69.7
18.1
3.2
5.4
2.3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
No Response
Very Unacceptable
Somewhat Unacceptable
Not Sure
Somewhat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Opinions of Acceptability of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.9)• Photo F – Five Rows of Shellfish Aquaculture
2.5
85.2
3.7
3.7
1.2
3.7
1.2
76.5
12.7
2.3
5
2.3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
No Response
Very Unacceptable
SomewhatUnacceptable
Not Sure
Somewhat Acceptable
Very Acceptable
Percent Responding
Perceptions of Benefits of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.10)
44
33.4
17.2
13.9
22.2
29.8
10.9
6.2
31.8
35.1
70.2
77.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Shellfish aquaculturedemonstrates “clean”resource harvesting
techniques
The presence of shellfishaquaculture is an indicator ofa healthy marine environment
Shellfish aquaculturediversifies the economy of a
coastal region
Shellfish aquacultureprovides employment in
coastal communities
Percent Responding
Not Sure Somewhat or Strongly Disagree Somewhat or Strongly Agree
Perceptions of Concerns of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.10)
51
42.1
25.2
7.9
17.5
11.9
7.3
4
29.8
43.7
64.9
86.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Some forms of shellfishaquaculture create noise
pollution
Some forms of shellfishaquaculture impact seabird
feeding opportunities
Some forms of shellfishaquaculture conflict withboating anchorages or
beach accesses.
Some forms of shellfishaquaculture alter visual
quality of the marineenvironment
Percent Responding
Not Sure Somewhat or Strongly Disagree Somewhat or Strongly Agree
Text Quotes Regarding Other Benefits / Concerns Not Stated in Survey:
Benefits:
• “Shellfish aquaculture improved water quality in Boot Cove because sewage discharge on lots adjoining the cove had to be upgraded.”
• “I think it may provide a safer source of shellfish for consumers than would wild harvest and less destructive to the natural shellfish environment.”
Concerns:
• “We are extremely annoyed by the garbage generated by the shellfish aquaculture in Booth Bay. It makes us have a very negative view of such operations.”
• “They destroy the natural cycles of local marine creatures.”
• “I am concerned about the harvesting of the wild shellfish in Booth Canal. Is it monitored? It appears to be over-harvested & is done in a noisy manner without consideration to residents who may be sleeping!”
Overall Perception of Shellfish Aquaculture (Q.11)
42.7
30.5
23.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Not Sure
Concerns OutweighBenefits
Benefits OutweighConcerns
Percent Responding
Text Quotes Regarding Influence of Finfish Aquaculture:
• “Farm salmon aquaculture is still highly controversial, and I cannot support shellfish aquaculture without 110% proven data that it has zero impact on the marine environment.”
• “The Gulf Islands (are) already at risk in terms of (their) marine environment. I would totally ban all forms of aquaculture.”
• “Based upon the disastrous impact of fish farms on the BC coast, I am concerned about where shellfish aquaculture will end up.”
• “Please keep shellfish / finfish aquaculture out of Gulf Islands!”
Text Quotes Regarding “Not Sure” Public:
• “I don’t understand why, if the bay is closed to shellfish gathering, an oyster farm is viable.”
• “I am not well informed, thus very concerned.”
• “Concerns over the health of farmed shellfish – not sure I’d eat them.”
• “Our knowledge of shellfish aquaculture is very limited – hence our ‘not sure’ answers.”
• “All in all, if this is a clean industry, then I would strongly support it. How much is allowed is another matter and there needs to be lots of informed public debate. We hear lots about fish farms but nothing really about shellfish aquaculture.”
Conclusions and Recommendations to Industry:
• Visual impact of shellfish aquaculture is low in relation to concern for other impacts on the marine environment. However, residents are cautious about new development.
• Perceptions of the industry are highly influenced by the intense controversy over finfish aquaculture in BC.
• There may be an opportunity to educate the public, before significant negative perception or controversy is created.
• Some concerns are relatively easy to remedy: aesthetic (colour of buoys, tidiness), garbage from the facility, and inconsideration of neighbours (noise, profanity, etc.).
• Consultations with local community are key to inform the neighbours about the activity at the facility.
Future Considerations for Research:
• Explore other methods to address the research.
• Address the process for integrating shellfish aquaculture policy with other planning frameworks:
• tourism,
• land-use planning,
• MPA planning,
• integrated coastal zone management.
David McCallum, MA CandidateMarine Protected Areas Research Group (MPARG)Department of Geography, University of Victoria(250) 721 7345 / [email protected]
Dr Rick Rollins, Principal InvestigatorDepartment of Tourism and RecreationMalaspina University-College, Nanaimo, BC(250) 753 3245 (x 2413) / [email protected]
Thank-you very much!
Photo Source: BC Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Fisheries