Aquaculture Development Plan

Editor:

George W. Lewis
Professor, Aquaculture and Fisheries
Warnell School of Forest Resources
The University of Georgia

Authors:

Dr. Gary Burtle, The University of Georgia
Dr. Ronnie Gilbert, The University of Georgia
Dr. George W. Lewis, The University of Georgia
Dr. James L. Shelton, The University of Georgia
Dr. Mac Rawson, The University of Georgia
Michael Spencer, Georgia Department of Natural Resources

February 1996

The Aquaculture Development Commission was established by the Georgia General Assembly in 1988. The purpose of the Commission is to facilitate the development of the aquaculture industry in Georgia. This Development Plan represents one of the goals of the Commission. It is based upon the best information available at the time. The Commission members believe aquaculture has the potential to expand and contribute even more to the state's economy.

A number of people have contributed their time and efforts in drafting this plan. Besides the authors and Commission Members, Mrs. Betty Smith was a valuable assistant in typing and editing this plan.

Georgia Power generously provided assistance in the printing of this Development Plan.

Members

Mr. Tom Crow
Crow's Lake, Inc.
PO Box 482
Jefferson, GA  30649

Senator Harold Ragan
Georgia State Senate
1296 Crine Blvd., NW
Cairo, GA  31728

Mr. Alton Moultrie
Georgia Dept. of Industry & Trade
285 Peachtree Center Avenue
Atlanta, GA  30303

The Hon. Henry L. Reaves
Georgia House of Representatives
Rt. 2 Box 290
Quitman, GA  31643

Mr. Harold D. Fallin
Hickory Hill Farms
461 Atwater Road
Thomaston, GA  30286

Mr. Mike Gennings
Georgia Dept. of Natrual Resources
Wildlife Resources Division
Fisheries Management Section
2070 US Hwy. 278
Social Circle, GA  30279

Mr. Jimmy Hill
Georgia Power Company
PO Box 449
Grayson, GA  30221

Dr. George W. Lewis
Warnell School of Forest Resources
The University of Georgia
Athens, GA  30602

Mr. Wayne Balkcom
Rt. 1 Box 145
Blakely, GA  31723

Dr. Ken Semmens
Owens & Williams Fish Farm
Rt. 1 Box 555
Newton, GA  31770

Mr. Walker Stephens
Marshlands Plantation
Rt. 7 Box 468
Tifton, GA  31794

Mr. Paul Williams
Owens & Williams Fish Farm
Rt. 1 Box 2000
Hawkinsville, GA  31036

Mr. Wayne Dollar
Georgia Farm Bureau
PO Box 7068
Macon, GA 31298

Mr. Don McGough
Georgia Farm Bureau
PO Box 7068
Macon, GA 31298

Mr. Michael Spencer
GA Dept. of Natural Resources
Wildlife Resources Division
Fisheries Management Section
2123 US Hwy. 278 SE
Social Circle, GA 30279

Dr. Loren Nichols
Gold Kist
PO Box 2210
Atlanta, GA 30301

Commissioner Tommy Irwin
GA Dept. of Agriculture
328 Agriculture Building
19 MLK Jr. Drive
Atlanta, GA  30334

Mr. Frank Giles
GA Dept. of Agriculture
328 Agriculture Bldg.
19 MLK Jr. Drive
Atlanta, GA  30334

Mr. Andy Truan
398 8th St.
Macon, GA  31201

For additional information, contact

Travis Henry
5314 Yeager Rd.
Douglasville, GA  30135

Executive Summary

The purpose of this plan is to assess Georgia's potential for further development and expansion of its aquaculture industry; identify constraints and opportunities and make recommendations to facilitate future growth and development.

The natural resources of the state are varied, diverse and overall more than adequate to support further expansion and development of an aquaculture industry. Some of the state's advantages are:

1. A longer growing season that provides production advantages over more northern locations.
2. Adequate and accessible groundwater resources in the state's coastal plain area.
3. In general, abundant supplies of surface water suitable for a diversity of aquaculture uses throughout the state.
4. With a few local exceptions, the state's topography and soils are ideal for aquaculture development.
5. The state's average yearly rainfall is 50 inches and is usually evenly distributed 3-5 inches throughout each month of the year.
6. Seasons without frost range from 190 days in the north to 300 days in the south.

Georgia possesses a highly integrated food processing and marketing sector. The state is blessed with a very good transportation system. These systems can be used to develop domestic and international markets for Georgia's aquaculture products.

Before 1992, the state of Georgia was perceived by some industry representatives as having restrictive regulations concerning aquaculture operations. The 1992 Session of the General Assembly resolved many of the regulatory issues that concerned Georgia's fish farmers by changing legislation to further separate laws affecting wild fish populations from those regulating farmed fish. The changes were accomplished by cooperation and compromise between Georgia DNR and the aquaculture industry. Regulations are less restrictive in Georgia than any other state in the region.
Another concern that has not yet been addressed is the lack of a state agency promoting and nurturing the aquaculture industry.

Action

• Several things will be done to improve the ability of producers of aquaculture products to obtain necessary financing. The first and most important is a coordinated educational effort to educate lenders, producers, potential investors and financial regulators about the industry. The second is the need for SBA, FmHA and city banks handling the overline portion of large loans for rural banks to develop or employ specialists with the experience and ability to review and evaluate both new aquaculture loan proposals and existing loans. This expertise could be used both internally and provided on a fee basis to outside users. Third, the need exists for qualified appraisers with the experience and training to assess the collateral value of equipment and improvements employed in aquaculture. A fourth area is the need to improve insurance programs to insure producers of established aquaculture products against potential disasters. The Cooperative Extension Service will organize a series of educational workshops to address these needs.
• A detailed list of aquatic producers and their products will be developed and made available to appropriate market segments. Buyers within the processing, distribution, and retailing complex can get data about cultured seafood products and the recreational fishing infrastructure can get information about bait, forage and sportfish. The Department of Natural Resources will develop and make available this list.
• Aquaculturists will ensure only safe, wholesome food products enter markets, which will require self-imposed routine evaluation of products for  compliance with generally accepted production practices (i.e., minimal residuals of therapeutic compounds, maximal nutritional value, shelf life, etc.). The Georgia Department of Agriculture is currently working with the industry to insure the quality of Georgia aquaculture products.
• A set of guidelines for permitting exotic species and genetically-altered animals will be developed by the Department of Natural Resources and shared with the aquaculture industry.
• Georgia has excellent resources and advantages for development and growth of its aquaculture industries. Aquaculture can contribute to Georgia's rural economic development. The Georgia Department of Agriculture and Department of Natural Resources should take a more active role in promoting the state's aquaculture industry, not only in market promotion but also for promoting industry development and growth as an agricultural enterprise.
• The Department of Industry and Trade will also help promote the industry by helping to recruit aquaculture business to relocate in Georgia.
• Considering the growth of the aquaculture industry, the Cooperative Extension Service's Aquaculture and Fisheries program should increase its staff, programs, and resources to maintain its leadership in providing the industry with information to make wise decisions relative to successful  production, processing, and marketing of aquatic species.
• Southern Appalachian Fisheries Research and Extension Center (Cohutta, Georgia) -- An additional professional staff member, joint appointment with the Warnell School of Forest Resources, is needed to direct research and Extension programs at the Center. This position would help to expand programs at the Center.
• Coastal Plain Experiment Station -- The facilities at Tifton should be enhanced with additional research ponds and a modern wet laboratory/hatchery building to be used by The University of Georgia professional staff for research and to demonstrate the technology developed for the aquaculture industry.

A Georgia Aquaculture Commodity Commission needs to be established and administered by the Georgia Department of Agriculture. The Aquaculture Commodity Commission could be supported by a "feed check-off" program, pending approval by the state's aquaculture producers. With these funds, the industry could assist in needed promotion, market development, and research that would enhance the further development of Georgia's aquaculture industry.

Aquaculture Outlook

Introduction

The growth of the aquaculture industry will continue because of opportunity for farmers and for the public benefits it provides. The major benefits include providing a safe and healthful food product for consumers, reducing the deficit in seafood trade, and creating jobs. The U.S. trade deficit in seafood is second only to petroleum products and promises to get larger as the demand for seafood increases. Aquaculture job creation can be demonstrated by catfish farming which had the highest job multiplier of any Mississippi industry analyzed.

U.S. Demand for Fishery Products

Fishery products are caught in domestic waters, raised in aquaculture, or imported. Facing declining domestic catches, imports have increased rapidly to accommodate the demand for seafood (Figure 1). The trade deficit for fishery products was $2.75 billion in 1982 and has risen to over 8.5 billion dollars in 1995, the most recent data report (NMFS 1995). As world seafood demand also increases, the need for aquaculture to fill the U.S. demand for fishery products will be more important. By the year 2000, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations projects a 20 percent shortfall in the global supply of fish (FAO, 1987).

Commercial Fishery Landings in the U.S.

The sportfish catch will double between now and the year 2010. In 1985, an estimated 46.4 million fishermen caught 20 percent of all the fish in the U.S. The pressure from this sector will result in a conflict over resource allocation with the commercial fishing industry. Some examples of this have already been seen in the ban on red drum fishing and on striped bass fishing in the Chesapeake Bay. Licenses and permits will be more restrictive in number and cost to allow the state and federal agencies to manage the allocation of the fishery resources.

The harvest of fish and shellfish is declining for many U.S. commercial species. Oyster catch in the south Atlantic states reached a peak in 1985 of nearly 30 million pounds but had declined to 19 million pounds in 1992. The loss of oysters off the Atlantic coast to a parasitic disease has been blamed for this decline. Since 1930 when oyster harvest was 18 million pounds in the south Atlantic, the oyster catch from the other regions of the U.S. have demonstrated even greater declines. Overall, the U.S. catch of oysters has declined by more than 67 percent since 1930. The most dramatic declines have been in the New England, mid-Atlantic, and Chesapeake areas (NMFS 1989).

Salmon catch has not kept up with the U.S. demand. With a static level of salmon catch since 1980, the importation of salmon has increased by 16 times (U.S. Department of Commerce 1988). The value of salmon imports in 1980 was $3.9 million, but they grew to $265 million in 1993 and are still increasing. Recent salmon imports are net pen-raised from Scandinavian countries. The U.S. net pen farming industry is just beginning to participate in reducing the dependency on imports.

Shrimp catch has been static since 1976, and imports have increased as a result (Figure 2). In 1978, a dramatic increase in the cost of imported shrimp occurred that has been escalating in recent years. The pounds of imported shrimp has doubled between 1976 and 1993, but the cost tripled to over $22 billion (complied from Current Fishery Statistics, U.S. Department of Commerce 1976-1993). Central and South American countries are raising farmed shrimp very successfully and using exports to the U.S. to generate badly needed currency.

Other finfish, crustaceans, and shellfish follow the trend of static or declining catch. The red snapper, for example, is being replaced on many restaurant menus by the orange roughy, once considered a lower grade fish. The natural fishery resource is expected to decline further under pressure of coastal development, water pollution, and overfishing.

Georgia Fisheries Landings

Management of oyster beds has been a problem in the past for the Georgia oyster industry. Loss of proper substrate for oyster growth became a problem when harvesting methods removed the supporting layer of the river bottom. Regulations against dredging for oyster harvest were enacted to control the loss of habitat. The shortage of low cost labor for harvesting, post-harvest sorting and cleaning, and returning spat to the beds further constrains this industry. In the recent past, disease has further reduced the oyster population off the Georgia coast. These concerns are being studied and managed so that the oyster industry can be maintained.

The coastal waters of Georgia are classified for best use by the Environmental Protection Division of the DNR (DNR 1974). The waters are classified into categories including fishing, drinking water, industrial navigation, and recreation. Water quality criteria have been used to classify specific waters. The criteria list the amount of bacteria, solids, dissolved oxygen, acidity, and temperature found in the water. The use of natural waters of the state are regulated by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources in "Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control" available from the Environmental Protection Division.

As the landings of fish from natural waters in Georgia fail to meet the demand for seafood, aquaculture becomes an alternative to importation of fishery products.

Status of Aquaculture

Global Status

Although Asia is the area of most concentrated production, all other areas increased production between 1985 and 1986 (FAO 1989). North American aquaculture production has increased by 11.5 percent in the same period and has increased every year since. Projections of world aquaculture production may be underestimated. For example, the U.S. Department of Commerce projected world shrimp production to be 490,000 metric tons in 1990, but that amount was surpassed in 1989. World seafood landings peaked in 1989 at 100 million metric tons and declined to 98 million metric tons by 1992 (FAO 1992). Aquaculture can meet future increased demand without endangering future supplies by over exploitation.

Status of Aquaculture in the U.S.

Table 1. Aquaculture Production in the USA (in tonnes)
 

Catfish

The value of the farm-raised catfish industry exceeds $480 million a year (Seafood Business 1994). The present price for catfish is considerably higher than in 1986 (Table 2). At that time, an adjustment of the normally static price for catfish rose by 18 percent for processed fish. The farmer has received higher prices for fish sold to processors with a supply and demand system causing lows and highs at intervals over the last 20 years. The recent price to the farmer is quite good at $0.80 per pound in February 1996. Favorable prices for feed ingredients have made catfish production exceptionally profitable for the past five years. Catfish prices vary to the farmer during each year, and fall prices are generally lower than winter and spring prices because of demand and growing cycle. Catfish, however, are now harvested year round so that the proportion of fish harvested in the fall is greatly reduced from that in the 1970s before present technology was in place. Utilizing technology that allows harvest at the time of highest demand will place catfish farms in a higher profit position.

Table 2. Average annual prices for processor and farmer sales of catfish (USDA 1995).
 

Recent promotional campaigns aimed at improving the commodity image of catfish has elevated it to the class of premium, center-of-the-plate status. This campaign coincides with the increase in health consciousness in the U.S. Catfish was traditionally popular in the Southeastern states and now has strong markets in the Midwest, northeast and west coast states. The efforts of the catfish marketing associations sponsored by feed mills and processing plants have benefitted from more than $3.5 million in the last three years.

Catfish production has developed in areas where farmers had the proper sites and resources and were in a position to change the direction of their farming enterprise. Without the need or will to change from more traditional crops, catfish industry development usually does not occur even with the availability of proper resources. Mississippi now has 60.7 percent of the acreage involved in commercial catfish production in the U.S. Growth in the catfish industry is occurring at a faster rate in other states. Between January 1989 and January 1990, the increase in acreage was 7.6 percent across all states but only 3.4 percent in Mississippi. Other states with significant acreages of catfish farms are in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas.

Catfish production will continue to grow. Grower entrance into the industry will increase fish inventory and drive markets to seek additional sales. The market will change in product mix as more higher-value products reach the consumer and add to the traditional bone-in catfish products. Tiered pricing for different sizes or qualities of catfish will encourage the farmer to produce more of what the consumer wants at a higher average price. Increased efforts from government researchers and economic developers will help the catfish industry solve some management problems that currently hamper marketing and profitability. In the past, when acreage increased, the price declined until markets caught up with the new production volume. Since farms can be built faster than the market, many new producers will rely on the new value-added products to provide a market for their fish.

Crawfish

A desirable advantage of crawfish farming is the low level of feed input required to raise a crop. Planting a field of rice has often been the only requirement. Rice farming areas of the country have been able to adapt to crawfish production readily if markets were available. Recently, more pounds per acre have been produced by aeration and circulation of ponds, increasing inputs but also profits. A concern of crawfish farmers is the high cost of harvesting because of the large amount of labor required.

1988 have already dropped to $5 per pound. The market for crawfish is expected to grow slowly over the next few years (USDA, 1988).

Louisiana has 85 percent of the farmed crawfish acreage and with the wild harvest produces 90 percent of the U.S. crawfish. Prices are presently depressed in Louisiana and export markets are being sought to maintain profitability.

Baitfish

The most popular baitfish is the golden shiner for its use as a bait for largemouth bass and crappie fishing. Golden shiners are among the top four most expensive fish sold in the U.S. at $2.75 per pound (FAO 1989). Golden shiner production is usually less intensive than production of other bait fish species. Golden shiners are produced at the rate of 400 to 1000 pounds per acre versus more than 1000 pounds per acre for goldfish, fathead minnows or white suckers. The technological advances used in other areas of aquaculture have not been widely applied to bait fish production.

Future growth in bait fish production will occur in local areas where distribution costs can be reduced between the farm and the fisherman. A national distribution system exists for bait fish primarily run out of Arkansas and Georgia. Arkansas has large farm acreage and Georgia has the largest distributing center. Georgia is in a rare situation of having an established distribution and marketing center but little production volume. A baitfish producer located near a major fishing area would have the advantage of more direct sales over the Arkansas producer. Coupled with an increase in fishing popularity, these conditions will lead to a steady but slow growth in the U.S. bait fish production.

Salmon

Salmon culture potential is overshadowed by the controversy surrounding off-shore net pen facilities. Alaska has banned all marine finfish pen culture for at least two years. Regulations are under review in the states of Washington, Oregon, California, and Maine pertaining to the location of net pens in public waters. However, the National Marine Fisheries Service predicts rapid growth of salmon culture. Raceway culture of salmon is possible and conversion of trout facilities to salmon culture has occurred. The outlook for salmon culture seems bright for farmers in more temperate climates than Georgia. Limited culture may occur in the state.

Trout

Expansion of the trout industry will continue at a slow pace (USDA 1990). The market will continue to increase in spite of competition from imports. Production locations are tied to the availability of large quantities of clean, cool water. Most trout are produced in Idaho for this reason. New technology will also allow producers to meet demand for more trout. If recirculation of water becomes feasible commercially, trout production will increase more rapidly.

Hybrid Striped Bass

There are several problems facing the hybrid striped bass industry. The shortage of fish producers who understand how to produce them is a major impediment. This causes a shortage of brood and seed fish caused by lack of success at hatcheries. State regulation of brood fish capture has caused some problems in producing seed fish. Future developments in technology for hybrid striped bass production and transfer of that technology to farmers will allow production of this species to flourish.

Clams and Oysters

Clean water is essential for production of cultured and wild mollusks. The disease that hit the mid-Atlantic oyster producing areas makes no distinction between farm and wild oysters. The lack of sufficient flushing in estuarine areas due to low stream flows or shortage of rainfall lowers the quality of mollusk harvest. As solutions are found for the oyster disease problem and other management and quality problems, potential for culture of these animals will increase. Aquaculture of oysters has resulted in several technological improvements. Culture of triploid oysters that never spawn provides high quality oysters year round that don't have the milky appearance of spawning oysters. Controlled stocking and harvest removes the danger of overfishing. Depuration, allowing the oyster to stand in cleaner water before marketing, improves product quality and consumer confidence in cultured oysters. Culture methods for some species of mussels have been well researched, however, many mollusks are not so well understood. As culture methods develop, the potential for increasing the supply of clams and oysters will remain good.

In Georgia, the culture of mollusks in coastal waters encounter significant legal impediments. If the legal and jurisdictional constraints are overcome, the potential for mollusk culture is good.

Shrimp

The balance of shrimp imports to U.S. catch has shifted far into the red during the 1980s. In 1989, 500 million pounds of shrimp were imported compared to 219 million pounds in 1980 (USDA, 1990). The two leading exporters of shrimp to the U.S. are China and Ecuador with a combined export value of $586 million. Mexico, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and India are other leading exporters of shrimp to the U.S. market. Most countries in Latin and South America are advancing in shrimp production with the hope of selling their shrimp to the U.S. to balance currency deficits. Taiwan once was a large exporter of shrimp to the U.S. but lower costs in less developed countries edged Taiwan's exports down from $160 million in 1987 to $23 million in 1989.

There has been successful culture of shrimp in Texas and South Carolina. The 1990 production of cultured shrimp was above 1.5 million pounds. Expanded acreage in Texas and better seed stock supply in South Carolina are expected to allow production to increase. In coastal Georgia, land costs and use restrictions are constraints to the development of shrimp culture.

Tilapia

The tilapia industry is growing rapidly. In 1993, 12.5 million pounds were produced in the U.S. (USDA 1994) up from 10 million pounds in 1985 (FAO 1989).

Other Aquatic Animals

1. Red drum are being grown in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. A production system for seed fish was recently developed so that commercial food fish production could proceed. However, open air facilities in 1989 were dealt a major blow by the cold winter causing most existing facilities to suffer heavy losses. When a solution to the overwintering problem is discovered and applied, the potential for culturing this fish will be good. The ban on commercial fishing for red drum exposed a market to successful aquaculture ventures.
2. Several species of carp are being used as companion species in catfish ponds in the southeast. The most popular is the grass carp used for aquatic weed control. The flaky white meat of this fish is valued especially by the Asian communities in the U.S. The bighead carp, also an exotic, eats plankton in aquaculture ponds and is a food fish. The silver carp also eats plankton and may fit well into aquaculture polyculture systems. The common carp has been in the U.S. for years and has markets as food fish and as a food for carnivorous fishes. All these carp are exotic to Georgia. However, common carp are grouped with native fish for the purposes of state aquaculture regulations. The other three carp species are subject to special laws governing the possession of exotic fish. The Department of Natural Resources is very concerned about the potential deleterious environmental impacts plankton eating silver and bighead carp would have on native fish and wildlife. Both carp species would find suitable spawning habitat in Georgia and reproducing populations would likely spread statewide very quickly if viable stock were imported. Sterile triploid grass carp are allowed without a permit if they are held in private ponds, are bought from authorized grass carp dealers, and the buyer retains the bill of sale to document that the grass carp are triploid.
3. Wild sturgeon are valued for their production of caviar as well as food fish. Culture methods are being perfected in the U.S., China and Russia. The natural populations of some species of sturgeon have almost vanished from U.S. waters. Aquaculture of the sturgeon may help to preserve the remaining wild fish as well as reduce our dependence on Russian imports.
4. Paddlefish have a sturgeon-like caviar as well as good tasting meat. The paddlefish is a plankton-eating fish that is a native of the U.S. and may have some water quality improvement characteristics. Paddlefish do not tolerate poor water quality conditions.
5. Some native fresh water fish such as the crappie may become aquaculture species. Crappie, black bass, bluegill sunfish, hybrid sunfish, and others are already raised for stocking recreational ponds. Commercial fish, including the buffalo fish, have been cultured in the Southeast. Yellow perch and walleye are being cultured in the Midwest. Regulations in some states limit the culture of these fish while other states, including Georgia, allow their sale when properly identified as farmed fish.
6. Aquarium fish and water-garden (ornamental) fish offer a growing opportunity for fish production. These areas have seen real growth over the past five years. Fish raised for these purposes are high in value, and ornamental fish farms require less land area than food fish farms. In order to enter this sector of fish culture, an excellent knowledge of the relative value of the many species of ornamental fish is essential. Many of these species are exotic to the state.
7. Alligators are being raised on farms today for meat and hide production. In 1993, 30,500 hides sold for over $7 million from U.S. alligator farms. The import of 78,000 hides in 1993 (USDA 1993) indicates that this sector has some room to grow. Supply of eggs and young alligators is limiting the growth of this industry at the present time. Georgia saw a rapid expansion in the number of alligator farms in 1989.

Status of Aquaculture in Georgia

Channel Catfish

The Georgia catfish industry has enjoyed growth since 1988 in spite of processing plant failures. The consumer demand for catfish has continually increased in past years allowing local markets to expand. Processing plants have not been able to hold out under pressures from competitive markets and limited supplies. The opportunities for Georgia processors to enter the catfish market exist as the U.S. catfish market expands. Georgia farmers looking for alternative crops are reluctant to enter an industry without an organized market.

Rainbow Trout

Baitfish

Crawfish

Sportfishes

Other species of fishes may have potential for commercial production in Georgia. These species include hybrid striped bass, paddlefish, American eels, yellow perch, and red drum. A considerable amount of research is needed to determine the feasibility of intensively producing these animals in the state.

Exotic Fishes

Penaeid Shrimp

Spawning shrimp and growing of larval stages in hatcheries to postlarvae made shrimp culture possible. Postlarvae are stocked into ponds at rates based on the risk and management desired by the culturist (Chambelain et al 1985). The higher the stocking rates, the greater the risk and the management required. Intensive management offers the advantage of more production using less land, but it requires more management skill, labor, feeding, and ability to control water quality.

The consequences to native shrimp populations of disease introduction and the accidental release of exotic species are unknown. This could lead to restrictions on importation of exotic species, and native marine shrimp are not promising aquaculture candidates. Shrimp aquaculture also requires land for ponds near coastal wetlands. Restrictions on alterations of wetlands and the high value of coastal land that is suitable for aquaculture may limit the potential for shrimp culture in Georgia.

Oysters

Culture techniques can be simply enhancing the natural production by spreading shells to which oysters attach. More intensive techniques of bag and cage culture are possible but are not practiced in Georgia. A critical problem is parasites that kill the oyster before it reaches legal size. Management techniques such as transplanting juvenile oysters from parasite-free areas to good grow-out areas could reduce exposure to parasites. Genetic improvement could increase disease resistance and allow oysters to reach commercial size before the parasites cause mortality. The other critical problem is the excessive oyster spat production. Oysters require 18 months to reach market size. During the second summer, single oysters become covered with settling spat which reduces their marketability. Current research has shown a promising mechanism for controlling spat fouling of single oysters.

Clams

Before 1981, the harvest of hard clams in Georgia was sporadic. Production from natural populations increased over the decade and reached 60,600 lbs. of meats in 1988. Culture began in the mid-1980s with seed bought from out-of-state hatcheries. Unfortunately, in 1985 the oyster parasite MSX appeared in Georgia oysters. Although clams are not known carriers of the parasite, the Department of Natural Resources banned the importation of molluscan seed into the state as a precaution (Cato et al, in press). Clam aquaculture stalled at that point, because there was no commercial clam hatchery in Georgia.

Like shrimp, hatchery technology advances were the critical development in clam culture. Several approaches to growing out seed clams succeeded. Trays suspended off the bottom of small creeks and cages partially buried on the exposed flats of sounds are good grow-out methods in Georgia's strong tides. The tides bring naturally-produced foods that the clams filter from the water. These methods do not require alteration of wetlands, but clean water is essential. Leases in some cases must be obtained from the adjacent land owner, the state, or federal government for rights to shellfish growing areas.

The critical need now is a source of seed stock. A procedure has been developed recently for importation of hatchery seed clams from out-of-state sources with special authorization from DNR, including disease-free certification. Separate hatcheries' operations have not proven profitable. Hatcheries typically are for supporting a company's grow-out operations. Unfortunately, potential growers in Georgia are small businessmen. They lack the technical skill and the capital to operate hatcheries.

Scallops

Blue Crabs

Shedding facilities are usually a series of holding trays in circulating waters. Most facilities in Georgia have recirculating water systems that remove waste. Recirculating water systems also allow them to be located inland where land costs are less.

The factor limiting production is the availability of mature peelers. An early stage of peeler is abundant in crab traps but difficult to hold. This stage feeds actively, but feeding them in recirculating systems stresses the system. Wastes increase and mortality results. Advances in filter technology could allow the early peelers to complete molting.

References

DNR. 1975. Activities in Georgia's coastal waters: past trends and future prospects. Office of Planning and Research, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA.

DNR. 1974. Existing classification for the waters of the state of Georgia. Environmental Protection Division, Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA.

FAO. 1987. Yearbook of fishery statistics. Vol. 64, Rome.

FAO. 1988. Strong growth forecast for aquaculture. ADCP Aquaculture Minutes, August 1988:1.

FAO. 1989. A regional survey of the aquaculture sector in North America. Edited by C.B. Kensler, Aquaculture Development and Coordination Program, FAO, Rome. ADCP/REP/89/37.

NMFS. 1989. Current fishery statistics no. 8800. Fisheries of the United States 1988. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service.

Ratafia, M. and R. Purinton. 1989. Emerging aquaculture markets. Aquaculture Magazine 15(4):32-44.

Seafood Business. 1989. The seafood handbook, '89 selling seafood. Published by Seafood Business, Rockland, ME.

USDA. 1995. Aquaculture: situations and outlook report. Commodity Economics Division, Economic Research Service, October, 1995, AQUA-1.

USDA. 1995. Aquaculture: situation and outlook report. Commodity Economics Division, Economic Research Service, September, 1995, AQUA-3.

USDA. 1990. Aquaculture: situation and outlook report. Commodity Economics Division, Economic Research Service, March, 1990, AQUA-4. USDA Department of Commerce. 1988. Aquaculture and capture fisheries: impacts in U.S. seafood markets. National Marine Fisheries Service. April, 1988.

Water Farming Journal. 1989. Trosclair & Associates, Inc., publisher. Metairie, LA. 4(5) May, 1989.

Natural Resources

The long growing season in Georgia provides an opportunity for production advantages over more northern locations, such as the upper Mississippi river delta area, for warmwater aquaculture facilities that would locate here. While row crops and livestock suffer from heat stress, warmwater fish may benefit from heat stimulated growth and the duration of warm weather. Displacement of certain row crops by aquaculture may improve profitability of farm enterprises (Meyer et al. 1973). The heavy clay soils that lack fertility for row crop production could be prime sites to consider for development of aquaculture facilities. Ponds used for fish culture can be used as water storage reservoirs for irrigation of row crops or watering livestock (Dupree and Huner 1984; Soil Conservation Service 1982). Extensive areas where cultivation has ceased because of infertile soils and forests could be considered for aquaculture sites provided that water impermeable soils are available and the topography is suitable.

As aquaculture facilities are located in Georgia, they will face competition for land and water use from several sectors. In north and coastal Georgia, the increased urban population provides markets for aquaculture products, but compete for land and water. Recently, a permit system was established to regulate agricultural water use. This permit system also provides a legal mechanism that establishes the legal right to use water for agricultural purposes. Farms using irrigation on row crops will compete for water. But farms with existing wells are in a position to convert some less productive crop land to aquaculture and use the wells for both aquaculture and row crops. As methods of water conservation in aquaculture are applied, Georgia's natural resources could provide the base for an aquaculture industry that is competitive with other states in the southeastern United States.

Water Requirements for Aquaculture Systems

Open Fresh Water Ponds

The amount of water used for aquaculture ponds includes the volume used to fill the pond initially and any amount needed to maintain the minimum water level of the pond during the year (SCS 1982). Evaporation and seepage cause most water loss from ponds. Rain falling directly on the pond surface or runoff from rains replaces some water lost during the year. Ponds with negligible seepage should be able to remain adequately full with average rainfalls. In dry years, makeup water would be required from either runoff or pumped water to maintain an adequate pond water level (Pote et al. 1988).

A study of the relationship between precipitation and evaporation over 26 years of climatological data for Mississippi showed that the average year would require makeup of only pond seepage since evaporation would be adequately replaced by rainfall (Pote et al. 1988). However, in years of drought, 25 inches of water were needed as makeup for evaporation, and in wet years, 25 inches of surplus water were available. This analysis would approximate the conditions for most of Georgia. Therefore, once the initial pond volume was pumped, about 48 inches per acre of pond area, the capacity to replace at least 25 inches of evaporative loss plus seepage loss should be available at the aquaculture facility. Ponds of this type are not usually drained and refilled more frequently than five year intervals.

Seepage from ponds varies with the quality of soil used for building the pond and the amount of compaction used during construction. For Georgia soils, using proper construction practices (SCS 1982), seepage loss of pond water is between 0.05 inches/day and 0.3 inches/day during the year. This estimate is derived from data reported for Piedmont soils and heavy clay soils (Stone and Boyd 1989). Seepage is slowed down or reversed by pressure from the water table in the area around the pond. Seepage adds 18 to 110 inches to the makeup water needed to maintain the water level in aquaculture ponds. Therefore, the requirement for suitably impervious soils at the site of pond construction is critical.

Ponds are the most common aquaculture facilities in Georgia. Watershed ponds built in the valley between two hills are most common. These ponds can be built in rolling topography but require a watershed about 10 times the size of the impounded water area (SCS 1982) and may need more area in forested watersheds. For this reason, most Georgia farms using watershed ponds have small water acreages, usually less than 50 acres each. Some farms have shallow ponds built side by side and supplied with well water. These farms are located in flat topography. At this time, the largest fish farm of this type has about 300 acres of water and pond sizes vary from 1 acre to 15 acres.

Cage Aquaculture

Cool Water Raceways

Mariculture

Closed Systems for Water Reuse

Water Quality in Freshwater Aquaculture Systems

Table 1. Amounts of some freshwater components considered best for fresh water fish aquaculture.

1. Depending on the chloride concetration in the water (From Boyd 1982).
2. Adapted from McKee and Wolf (1963).

Water Availability

Fresh Groundwater Supplies

Principal Artesian Aquifer

Figure 1. The Principal Artesian (Floridan) Aquifer (Kundell 1978).

Recharge of the Principal Artesian Aquifer varies between 0.1 and 2 million gallons per day per square mile (Meeks and Hayes 1984). In 1984, annual mean withdrawal from wells was approximately 225 million gallons per day. This withdrawal was mainly from agricultural irrigation and varies from year to year and by location. This aquifer has experienced considerable drawdown in certain areas (Stephenson and Veatch 1915; Herrick 1961). However, heavy irrigation use in southwest Georgia during the drought of 1977 was replaced by periods of heavy rainfall in following months (Kundell 1978). Water users should be concerned by the effect of several years of drought and high irrigation use that can lower the water level in the Principal Artesian Aquifer and increase pumping costs or change the aquifer water quality. Well volumes between 1000 and 5000 gpm are common in this aquifer (Clarke and Pierce 1985).

Water quality in the Principal Artesian Aquifer is generally excellent for fish culture. Water hardness is usually between 100 and 200 mg/L and total alkalinity is similar to hardness because of the calcium carbonate structure of the aquifer. Iron concentrations are generally between 0.01 and 0.4 mg/L although isolated wells have as much as 1.2 mg/L. Chloride concentrations are low and range between 3 to 11 mg/L.

In localized areas some unwanted water components must be removed by treatment of the water before use in fish hatcheries. In the Lowndes County area, high sulfate and hydrogen sulfide concentrations are present in water from this aquifer. It is possible, in wells deeper than 481 feet, for the sulfate concentration to exceed 230 mg/L and hydrogen sulfide levels to range between 0 and 3 mg/L correlate to the concentration of sulfate (Krause 1979). Therefore, historic records for well water quality should be investigated in areas of proposed aquaculture facility development. Carbon dioxide and nitrogen gas concentrations are supersaturated in the Principal Artesian Aquifer in the Tifton Area. Carbon dioxide between 10 and 15 mg/L and nitrogen must be reduced at least to saturation concentrations before use in fish hatcheries. These gaseous components do not pose a problem when well water is used to fill fish ponds. In that case, the gasses come to equilibrium with the atmosphere or dilute in the volume of water already in the pond.

Near the coast at Brunswick, deep wells have salt water intrusion which cause well water to contain about 300 mg/L dissolved solids at 500 feet and 2500 mg/L dissolved solids below 900 feet of depth (Grantham and Stokes 1976). Some wells in the Principal Artesian Aquifer draw water from formations with a high radium content. Community wells in Berrien, Montgomery, Tift and Wheeler counties have required reconstruction to reduce radium levels to drinking water standards (Clarke and McConnell 1988).

Clayton Aquifer

Figure 2. The Clayton Aquifer (Kundell 1978).

The water quality of the Clayton Aquifer is good for fish culture. Water hardness ranges from 26 to 150 mg/L depending on the location and depth of the well. Alkalinity of well water in this aquifer ranges somewhat higher than hardness and may reach 200 mg/L (Grantham and Stokes 1976). Generally, iron concentrations are about 0.1 mg/L; However, in some areas of Randolph County dissolved iron concentrations may be as high as 0.65 mg/L. Sulfate, chloride, and nitrate concentrations are low in this aquifer. Total dissolved solids average about 165 mg/L (Clarke and McConnell 1988).

Clairborne Aquifer

Figure 3. The Clairborne Aquifer (Kundell 1978).

The Clairborne Aquifer has good water quality for aquaculture. Hardness ranges between 6 and 160 mg/L. Alkalinities in most wells exceed 100 mg/L (Grantham and Stokes 1976). Iron concentrations usually are below 0.3 mg/L with a few wells having up to 0.7 mg/L. The median iron concentration is 0.08 mg/L. Sulfate, chloride and dissolved solid concentrations are usually low in water from this aquifer. However, in deep wells in south-central Georgia, concentrations of 22,200 mg/L dissolved solids and 11,900 mg/L chloride have been reported (Clarke and Pierce 1988). Therefore, deep wells into this aquifer could provide high salinity water for specialized aquaculture uses. However, over-pumping in the aquifer could allow this salt water to contaminate wells by intrusion.

Cretaceous-Tertiary Aquifer

Figure 4. The Cretaceous-Tertiary Aquifer (Kundell 1978).

Although the water quality of the Cretaceous Aquifer is good for many uses, it is less than optimum for aquaculture. Because of the sand and gravel strata of this aquifer, hardness and alkalinity are low in most wells. In the outcrop areas at the fall line, hardness and pH are low. Median hardness is 14 mg/L for the aquifer (Clarke and McConnell 1988). Iron concentrations vary over the range of the aquifer. In some wells in east-central Georgia iron concentrations exceed 0.3 mg/L and range as high as 6.7 mg/L. However, the median range of iron analyses is 0.04 mg/L. Sodium and chloride concentrations are high in one 5500 ft well in Dougherty County, 586 mg/L and 435 mg/L respectively (Granthan and Stokes 1978). Generally, the aquifer has few dissolved solids with a median value of 35 mg/L (Clarke and McConnell 1988). Sulfate is low over the entire area of the aquifer. Because of the rapidly sloping wedge of this aquifer (100 ft of depth per mile) water quality varies from north to south in this aquifer. Dissolved solids, sodium, and chloride increase at deeper levels and to the south of the outcrop area.

Shallow Sand Coastal Aquifer

Figure 5. The Shallow Sand (Coastal)Aquifer (Kundell 1978).

Water quality of the Shallow Sand Aquifer is generally good for most uses but tends to be soft. The geological deposits that make up this aquifer are the Holocene, the Pliocene and the Miocene formations. In Appling County, a well drilled into the Holocene and the Pliocene at 68 ft depth had a hardness of 38 mg/L and bicarbonate alkalinity of 31 mg/L. This soft water had a pH of 6.5 and low sulfate and chloride. In Wayne County, a well drilled into the Miocene at 190 to 310 ft. depth had hardness of 101 mg/L and bicarbonate alkalinity of 148 mg/L. The Miocene has water with pH values near 7.5 and low sulfate and chloride (Grantham and Stokes 1976).

Paleozoic Aquifers

Figure 6. The Paleozoic (Northwest) Aquifers (Kundell 1978).

Because these aquifers are scattered among different types of deposits, the water quality varies from well to well. In sandstone, water is soft and hardness may be as low as 6 mg/L. Some in this region yield water with hardness of 1100 mg/L. Mean dissolved solids for these aquifers is 126 mg/L. Although iron concentrations are generally low, as much as 11 mg/L iron may be found in some wells (Clarke and McConnell 1988).

Historic Aspects of the Principal Artesian Aquifer

Figure 7. Areas of Georgia and utilization of aquifers (Clarke et al. 1987).

Figure 8. The High Irrigation Water-use Zone of Georgia (George 1980).

Figure 9. Estimated ground water withdrawal in Georgia. 1977 (1980).

The intrusion of salt water into the Principal Artesian Aquifer was recognized as a problem in the 1970s. Since then, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources has limited the amount of withdrawal from coastal wells in this aquifer. As a result no further permits for industrial wells will be issued in the Savannah area and municipal wells will be limited. Similar regulation is planned for the Brunswick area (Clarke and McConnell 1988). The Water Resources Management Branch of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division issues permits for wells. In July 1991, agricultural users of groundwater began the same permitting process required of industrial and municipal users.

Fresh Surface Water

Surface Water Diversion

The state is divided into subregions that correspond to the watershed of major river systems (Figure 12). The water in all but one subregion flows to the south. In the Middle Tennessee-Hiawassee subregion, the water flows to the north from the Blue Ridge area in north Georgia. Some characteristics of these regions are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Selected stream flows of major river basins in Georgia (cubic feet per second). From Carter and Hopkins (1988).

The quality of water in Georgia streams is generally good. Pollution from industrial, agricultural and municipal sources is very localized where it exists. In periods of low stream flow, the impact from pollution sources may be greater. During these periods, depending on individual permits, facilities releasing waste water may be required to use higher levels of treatment or temporary storage to reduce stream pollution (Carter and Hopkins 1988). In the Altamaha-St. Marys subregion and in the Suwanee subregion, dark colored acid water would require pH adjustment before being used for aquaculture. The amount of dissolved solids reflects the hardness and mineral content of the streams. For most of Georgia, dissolved solids are less than 100 mg/L and hardness is less than 60 mg/L (Figure 13). In the northwest and southwest corners of the state, hard waters flow from limestone formations and hardness may exceed 100 mg/L during periods of low flow. Hardness in the northeast and southeast parts of the state may be below 10 mg/L because of the siliceous material in those drainage areas (Figure 14). The pH of surface waters in Georgia are generally in the range of 6.0 to 6.8 (Figure 15). The southwest and northwest corners and an area in Jenkins County have relatively high pH. The water in the southern part of the Suwanee subregion is very acid with pH below 6.0 (Cherry 1961).

The iron content of stream water may be high especially in the southern part of the state (Figure 16). The iron containing clays of the middle and southern parts of the state contribute to raise the iron concentration in streams above 1.0 mg/L. Activity of microorganisms also contributes to solution of iron from watershed materials in south Georgia. Before using stream water for aquaculture, iron analysis should be made in all parts of the state. Only the mountain areas and the southwest drainage of the Flint River have streams with low iron concentrations (Cherry 1961).

The maximum temperatures of stream water during the year allow culture of both coolwater and warmwater fish in Georgia. A compilation of water temperatures for streams was made by the U.S. Geological Survey for the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (Dyer and Stokes 1973). Yearly temperatures for 146 streams were charted. Generally, sites with temperatures below 70°F all year were located near the headwaters of streams above 34° latitude. In south Georgia, stream temperatures exceeded 90°F during July and August. Most stream temperatures dropped below 45°F during January or February each year. However, the Little River near Adel did not have temperatures below 48°F recorded from 1954 to 1963.

Management of Existing Impoundments

Developing the small impoundments for aquaculture presents a challenge to pond owners and state Extension and regulatory agencies. The size of the fish farm composed of watershed impoundments would be small. Therefore, the owners of these farms would need to produce large numbers of fish per unit area or a high value fish species in order to justify entrance into aquaculture. The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service and the Wildlife Resources Division of the Department of Natural Resources have programs for educating pond owners to properly manage their small impoundments. Cage aquaculture in particular requires a greater degree of technical knowledge and management than most pond owners possess.

Saline Waters

Managing the estuaries and bays for shellfish culture has been recognized as an immediate opportunity for aquaculture. The oyster fisheries along the Atlantic coast of the United States is declining. Establishment of carefully controlled beds of shellfish may provide relief to this declining industry. There is the possibility of bringing harvested oysters into unpolluted estuaries for a period of time needed to purify the oysters of any contaminants or unwanted flavor compounds. Shellfish facilities being studied by the Marine Extension Service of the University of Georgia include hatcheries, land-based nursery systems, saltwater ponds, natural grow-out systems and man-made grow-out systems. The areas designated for shellfish leases changes from year to year as determined by the Department of Natural Resources and leases may be made for up to 15 years. The approved areas are surveyed by the Coastal Resources Division in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Division for very high quality water prior to offering leases which are award by sealed bidding. Many of the approved areas are not utilized for oyster growing (DNR 1975).

In the past ten years, a variety of finfish and shellfish have been recognized as viable saltwater aquaculture opportunities. These species include, but are not limited to, soft shelled crab, red drum, brackish water shrimp, saltwater shrimp, red snapper and flounder. Facilities for culture must overcome a major obstacle of local community acceptance. For example, diked impoundments have been opposed in the past. Before current wetland protection regulation, proposed diking of 1200 acres on Barbour Island was opposed at a public hearing contributing to the rejection of permit application by the Army Corps of Engineers (DNR 1975). All licenses for mariculture activities would be through the Georgia Department of Natural Resources but subject to approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The water quality in the coastal waters is considered to be excellent for maintaining saltwater fish nursery areas and shellfish beds. 1971 data from the Ogeechee estuary is representative of those along the Georgia coast (Windom and Beck 1971). Current varied with incoming and outgoing tide. Current near the bottom of the estuary was slightly less than at the surface. The ebb current peaked at 1.5 knots over a period of 7 hours while the flood current was less and peaked below 1.0 knot. Temperatures were warmer at the mouth of the estuary than further inland. Variation during the day was greater at the mouth and depended on tidal influence. Dissolved oxygen concentration was very low in the inland reaches of the estuary due to decomposition of organic matter from swamps. In this estuary during August, dissolved oxygen ranged from about 40% of saturation inland to over 80% of saturation at the mouth. The values of pH also increased closer to the mouth of the estuary, from about 5.0 to about 7.5. Sodium increased from about 8.0 mg/L to about 7500 mg/L at the mouth of the estuary. The salinity of the water near the mouth of the estuary was about 22 parts per thousand.

Iron concentrations decreased from the inland reaches toward the mouth of the estuary. The acidic water and clay sediment containing iron contributed to relatively high iron concentrations of about 1.0 mg/L in the swamps near the estuary origin. As the pH increased in the estuary as the water became more salty, the iron precipitated. Concentrations of iron below 0.5 mg/L were nearly constant in the Ogeechee River at its mouth. Iron concentrations varied with the tide and high concentrations were measured close to the mouth of the estuary during ebb tide. Withdrawal for aquaculture purposes should be located near the mouth of estuaries and only after chemical analysis of the quality of the water.

Land

Topography

Georgia's topography is gently rolling over most of the state but is mountainous in the north and flat in the south. Most of the area in the northern quarter of the state has topography with slopes too steep to allow construction of large ponds. The Piedmont and Coastal Plain areas are generally suitable for watershed ponds. Clay soils located in these regions are suitable for pond dam construction. However, variation in soils occurs, and the Conservation Service or a Natural Resources qualified engineer should be consulted before using a particular site. Flat land in the lower coastal plain, flatwoods, and southwest Georgia areas may be able to support large acreages of shallow leveed ponds built with bottom slopes of 0.5 to 0.1 percent.

Soils

The state is divided into eight soil provinces (Figure 17). The Cumberland Plateau in the northwest corner has sandstone ridges and steep mountain slopes. The Valley and Ridge province has variable soils over a limestone strata. This area is prone to development of sinkholes and is underlaid by limestone. The Mountain and Intermountain province has narrow floodplains and some intermountain plateaus with coarse and even stony soils. The Piedmont Plateau is characterized by heavy red and yellow clays. The Sandhill province parallels the fall line and has deep sands in the recharge areas of several aquifers. The Upper Coastal Plain has clay based soils but also deep sands. The Middle Coastal Plain has sandy clay and sandy loam topsoils of variable thickness over soils with higher clay content.

The soils in south Georgia vary from heavy clay to sandy at the surface. In the Lower Coastal Plain soils are humic, sandy or poorly drained peats. In the Flatwoods, several feet of sand or sandy loam cover the clay containing soils and much of the clay soils contain too much sand for pond dam construction (Giddens et al. 1960) The soils in south-central Georgia, just north of Valdosta, and southwest Georgia were deposited on top of limestone and are prone to sinkhole development (Giddens et al. 1960). All sites should be tested with three or more bore holes per acre to check for soil variability (SCS 1982). Detailed soil maps are available from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Climate

Temperature

Rainfall

References

Boyd, C. E. 1982. Managing water quality in channel catfish ponds. J. Soil and Water Conservation. 37:207-209.

Brown, E. E., M. G. LaPlante, and L. H. Covey. A synopsis of catfish farming. Research Bulletin 69. University of Georgia, College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, Athens, GA. Carter, R. F. and E. H. Hopkins. 1988. Georgia surface water resources. In the National Water Summary, 1986. Water-Supply Paper 2300. U.S. Geological Survey. pp. 195-200.

Cherry, R. N. 1961. Chemical quality of water of Georgia streams, 1957-1958. Bulletin No. 69. U.S. Geological Survey.

Clarke, J. S. and J. B. McConnell. 1988. Georgia groundwater quality. In the National Water Summary, 1986. Water-Supply Paper 2325. U.S. Geological Survey. pp. 215-222.

Clarke, J. S. and R. R. Pierce. 1988. Georgia groundwater resources. In the National Water Summary, 1986. Water-Supply Paper 2275. U.S. Geological Survey. pp. 179-184.

Clarke, J. S., S. A. Longsworth, C. N. Joiner, M. G. Peck, K. W.McFadden, and B. J. Milby. 1987. Ground-water data for Georgia, 1986. Open-File Rpt. 87-376. U.S. Geological Survey.

Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 1975. Activities in Georgia's coastal waters: past trends and future prospects. Office of Planning and Research, Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Atlanta, Georgia.

Dupree, H. K. and J. V. Huner. 1984. Third report to the fish farmers. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, Washington, D.C. Stock No. 024-010-00654-4.

Dyar, T. R. and W. R. Stokes. 1973. Water temperatures of Georgia streams. U. S. Geological Survey and Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division. Atlanta, Georgia.

George, J. 1980. Status of water knowledge, U.S. Geological Survey. In Georgia water resources issues and options. J. E. Kundell editor. Institute of Government, University of Georgia. pp. 94-105.

Giddens, J., H. F. Perkins, and R. L. Carter. 1960. Soils of Georgia. Soil Science. 89:229-238.

Grantham, R. G. and W. R. Stokes. 1976. Ground-water quality data for Georgia. U.S. Geological Survey and Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA.

Herrick, S. M. 1961. Well logs of the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Georgia Geological Bulletin 70. U.S. Geological Survey and Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA.

Kundell, J. E. 1978. Ground water resources of Georgia. Institute of Government, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.

Kundell, J. E. 1980. Georgia's water resources. In Georgia water resources issues and options. J. E. Kundell editor. Institute of Government, University of Georgia. pp. 2-16.

McKee, J. E. and H. W. Wolf. 1963. Water quality criteria. Publ. No. 3-A, The Resources Agency of California, State Water Control Board, Sacramento, California.

Meeks, W. C. and L. R. Hayes. 1984. Recharge and water budge of the principal artesian aquifer, southwest Georgia. In A Conference on the Water Resources of Georgia and Adjacent Areas, R. Arora and L. L. Gorday editors. Bull. 99, Dept. Natural Resources, Atlanta, Georgia.

Meyer, F. P., K. E. Sneed, and P. T. Eschmeyer. 1973. Second report to the fish farmers. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Washington, D.C. Resource Publication 113.

Pote, J. W., C. L. Wax, and C. S. Tucker. 1988. Water in catfish production: sources, uses, and conservation. Special Bulletin 88-3, Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Mississippi State, MS.

Schefffer, P. M. and L. D. Marriage. 1975. Trout farming. Leaflet 552. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service.

Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1982. Ponds-planning, design, construction. Agricultural Handbook No. 590. U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Stephenson, L. W. and J. O. Veatch. 1915. Underground waters of the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Water-supply paper 341. U.S. Geological Survey. Washington, D.C.

Stone, N. M. and C. E. Boyd. 1989. Seepage from ponds. Bulletin 599, Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, AL.

Wellborn, T. L. 1987. Catfish farmer's handbook. Mississippi Cooperative Extension Service, Publ. 1549. Mississippi State University, MS.

Windom, H. L. and K. C. Beck. 1971. Diurnal variations in the chemical characteristics of the Ogeechee estuary in Georgia. Bulletin of the Georgia Academy of Science. 29:65-75.

Financing

Changing Financing Environment

1. The requirement by lenders for more and better information.
2. More thorough analysis and verification of the information provided.
3. Greater emphasis on both repayment ability and risk management.
4. Increased requirements for monitoring business performance after loans are made.
5. Stricter adherence to the lending institution's policy guidelines, i.e. fewer exceptions to the rules.

In preparing a loan request and a business plan, prospective borrowers need to recognize and address the following questions:

1. How much is to be borrowed over the planned period?
2. When will the money be needed?
3. What is it going to be used for?
4. How will it affect the borrower's financial position?
5. How will the loan be secured?
6. When will it be repaid?
7. How will it be repaid?
8. How will alternative possible outcomes in terms of both prices and quantities affect repayment ability?
9. How will the loan be repaid if the first repayment plan fails?
10. How much can the borrower afford to lose and still maintain a viable business?

Aquaculture Financing Issues

Lack of Aquaculture Experience

Early Stage of Development

The marketability of an aquaculture operation can be roughly judged by the number of marketing channels that are bidding for the firm's product. If there is only one marketing channel, the market is subject to less competition or assurance of a continuing market. Therefore, in a market where there is only one market for the farm's production, improvements may be valued at as little as 10 to 20% of cost or book value, while the existence of three or more marketing outlets may increase this value to 40 to 60%. More marketing channels indicate that the market is more mature and established. Obviously, these valuation factors are also influenced by the size, financial strength and reputation of the marketing outlets involved. This latter point also extends to the collateral value of contractual arrangements between producers and processors.

Inventory Questions

It should be noted that the problems just discussed differ significantly by type of species. There are both new and established aquaculture products. For example, catfish have been produced successfully on a large commercial scale for years, and the market acceptance has been well established. While Georgia lenders and producers may lack experience with these products, there is at least information and experience available. Moreover, this experience can be accessed through published materials, the employment of consultants, and by hiring experienced management and/or loan officers. The same situation does not exist, however, for many other aquaculture enterprises.

Factors Outside the Business

There are two particular areas outside the aquaculture firm that need to be considered: the general environment and the specific industry. The general environment needs to be evaluated in terms of social, cultural, economic, government/legal, technological and international issues. The specific industry needs to be examined in terms of market forces represented by potential new entrants, supplier market power, buyer market power, substitute products and the degree of competition that exists.

Social and cultural issues include general attitudes over farm raised aquaculture products, religious beliefs, education, etc. Economic issues center around the end user's ability to purchase the product. Disposable income, leisure time, spending priorities, changes in interest rates, the inflation rate and the unemployment rate are some specific economic considerations. Governmental and legal issues can play a major role in an aquaculture project and should be examined carefully. Rights to water, exotic species permits, environmental regulations, and taxing authorities all need to be addressed in the planning process.

Competition

Market Contracts

Sources of Financing

Others wishing to enter aquaculture ventures involving products which have a successful track record, e.g. catfish, may be unable to secure loans from the sources listed above because of a lack of borrower management experience, inadequate financial strength or because some lenders are still unwilling to loan for purposes where they have no previous experience. This group may be able to obtain assistance through the Small Business Administration (SBA) or the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA).

A third group of aquaculturists are those interested in high risk, but potentially high profit operations such as shrimp farming. It may be possible to obtain support for such ventures from SBA or FmHA, but many of these operations will be forced to seek venture capital or obtain outside grantors to provide additional financial strength.

Finally, there are aquaculturists who are interested in obtaining funding for the development of commercial operations based on technology which has not been demonstrated outside the research laboratory. Projects of this nature include closed culture systems for certain species. There is little or no credit available for these types of ventures. Funding must be obtained almost entirely through venture capital or by placing the developer's own equity capital at risk.

Non-Government Funding Sources

Commercial Banks

Two factors which will tend to make commercial banks more interested in diversifying their loan portfolios but at the same time may make them more risk averse, are the reform of the Federal Deposit Insurance system designed to vary FDIC premium rates according to perceived risks and the raising of capital requirements for "higher risk" banks. These changes will encourage greater reliance on loan guarantees and further reinforce the need for more education and a better understanding of aquaculture by both lenders and bank examiners.

Farm Credit System

The United States is currently divided into twelve farm credit districts. The eleven FCBs provide a source of funds as well as supervision and support services to 142 Federal Land Bank Associations (FLBAs), 85 Production Credit Associations (PCAs) and 40 Agricultural Credit Associations (ACAs). As of August, 1989, these 267 associations had approximately 1200 branch office locations throughout the country.

FLBAs make 5 to 40 year term first-mortgage loans for land and capital improvements. Loans may not exceed 85 percent of the market value of the property taken as security unless the loan is guaranteed by a federal agency. PCAs make short and intermediate-term loans for operating expenses, capital purchases and capital improvements. Producers and harvesters of aquatic products may receive terms of up to 15 years. ACAs are associations created by the merger of one or more FLBAs and PCAs.

The other lending arm of the Farm Credit System are the Banks for Cooperatives (BCs). The BCs offer a complete line of credit and leasing services to agricultural cooperatives, rural utility systems and other eligible customers. They require that at least 80 percent of the voting control of the cooperative must be in the hands of farmers, ranchers or producers and harvesters of aquatic products. A cooperative must also do at least 50 percent of its business with or for its members. The BCs may also finance joint ventures between eligible cooperatives and private firms as long as the cooperative has a controlling interest. Three banks, each with a national charter, comprise the BC system. CoBank, the National Bank for Cooperatives, is headquartered in Denver, Colorado, and maintains ten, full-service regional offices. CoBank also finances agricultural exports and provides international banking services for the benefit of U.S. farmer-owned cooperatives. The two other BCs are the St. Paul Bank for Cooperatives headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota, and the Springfield Bank for Cooperatives based in Springfield, Massachusetts.

Government Funding Sources

The Small Business Administration

The Economic Development Administration

Farmers Home Administration

1. Farm Ownership Loans and Loan Guarantees are made to help eligible applicants become owner-operators of family farms; to make efficient use of land, labor and other resources; to carry out sound and successful operation on the farms; and to enable farm families to have a reasonable standard of living. These loans can be made for the purchase and development of real estate, including water resources. The loan limit of $200,000 for direct loans and $300,000 for guaranteed loans.
2. Operating Loans and Loan Guarantees are made to operators for family farms and to applicants wanting to become operators of such farms. These loans can be used for financing and refinancing equipment, for livestock or fish purchase, for family living and farm operating expenses, and for minor land or water improvements. Objectives of the program are to improve living and economic conditions and to help operators become established in a sound system of aquaculture or agriculture. The loan limit is $200,000 for direct loans and $400,000 for guaranteed loans.
3. Emergency Loans are made in counties where property damage or severe production losses occur as a result of a natural disaster or because of other emergency situations. The funds can be used for major adjustments, operating expenses and other essentials to enable borrowers to continue their operation. This program involves only direct loans and has a loan limit of $500,000 or the amount of loss sustained, whichever is less.
4. Soil and Water Loans finance land and water developments, drainage of farmland, irrigation, pasture improvement, and related land and water-use adjustments. The loan limits for this program are combined with and limited to those for farm ownership loans.
5. Business and Industrial Loans Guarantee promote development of business and industry. Rural communities and towns of 25,000 or less receive preference. These loans may also be made for aquaculture-related businesses, such as processing plants. Loans of less than $2 million are eligible for a 90% guarantee, those between $2 - 5 million an 80% guarantee, and those between $45 - 10 million a 70% guarantee.
6. Borrowers under the direct farm ownership and operating loan programs may be able to qualify for the special limited resource loan program. Eligible borrowers qualify for initial interest rates which are approximately half of the normal loan rate, but this rate will adjust upward as the borrower's ability to pay improves.

Federal Cost-Sharing Programs

Recommendations

The success of any food production enterprise depends on efficient processing, distribution and marketing of products. The food processing and marketing sector in Georgia is a large, complex industry. However, aquaculture is a relatively small and fragmented newcomer to the Georgia food industry. Appropriate infrastructure does not exist between production and utilization interests to facilitate use of local products by processing and marketing firms.

This chapter focuses on aquacultural production as a food item which enters customary marketing channels. Processing and marketing of aquacultural production for ornamental use, bait or sport fish stocking programs are not considered.

Processing and Marketing

Seafood Demand and Supply

Demand

Between 1978 and 1995, per capita consumption of all seafoods increased from 13.4 pounds to 15.9 pounds. This increase in seafood use has been attributed to: a) increases in personal income, b) lifestyle changes and c) a greater awareness of the health benefits of fish and seafood. Historically, the majority of seafood products have been consumed away from home.

However, this historic dependence on the away-from-home market is being balanced somewhat by food retailers who are developing aggressive seafood programs. Since mid 1980, the retail food sector has steadily increased its commitment to seafoods as an additional component of the meat mix. In 1991, the retail food sector reported that seafood department sales accounted for 5.7 percent of total store sales nationwide; an increase of 43 percent since 1985, or about 17 percent per year.

Seafood products found a growing niche in the total domestic food market of the 1980s. Ten years ago food retailers were skeptical about seafood department performance; today their main concern is procurement to meet increasing demand. Similarly, the food service sector has experienced real gains in seafood use. For example, the domestic shrimp market has grown about 8 percent each year since 1985.

Projections by USDA in 1986 suggested that by the year 2000 per capita consumption would increase 5-17 percent above 1986 levels, with estimates ranging from 15.5 to 17.2 pounds. Surprisingly, this projected increase was achieved in 1987 when a record per capita value of 15.4 pounds was reported.

What is the outlook for the Georgia market? Georgia represents an already large and growing market for fish and seafood products. In terms of volume, approximately 103 million pounds of seafood products in ready-to-use market forms, (not live weight pounds) were required to satisfy this demand. (This volume was calculated by multiplying the per capita consumption value of 15.9 pounds by the 1990 Georgia population of 6.5 million people.)

A major share of seafood consumption is accounted for by a relatively small number of species. For example, the domestic market for shrimp is large and growing. The U.S. per capita consumption of shrimp has grown from 11 percent of domestic seafood uses in 1978 to 16 percent in 1993. While the total per capita consumption of all seafoods has increased about 12 percent between 1978 an 1993, shrimp consumption has increased from 548 million pounds in 1985 to 667 million pounds in 1992, a 22 percent increase.

Regarding finfish, industry sources cite freshwater, farm-raised channel catfish products as a major component of the Georgia seafood demand base. While U.S. per capita consumption of catfish is about 0.6 pounds, Georgia consumption is certainly much greater, possibly as high as 2 or more pounds. This means that in 1990, Georgians would have consumed an estimated 13 million pounds of catfish. Numerous other wild-caught fishery products also contribute to seafood demand in Georgia. Among these are many varieties currently imported from other regions of the U.S. or other countries such as ground fish (cod, haddock and pollack), various flatfishes (flounder, sole and halibut), and salmon (both wild caught and pen raised).

Supply

Supplies of fish and seafood in Georgia originate from local production (mostly from wild harvests) and to a larger degree imports from other states, regions or countries of either wild caught or aquaculture products. During 1988, Georgia commercial fishermen landed about 5 million pounds of shrimp with an ex-vessel value of about $15.5 million, 7 million pounds of blue crabs (valued at $2.4 million) and about 280,000 pounds of finfishes (valued at about $410,000).

Exact measurement of how much Georgia-produced seafood remains in-state is difficult to pinpoint. Oysters and clams are harvested from Georgia waters, but both are sold wholesale to processors in other states like Florida and Louisiana. When commercial fisheries landings are compared to estimations of cumulative, statewide demand, it is clear that a vast majority of all seafood used in Georgia (103 million pounds in ready-to-use market forms) must come from out of state sources.

Infrastructure

Georgia possesses a highly integrated food processing and marketing sector. The seafood processing and marketing sector in Georgia is a subset of a larger food processing and marketing complex. The firms comprising this sector vary from family-owned specialty retailers who use locally-harvested indigenous species to publicly-traded, vertically integrated companies. Many of these conglomerates procure products from domestic and international sources to satisfy trade area needs. Some participate in the processing and distribution functions as well. Unfortunately, the Georgia aquaculture industry, with few exceptions, has not been able to successfully interface with this existing infrastructure. Possible constraints to this linkage include competition from smaller volume, but higher priced local live markets, lack of consistent year-round supply, and lack of sufficient production volumes to service large-scale processors.

Processing

The Georgia coast is home to approximately 75 seafood interests which buy directly from harvesters. Included among these are approximately three large and middle-sized processing plants that are labor-intensive crab processing facilities and capital-intensive shrimp or whelk processing facilities that can provide numerous products processed through the combination of various market forms, freezing techniques, levels of convenience, and packaging. Shrimp processors currently have excellent capabilities in transporting unprocessed product from producer to plant, efficient material handling and full line processing. Whelk processors have excellent capabilities in custom cooking and packaging and holding product on a long-term basis.

Unlike the larger processing facilities for shrimp and crabs, the processing capacity for finfish consists of relatively small, inefficient operations diffused throughout the entire production and marketing system (although several isolated exceptions exist). It is common for processing to be accomplished by hand on a custom basis by either producers, small scale processors of wild-caught, estuarine fishes, or by firms classified as mid-level handlers; i.e. wholesale distributors. Georgia is also home to four medium-to-large seafood breaders/cooks/processors that do not deal in Georgia-harvested product.

Large-scale catfish processing has historically been unavailable in Georgia. Processing capability, for the most part, is limited to small hand operations. Two attempts at large-scale processing made in the last 20 years (Gold Kist Fish in the 1970s and Georgia's King Catfish in the 1980s) have failed.

Distribution

Another source of variability is the manner in which procurement is conducted. Some firms may rely on long-standing relationships with vendors for many of the standardized items such as block frozen shrimp, but may have to participate in open market procurement for fresh products. Distribution of food products is completed by a number of different business types ranging from producers who distribute their own output to full line wholesale distributors who utilize sophisticated technologies for managing procurement and sales.

Specialty Wholesale Operations

Full-Line Distributors

Operations

Detailed, timely information about production outlooks, harvests, etc. is required in order to make purchasing decisions. Typically, products are selected based on price and adherence to pre-defined criteria. Thus, the decision to purchase farm-raised catfish fillets from either Mississippi or Georgia will be based on (1) incoming price plus transport costs, (2) ability to assure year around supply, and (3) adherence to specifications. Products meeting specifications but priced above the market will not move through customary distribution channels, regardless of origin. Industrial buyers often look for products worldwide. Country of origin is sometimes an important concern, particularly since FDA scrutinizes shipments from those countries which have been or are just coming off the "blacklist."

Mid-level handlers (including processors who serve a retail account base, full-line distributors and specialty wholesalers) typically maintain an account base by providing timely deliveries of the correct mix of competitively priced products. Due to the extremely competitive nature of the business, all wholesale distributors must be sensitive to any conditions that provide an account with a reason to switch to another vendor. One such reason may be products which are inconsistent in quality and/or availability.

Many distributors considering long term purchasing arrangements will begin by scrutinizing financial well being of the supplier. Financial conditions that could influence the vendor's ability to obtain raw materials because of a poor credit history are of extreme importance since suppliers directly influence the product line offered and concomitantly, the distributor's ability to provide service. Thus, firms being considered as potential suppliers must have an identifiable history that can be accessed by firms such as Dun & Bradstreet. Without such references, negotiations for a purchasing contract may not proceed.

For firms that compete on the basis of common product lines, the use of long-term arrangements with large-sized vendors is paramount. Secondary suppliers are used to avoid being out of stock on a particular item. Conversely, those firms which provide customers with a mix of seasonal products in addition to a standard set of choices typically are more flexible in their procurement strategies. These businesses often purchase products on more of an open market arrangement from numerous vendors for shorter contract durations with less scrutiny of historic financial condition.

Constraints

Quality Assurance

One means of creating quality-assurance programs is to establish voluntary, industry-sponsored programs which are overseen by objective third parties. This type of voluntary, species-specific, quality-assurance program has been instituted for numerous aquaculture products including the Mississippi catfish industry, Scottish pen-raised salmon, and Long Island, New York, hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria).

Product credentialing is a logical option when the industry's product line is not standardized via mandated criteria, as is the case currently with the seafood industry. It is also appropriate when the industry desires to set standards which surpass existing ones.

All credentialing programs have three major components: the agreement to generate a promotional budget to support market development activities via checkoffs, either at the producer or first handler level; the development of enforceable product quality standards which are "market driven"; and the development and implementation of promotional strategy to communicate product quality standards to various segments within the overall market system. In lieu of proprietary consumer advertising (which is generally beyond the means of most processors) this concept provides for consumer recall of those products which have been credentialed; Through such a procedure, participating firms benefit in direct proportion to their market share. Participants in other credentialing programs have indicated favorable results being achieved from such efforts.

Linkages Between Producers and Marketers

Other types of information seem appropriate for establishing linkages between production and utilization interests. Specifically, producers should know more about the species and market forms preferred by various market segments. Similarly, producers should know more about specific processing capabilities and requirements of processors, distributors and retail interests i.e. minimum quantities required by utilization/marketing firms, availability of farm pick-up, lead time required to execute a procurement arrangement, required product testing prior to purchase, etc.

Critical Mass

Many buyers simply require larger quantities of raw materials per order than are currently available from Georgia farmers. Several potential buyers have indicated interest in aquaculture products if supply could be insured. Entry into these markets may require pooling of output from several producers.

Pooling arrangements enhance contract negotiations by: (a) reducing out-of-stock risk since output from more than one production facility is used; (b) reducing distribution cost through economies of scale and specialization of skills; providing for some excess procurement capacity if the market responds very favorably to the product.

Seasonality

The inability to purchase aquaculture products year round for the fresh market is a significant constraint in some situations. However, for others, seasonality of harvest may not be problematic. Firms which require a consistently available product line corporate-wide generally enter into long-term purchasing arrangements with suppliers who can provide a constant supply of consistent quality. Thus, sporadic production is of little value to these types of firms. Conversely, there are marketing interests which want to avail themselves to all procurement opportunities, regardless of seasonality.

Waste Disposal

Pricing

At the farm level, Mississippi farm-raised catfish are perfect substitutes for Georgia farm-raised production. Thus, Georgia producers must accept the current price for catfish if they compete in similar markets. A Mississippi Delta catfish producers group known as the Catfish Bargaining Association is attempting to secure contracts with processors that will stabilize fish prices paid to farmers. On the other hand, marketing a product such as hybrid striped bass requires less sensitivity to pricing since there are few available substitutes.

To avoid this competition from large integrated operations, small-scale Georgia catfish growers must continue to sell to local markets. The present lack of supporting infrastructure, considered a "growing pain" in developing industries, can be corrected over time if growth occurs.

Recomendations

Aquaculturists should ensure that only safe, wholesome food products enter marketing channels. Not only will this send a powerful message to consumers, it will also help build credibility with the food processing and marketing complex. This may require self-imposed routine evaluation of products for compliance with generally accepted production practices (i.e., minimal residuals of therapeutic compounds, maximal nutritional value, shelf life, etc.).

A critical mass of production is required to justify construction of efficient processing facilities and to gain access to desirable markets. The small Georgia industry largely lacks this critical mass and will face difficulty as it expands and competes with established aquaculture infrastructure in other states and countries. Initial economic development assistance is recommended to build needed infrastructure in appropriate areas.

This assistance should come in a form that will promote the development of private industry that can support itself and does not require long-term government assistance. A system of collecting and disseminating pertinent economic and marketing information to interested investment groups would be beneficial in this regard.

Regulatory Issues in Georgia

Current Issues

Ownership of the Resource

Exotic Species Policy

The obvious solution to such problems is to collect more data and document the actual impact. This process can be time consuming and expensive. Some farmers have complained that too much of the burden of proof is placed on the applicant.

A standard set of rules for permitting exotic species and genetically-altered animals should be developed by the DNR and shared with the aquaculture industry.

State Agency Promotion

DNR has taken an active stance in support of private aquaculture in Georgia. DNR has contracted with Auburn University for fish disease diagnostic services which are available to private aquaculturists free of charge. DNR is a cooperative sponsor of the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit of the University of Georgia which also provides disease diagnostic, instruction, and consultation services to private aquaculturists. DNR has also supported research at the UGA Fisheries Center at Cohutta by providing fish. A resolution supporting the development of private aquaculture was passed by the Board of Natural Resources in September 1992.

DNR has assigned a full-time staff member aquaculture responsibilities. This individual will facilitate communication between the industry and DNR, provide permit information, and coordinate regulatory activities. DNR fish hatcheries can serve as models to private aquaculture, and this person will disseminate information from research and coordinate visits and demonstrations at state hatcheries.

Lack of Adequate Funding

A Georgia Aquaculture Commodity Commission needs to be established and administered by the Georgia Department of Agriculture. The Aquaculture Commodity Commission could be supported by a "feed check-off" program, pending approval by the state's aquaculture producers. With these funds, the industry could assist in needed promotion, market development, and research that would enhance the further development of Georgia's aquaculture industry.

Other Regulatory Issues

• Developing an expanded list of FDA approved chemicals for use in treating water and feed.
• The utilization of wetlands for aquaculture enterprises.

State and Federal Government

Georgia Department of Natural Resources

Wildlife Resources Division

Regulatory Requirements

Aquaculture Registration

Aquaculturists producing and selling or reselling domestic fish may register (free) with the Department of Natural Resources. "Domestic fish" are lawfully obtained farmed fish which are held in confinement in private ponds, but only if they are fish species which are either indigenous to Georgia or are fish species which have been recognized before 1992 as having an established population in Georgia's public waters. White perch Moroneamericana cannot be considered a domestic fish. A commercial fish hatchery license, wholesale fish dealer's license, or retail fish dealer's license are not needed to sell domestic fish if the seller has registered as an aquaculturist. Persons in possession of domestic fish from registered aquaculturists must have a bill of sale or lading which provides the date of the sale, identifies the seller and which details two of the following three criteria for each species of fish: number, weight, or average length. Grocery stores do not have to register to sell domestic fish. Aquaculture registration certificates expire on April 1 following two years of registration. Information provided by the aquaculturist for registration must be updated if there are changes during the registration period.

Catch-Out Pond License

This license is not required. However, without this license, persons fishing in the catch-out pond must purchase a state fishing license or trout stamp, and comply with state creel limits, possession limits, or seasons if the owner has stocked fish other than farm-raised, domestic fish (see definition of domestic fish under Aquaculture Registration). No one needs a state fishing license to fish in private ponds containing domestic fish, even if the owner is operating the pond as commercial catch-out pond.

Commercial Fish Hatchery License

This license is needed for any facility with two or more ponds or a raceway system producing fish for sale more than once annually. This license is not needed for hatcheries raising only domestic fish if the owner has an aquaculture registration (see definition of domestic fish under Aquaculture Registration). Fish sold from licensed dealers must be accompanied by a bill of sale or lading which provides the date of the transaction, identifies the seller and which details two of the following three criteria for each species of fish: number, weight, or average length. Licensed hatcheries may sell legally-obtained game fish.

Fish Dealers License

A wholesale ($59) or retail ($10) fish dealers license is needed to sell live fish or fish eggs. Exceptions include persons with a commercial fish hatchery license, persons selling fish for use in aquaria, and registered aquaculturists selling only domestic fish (see definition of domestic fish under Aquaculture Registration). A wholesale license is needed for persons selling fish to others for the purpose of resale, and for those persons importing live fish or eggs into the state. A retail license is needed in other instances. Nonresident persons may sell and import live fish and eggs into the state without purchasing a license if they sell to a licensed wholesale fish dealer. Fish sold from licensed dealers must be accompanied by a bill of sale or lading which provides the date of the transaction, identifies the seller and which details two of the following three criteria for each species of fish: number, weight, or average length.

Wild Animal License

This license is required to possess, import, transport, transfer, sell or purchase any wild animal including exotic fish species. No license is needed for exotic fish (see exceptions below) if they are held in containers for holding fish from which is water is discharged, except during periodic cleaning, and which discharged water is passed through a filtering system capable of removing all fish and fish eggs and is disposed of only in a septic tank permitted by the county or in a waste water treatment system permitted by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division. Exotic fish are all fish species not native to Georgia. However, rainbow trout, brown trout, common carp, goldfish, and fathead minnow are examples of nonnative fish that are not considered exotic fish for regulatory purposes. A wild animal license is always needed to possess banded tetra (Astuamaxfaciatis) piranhas (all species including the Genera Serrasalmus, Serrasalmo, Pygocentrus, Taddyella, Rooseveltiella, and Pygopristis); grass carp (Ctenopharyngodonidella, see exception below) silver carp (Hypopthal-michthysmolitrix); bighead carp (Aristichthysnobilis); air-breathing catfishes (all species of the Family Clariidae); parasitic catfishes (all species of the Genera Vandellia (candiru) and Urinophilus); giant walking catfishes (all species of the Genus Heteropneustes); snakeheads (all species of the Genera Ophicephalus and Channa); and fresh water stingray (all species of the Family Potamotrygonidae). Licenses are individually conditioned to ensure that the requirements of the Game and Fish Code are met. No permit is required for persons buying triploid grass carp from wild animal dealers licensed by Georgia to sell grass carp if the buyer retains the bill of sale as proof, and the grass carp are stocked into a private pond.

* These licenses (catch-out pond, commercial fish hatchery, wholesale, and retail licenses) marked with an asterisk are not needed to sell farmed-raised, domestic fish. "Domestic Fish" are lawfully obtained farmed fish which are held in confinement in private ponds, but only if they are fish species which are either indigenous to Georgia or are fish species which have been recognized before 1992 as having an established population in Georgia's public waters. White perch Morone americana cannot be considered a domestic fish. Largemouth bass, bluegill, rainbow trout, brown trout, common carp, crappie, golden shiner, and channel catfish are examples of eligible fish species if they meet the definition of domestic fish.

Georgia Environmental Protection Division

Regulatory Requirements

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit

Georgia's Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control require that any person discharging or proposing to discharge from a "Concentrated aquatic animal production facility" into the waters of the State shall obtain an NPDES permit from the Division.

A "concentrated aquatic animal production facility" means a hatchery, fish farm, or other facility which contains, grows or holds aquatic animals in either of the following categories, or which the Director designates as such on a case-by-case basis:

1. Cold water fish species or other cold water aquatic animals including, but not limited to, the Salmonidae family of fish (e.g., trout and salmon) in ponds, raceways or other similar structures which discharge at least 30 days per year but does not include:
1. Facilities which produce less than 9,090 harvest weight kilograms (approximately 20,000 pounds) of aquatic animals per year; and
2. Facilities which feed less than 2,272 kilograms (approximately 5,000 pounds) of food during the calendar month of maximum feeding.
2. Warmwater fish species or other warmwater aquatic animals including, but not limited to, the Ameiuridae, Cetrarchidae, and Cyprinidae families of fish (e.g., respectively, catfish, sunfish, and minnows) in ponds, raceways, or other similar structures which discharge at least 30 days per year, but does not include:
1. Closed ponds which discharge only during periods of excess runoff; or
2. Facilities which produce less than 45,454 harvest weight kilograms (approximately 100,000 pounds) of aquatic animals per year.

Georgia's Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control require an Agricultural Water Use permit for all ground and surface water withdrawals of 100,000 gallons or more per day on a monthly average. No Agricultural Water Use Permit shall be required for any farm pond or farm impoundment constructed and managed for the sole purpose of fish, wildlife, recreation or other farm uses.

Agricultural use is defined to include the processing of perishable agricultural products and the irrigation of recreational turf (e.g., golf courses) except in certain areas of the state where irrigation of recreational turf is considered industrial use. These areas are, for surface water, the Chattahoochee River watershed upstream from Peachtree Creek (north Georgia) and, for ground water withdrawals, the counties of Chatham, Effingham, Bryan and Glynn.

Agricultural Water Use Permits have no expiration date, require no reporting of water use, may be transferred to subsequent landowners upon notification of EPD and cannot be revoked for nonuse.

Agricultural water withdrawals initiated prior to July 1, 1988, with permit application made to EPD before July 1, 1991, will automatically be granted a permit under prior use provisions of the law. Withdrawals begun after July 1, 1988 or permit applications received after July 1, 1991 will be subject to full review.

During periods of water shortage classified as an emergency, agricultural water use will receive second priority after water for human consumption. Emergency periods and affected areas will be defined by the Director after review of conditions occurring at that time.

Trout Waters - Approval to Impound or Discharge

The natural temperatures of streams designated as Primary Trout Waters may not be elevated, and the temperature elevation in Secondary Trout Waters is limited to 2°F or less. No person may construct an impoundment on Primary or Secondary Trout Waters without the approval of the Environmental Protection Division.

Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMP'S)

Coastal Resources Division

The Coastal Resources Division manages marine and estuarine fisheries resources, including many species with mariculture potential, such as molluscan shellfish, shrimp, and finfish. Shellfish harvested from mariculture systems would be governed by the same regulations as those for natural stocks. Mariculture systems may be affected by general commercial fishery regulations which apply to commercial fishing operations. Following are regulatory requirements applicable to mariculture.

Regulatory Requirements

Commercial Fishing License and Commercial Fishing Boat License

Each person engaged in commercial fishing in the state's salt waters must obtain a commercial fishing license ($12 resident, $118.00 nonresident). In addition, a commercial fishing trawler license (resident $50 plus $3 per foot over 18 feet, nonresidents add $25) is required if a boat is used. Nontrawler licenses are $5 for first 18 feet length plus $0.50/ft over 18 feet. Add $25 for nonresidents. All operators of commercial fishing vessels must keep daily catch records of all species sold for human consumption. Purchasers of seafood for human consumption or resale must keep records detailing the date of the purchase, the person from whom purchased, the quantity purchased by species name, the approximate location of harvest, and the state or federal boat registration number and size of the harvesting vessel. Records must also be kept for all seafood sold and shipped. Dealers must submit an itemized written report to DNR no later than the fifth day of each month. Shrimp bait dealers have additional reporting requirements.

Master Collecting Permits

This free permit and a commercial fishing license must be obtained by persons taking oysters or clams for commercial purposes. The permittee must report to DNR the volume and location of oysters and clams harvested the previous season. Master collecting permits will only be issued to persons who have an exclusive right to harvest oysters or clams, or to lessees of such persons. State owned property may be leased for shellfish harvesting.

The Commissioner of DNR is authorized to open or close any portion of the salt waters for the taking of oysters and clams. Water quality must meet the National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) guidelines. Oysters must measure at least three inches from hinge to mouth, and clams must measure at least one inch thick, except that smaller oysters that cannot be removed without being destroyed may be taken if attached to one of legal size. No more than five percent of oysters at a canning or shucking operation can be less the legal size. Prior written approval from the department must be obtained to transplant oysters and clams from restricted to approved growing areas, or to build or operate a facility for controlled purification of shellfish. Before being permitted by DNR, a shellfish producer must establish a Department of Agriculture certified handling facility. Permitted harvesters are issued tags which must be attached to all shellfish shipping containers. Unless otherwise specifically authorized in writing, and having this authorization on their person, it is illegal to take oysters or clams except with hand-held implements. Persons taking oysters commercially must return 33.3 percent of the volume of oyster shells to designated areas or transplant at least this amount of oysters from unapproved growing areas, or transplant at least this amount of clutch material.

DNR may authorize persons by contract to take, transport, possess, purchase, sell, band, or release wildlife (including crustaceans, shellfish, and other seafood) at times, by methods, and in quantities otherwise illegal. DNR may issue a special permit for persons to utilize shellfish less than the minimum size as seed. or to take, possess, or transport certain species for scientific purposes. Exotic shellfish may be imported or introduced with special authorization from DNR. In accordance with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission guidelines in "A Procedural Plan to Control Interjurisdictional Transfers and Introductions of Shellfish": persons wishing to import shellfish into Georgia for production in contained growing facilities should, prior to each transfer, have authorization from DNR and provide to DNR certification that the mollusks are of a single species and free from common diseases of mollusks.

Georgia Department of Agriculture

Regulatory Requirements

Wholesale Fish Dealers License

Processing Facilities

Mobile Sales

For more information on areas regulated by the Georgia Department of Agriculture, call 1-800-282-5852.

Federal Government

Regulatory Requirements

404 and Section 10 Permits

A State Water Quality Certification (free, Georgia Environmental Protection Division, Water Protection Branch) is required before the Corps of Engineers will take final action on a Section 10 or 404 permit. A copy of the application for a Section 10 or 404 permit will automatically be sent by the Corps to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division for State Water Quality Certification.

Addresses and Phone Numbers of Regulatory Agencies in Georgia

Environmental Protection Division
Land Reclamation and Sedimentation Control Program
3420 Norman Berry Drive
Hapeville, GA 30354
Ph: 404/656-7404

Environmental Protection Division
Water Resources Management Branch
Suite 1156, East Tower
205 Butler Street, SE
Atlanta, GA 30334
Ph: 404/656-3094

Environmental Protection Division
Water Protection Branch
Suite 1058, East Tower
205 Butler Street, SE
Ph: 404/656-4887

Georgia Soil & Water Conservation Comm.
4310 Lexington Road
PO Box 8024
Athens, GA 30603
Ph: 706/542-3065

Georgia Wildlife Resources Division - Aquaculture Program
2123 U.S. Highway 278 SE
Social Circle, GA 30279
Ph: 770/918-6418

Georgia Wildlife Resources Division - License Unit
Building 10, Suite 108
2189 Northlake Parkway
Tucker, GA 30084
Ph: 770/493-5770

Georgia Wildlife Resources Division - Permit Office
Game Management Section
2070 U.S. Highway 278 SE
Social Circle, GA 30279
Ph: 770/918-6404

U.S. Army COE - Savannah District
District Engineer
Attention SASOP-F
P.O. Box 889
Savannah, GA 31402-0889
Ph: 912/974-5347

Georgia Department of Agriculture
Consumer Protection Division
19 MLK, Jr. Drive
Atlanta, GA 30334
Ph: 404/656-3621

The University of Georgia, Existing Programs, Personnel and Resources

College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences

Coastal Plain Experiment Station (Tifton)

Facilities and personnel to support this research should be supported for developing technologies that ensure high water quality, optimize fish growth, and preserve the high quality of fish products. The primary need for research is in the following areas:

1. Catfish Production Systems: Since Georgia and Atlantic coastal state consumers prefer a smaller catfish than other U.S. consumers, unique systems of management must be developed to efficiently produce these fish.
2. Design and Mechanization: Development of increasingly more efficient production systems must be a continued function of the aquaculture research unit. Conservation of water, improvement of water quality, and treatment or further utilization of effluent waters are current needs and topics for research. Mechanization of feeding, harvesting, and water quality management would improve efficiency and reduce cost of production.
3. Practical Nutrition: Fish nutrition research addresses the largest economic input of the fish farmer. Development of efficient feeding practices and low cost but high quality feeds are vital to the aquaculture industry. Technician labor is very much needed in this research area.
4. New Species Production Systems: Opportunity to culture species other than channel catfish is important to many Georgia fish farmers. Additional facilities and personnel are required before technology for culture of species such as crappie, sturgeon, bass, crawfish, and baitfish can be developed in Georgia.
5. Polyculture: Growing more than one fish in a pond at the same time can improve production efficiency but requires special technology for successful implementation. Substantial progress in yield per acre increases, fish disease control, and product diversity can be made with an investment in polyculture research.
6. Disease Identification and Control: Fish disease research is a critical infrastructure element for the further development of Georgia aquaculture. Current efforts in catfish parasitic and bacterial disease research should be continued and expanded to include other diseases and fish species. Additional faculty and technicians are needed to adequately meet the current and future needs for fish disease research.

Food Science & Technology Department, Aquaculture Research, Georgia Experiment Station (Griffin)

Objectives

1. To determine the effect of various washing treatments on the removal of geosmin from minced catfish.
2. Evaluate the functional properties of catfish surimi.
3. Determine the ability of smoking to mask off-flavored fish and surimi.
4. Quantitate levels of iron, nucleotides, free amino acids, citrate, vitamin E, vitamin C and glutathione in catfish muscle.
5. Characterize isolated sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) vesicles from catfish for lipid composition and for lipid peroxidative activity.
6. Examine the effects of iron, nucleotides, free amino acids, citrate, vitamin E, vitamin C and glutathione onlipid peroxidative activity in the SR model system.
7. Establish the existence of any relationship(s) between chemical measurements, and sensory perception of rancid flavors and odors in fish muscle subjected to various frozen storage treatments.
8. Develop models for prediction of frozen shelf-life of catfish muscle incorporating data obtained from model system and frozen storage studies.

Environmental and Agricultural Engineering Department, Coastal Plains Experiment Station

Warnell School of Forest Resources

Whitehall Forest (Athens)

A significant need at this facility is for small research ponds for faculty to conduct aquaculture research and provide a more convenient source of research animals. At the Whitehall facility, a site has been surveyed and blue prints developed for 40, 1/10-acre research ponds. An existing water shed pond above the site can be used as a reservoir to fill these ponds and/or a pump can be installed on the Oconee River adjacent to the site, to fill the ponds.

Cohutta Fisheries Center (Whitfield Co.)

Research and Extension programs were initiated at the Center in 1985. Since 1985, 38 workshops have been held at the facility, and more than 10,500 aquaculturists from Georgia and surrounding states have participated in these programs. The facility has been used regularly for Peace Corps training, and more than 28,000 adults and youth have informally visited the Center since 1985.

Ongoing research and Extension programs at the Center include:

1. Hybrid striped bass research on determining the feasibility of the commercial production of these fishes in Georgia. Research activities include, hatchery methodologies, stocking strategies for fingerling and food fish production, crude protein requirements, and cage culture.
2. Studies on the profitability, management strategies, and consumer attitudes in marketing fish through fee-fishing ponds.
3. In cooperation with Auburn University, evaluating six different strains of channel catfish for the aquaculture industry.
4. Demonstrating latest production methods for channel catfish and rainbow trout.

Extension Aquaculture and Fisheries

Considering the growth and potential of the aquaculture industry, the Cooperative Extension Service will have to increase its staff, programs, and resources to maintain its leadership in providing clientele with information to make wise decisions relative to successful production, processing, and marketing of aquatic species.

In addition to refunding lost positions, the following additional personnel and resources are needed primarily for aquaculture programs and services.

1. Southern Appalachian Fisheries Research and Extension Center (Cohutta, Georgia) - An additional professional staff member, joint appointment with the School of Forest Resources, is needed to direct research and Extension programs at the Center. This position would help to expand programs at the Center. Presently, the Center does not have an adequate meeting room auditorium to accommodate more than 20 people attending on-site workshops or short courses). There is an immediate need to build an auditorium to accommodate up to 100 people. There is also a long-term need to build additional ponds at the Center. Presently the Center has 24 ponds. This relatively small number of ponds does not allow adequate replication of demonstration and research plots if a number of concurrent projects are conducted at the Center. A series of 20 to 30 ponds, 0.1-0.2 acres in size, needs to be built on existing land at the Center.
2. Coastal Plain Experiment Station (Tifton) - Technology transfer and continued education of fish farmers is required for support of the existing aquaculture industry and expansion to its potential. It is of priority importance to establish a 100% Extension position in south Georgia. Current and future needs for aquacultural problem solving, fish disease case investigation, and production system assistance should be addressed by establishing this position.

Marine Extension Service

Current research and advisory efforts in Georgia target four major mariculture candidates: hard clams, surf clams, oysters, and soft-shell blue crabs. In addition to transferring technology developed during the research phase, there is major problem associated with educating the public in the intricacies of obtaining state leases for shellfish harvesting and its associated culture.

Restoration of the oyster industry is an extremely difficult task because of (1) past destruction of oyster bottom which has sharply reduced the amount of available setting space for oyster larvae, (2) lack of capital to invest in long-term bed development, (3) uncertainty about legal rights to shell fishing grounds, (4) difficulty of protection from poachers, and (5) periodic oyster mortalities caused by diseases, parasites, and predators. In spite of difficulties in restoring the oyster industry, many watermen are optimistic.

The applied research to date has provided great promise for a mariculture-based shellfish industry for several species, namely Mercenaria mercenaria - the hard clam, Spisula solidissima - the surf clam, Crassostreavirginica - the American oyster, and possibly Argopectenirradians - the Southern bay scallop. These species represent major research species.

Prior to the initial Marine Extension Service effort in 1980, the soft-shell crab industry consisted of one modest operation in Georgia. Staff trained crab fishermen to identify crabs that were ready to shed (peelers) and to sort them from the catch. Crab fishermen and others, including the Bryan Fishermen's Cooperative, were encouraged to build crab-shedding facilities. They were trained in operating a holding system and in shedding, processing, and marketing the crabs. Georgia's 460 crab fishermen can either shed the crabs themselves or sell premolt crabs to a shedding facility operator. Each hard crab normally sells for $0.04 to $0.05 at the crab-meat picking plant. Peeler crab sold to crab-shedding plants bring $0.30 to $0.35. From shedding facilities, soft-shell crabs are sold for $0.75 to $1.25 each.

Georgia has many natural advantages for a mariculture industry. Abundant pollution-free and food-rich water, combined with warm temperatures, ensure excellent growth rates for a wide range of shellfish. Major research, development and advisory programs represent the best way of taking advantage of nature's generous marine endowment to this state.

Marine Fisheries Center Physical Facilities

1. General biology, culture technologies, feeds, water quality, harvesting, processing, seafood quality and handling and consumer education are key areas of concern.
2. Development of pilot plant locations for improving seafood product handling, processing, packaging and storage is needed to maintain high quality in the industry products.
3. Educational programs for salt water aquaculture producers and seafood handlers must be supported for assurance of product quality.
4. Determining the best use of mariculture for enhancement of molluscan fisheries is needed in Georgia.

Budgetary Needs at the University of Georgia

Information Sources

Aquaculture Magazines

Aquaculture Magazine

Aquaculture Today

The Aquaculture News

Farm Pond Harvest

Feed Management

Fish Farming International

Mollusk Farming USA

Naga, the ICLARM

Practical Aquaculture & Lake Management

Salmonid

Seafood Business Magazine

Seafood International

Seafood Leader

The Catfish Journal

World Aquaculture

World Shrimp Farming

Informational Systems

An international bibliographic service covering the world's literature on aquatic sciences and fisheries, including aquaculture. FAO, Rome. Contact: Aquaculture Development and Coordination Programme (ADCP), FAO, Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.

Aquaculture Information System, AQUIS

Selective Fisheries Information Service

Abstracting Aids

Fisheries Review

ASFA Aquaculture Abstracts

Statistical References

Aquaculture Situation and Outlook

Current Fisheries Statistics, Fisheries of the United States. Published by the National Marine Fisheries Service. Gives statistics for previous year. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Catfish and Trout Crop Reports. Both are USDA publications. Agricultural Statistics Service Publications, 341 Victory Drive, Herndon, Virginia 22070.
FAO Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics. Gives world statistics on catches and landings.

Aquaculture is included. Publication runs about 18 months after end of year reported. This and other FAO publications are available from: Aquaculture Development and Coordination Programme (ADCP), FAO, Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.

Libraries

Aquaculture Information Center

Meetings and Trade Shows

Journals and Books

Agency Reports

National Aquaculture Associations

American Alligator Farmers Association

American Fish Farmers Federation

American Fisheries Society

American Tilapia Association

Aquaculture Association of Canada

Associated Koi Clubs of America, Inc.

Canadian Aquaculture Producers Council

Catfish Farmers of America

European Aquaculture Society

International Association of Astacology

National Aquaculture Association

National Aquaculture Council

National Fish and Seafood Promotional Council

National Fisheries Institute

National Shell Fisheries Association

Striped Bass Growers Association

United States Trout Farmers Association

World Aquaculture Society

Electronic Media

International Center for Aquaculture, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849.

Catfish Aquaculture (19 min)
Redfish Aquaculture (23 min)
Crawfish Aquaculture (22 min)
Alligator Aquaculture (19 min)

John Brooks, LSU Cooperative Extension Service, 128 Knapp Hall, LSU, Baton Rouge, LA 70803.

Catfish Farming in the South (38 min)
Red Drum Aquaculture (35 min)

Southern Regional Aquaculture Center funded these videos. Several others are in preparation. Available through Extension Aquaculture and Fisheries Department, The University of Georgia.

Extension Literature

Handbooks and Manuals