Feck off with your Fish Farm

6/24/2013

Geez, just found out the muppets want to put a 700ha fish farm just 2k's off Pipe. Are they off their flipping pips? The pollution from the fish shit will be scary, it'll look freaking ugly (hundreds of huge cages over 7 square km's), it'll stuff up the waves in the bay for sure, ruin the pristine marine ecology of this part of our bay, draw tons of sharks to the area, and our dolphins & whales will get entangled in the nets. Jeez, we're meant to be the watersports capital of SA....and they want to go plonk a fish farm slap bang on our beachfront. This is your bay, your beachfront, and your waves they're gonna cock up, so OBJECT!! Fill in the form below, and your objection will be registered with the peeps managing the process. Make your voice heard. Too late to bitch once it's built!
(Update: objection form has been removed from the blog post as closing date for objections was Monday 24 June 13)

The implications for our bay are just to hectic to even think about. The pollution will be hectic - imagine 9000 tons of fish shitting just 2k's from where you're surfing and swimming?! And then add in the antibiotics they pump them full of, the disease potential of so many fish caged in such a small area, the chemicals used to clean the cages. Plus the fish are fed commercial feeds - and we all know the exciting genetic modifications/mutations that go with that.

Let's also not forget all the sharks that are gonna pull in to their version of a fishy McDonalds drive-through - just 2k's away from where you're surfing. And if they can't get to those nice yummy fishies in the cages, they're gonna come cruise our beaches for a snack maybe? Will you be on the lunch menu?

What happens to our local pod of dolphins who cruise through that part of the bay daily - what'll stop them getting stuck in all those nets?? And the whales that come each year to breed - say cheers to them too.

And tourism? Gonna look flipping ugly with 7 km square of fish cages right off our beach. And the muppet's have the audacity to say, yah - it'll be a tourist attraction. Dunno, when last did you decide to go on holiday to a spot cos you could check out this kiff fish farm they have? Not! We have such a beautiful bay, and are renowned as the water sports capital of SA....and now this!

I totally get the fact that fish farming in future may be a much needed reality as food stocks dwindle. But surely it makes sense to locate such farms in area's that are firstly much better protected (cos dunno if the study peeps have checked the swell conditions out there in a big west or east - them cages are gonna be making frequent trips down to Kings Beach as they get blown off their moorings!), but also - just put em where they don't stuff up so many things for so many people. There are plenty other more protected area's away from residential area's that could be considered. C'mon DAFF, don't be such muppets!
(*DAFF - Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries)

To read all the documentation, and to register as an Interested and Affected Party, go here:
http://cape-eaprac.edenit.co.za/active/171-marine-aquaculture

Mike Callaghan

6/23/2013 11:17:06 pm

David Lipschitz

6/23/2013 11:46:11 pm

This is a ridiculous place to impact the ocean where things are now settled and the status quo is acceptable to all.
There are many areas North of the Harbor where there will be little or no potential impact.
The ocean users of this area will be up in arms if this project is not moved.
Regards
David Lipschitz
I am the ex-President of South African and Eastern Province longboarding and am on the comitee of the Eastern Province surfing association.

Dave from PE

6/23/2013 11:51:40 pm

Hi there. I have no axe to grind but I do have a few facts to share with your reading audience, if I may.

Namely that this is a spectacularly poorly researched, badly written, presumptuous and unnecessarily scaremongering post.

Last minute kneejerk much?

I recognise that you have some sort of agenda here, but the fact is that since you posted this with 3 hours to go of a process which has been ongoing for over 21 months, so I'm guessing that you probably had to rush it out. I understand that you may have made a few assumptions, twisted things a bit to make it sound worse than it actually is and maybe chucked in a couple of "facts" which don't actually conform to the commonly understood definition of the word "facts".

Perhaps caught up (if you'll excuse the pun) in your hyperbole of describing PE as "the watersports capital of South Africa", you seem to have exaggerated other facts: the fact that it's "slap bang on our beachfront" is far from accurate - it's going to be more than 2kms offshore which kinda makes your point about it being "freaking ugly". Perhaps so if fish lived in concrete towers, but they don't. They live underwater and the farm will be nigh on invisible from land.

Your description of the proposed development as "a fishy McDonalds drive-through" was superb, mind. I can't fault you on your vivid imagination, but I can fault you on your assumption that fish farms attract sharks in the first place, when there's clear evidence to suggest that <a href="http://www.kingsalmon.co.nz/KingSalmonEvidence_documentation/Sarah%20Margaret%20Dawson%20-%20Appendix%20A.pdf">they don't</a>. There are several fish farms near Hermanus and Gansbaai and they haven't had a shark attack in years.
Oh - and the hugely emotive dolphin/whale thing? All but the most biased of research suggests that "entanglement should be a minor risk". Straw clutching.

Also, you seem to have somehow overlooked the fact that while you were out "catching a wave, bru" for the past 21 months, the DAFF has been researching the area and planning strategically in order to ensure that this development is placed sensibly. They do all sorts of stuff with ocean current mapping and the like, seeing where that fish poo goes, while you were describing stuff as "gnarly" and publishing photos of <href="http://www.millerslocal.co.za/uploads/5/0/1/3/5013304/9271771_orig.jpg">young men hugging (and worse!) sports equipment</a>. DAFF totes win at doing the homework.

I know that you are only concerned about your waves, but then there's the other side of things as well. The investment in local businesses, increasing employment for the underprivileged in an area that really needs this sort of help.
And the tourist thing - nah, I don't think it'll draw any tourists in either, but neither will it scare them all away. Fact is, you probably won't even notice it's there.

So stop panicking bru, go hit the swell with your ous and have a chilled ride or two before the weather goes miff.

Your friend,
Dave. x

sharon

6/25/2013 02:07:36 am

I have just had a hectic day at work. Came across your letter and decided to read it. I must congratulate you Dave on a letter that is excellently written and guess what I don't even need a glass of wine to relax.I had such a good hearty laugh and I feel so much better. GREAT READING and so true.

6/23/2013 11:56:05 pm

Damnit.

I forgot to comment on your "we all know the exciting genetic modifications/mutations that go with that" line, which was one of your best.
If that really is your feeling, I'd stick to surfing rather than attempting anything spectacular in the biotechnology field. Just saying.

Your friend,
Dave. x

millerslocal

6/24/2013 01:31:28 am

Hiya Dave,

Yip - it is last minute cos I only found out about it this morning thanks to an email I was cc'd in on.

DAFF was possibly not looking for peak public awareness of the proposal by placing the public info ad's over a weekend in December, when most peeps aren't reading the smalls in the paper cos they're on holiday.

To quote Nelson Mandela Bay Tourism:
"Nelson Mandela Bay (Port Elizabeth, Uitenhage, Despatch and Colchester), an excellent value-for-money-family-fun-in-the-sun-holiday destination, named after Nelson Mandela - humanitarian, freedom fighter and world icon of peace - is located 763 km east of Cape Town, is regarded as the "official" gateway to the scenic Eastern Cape Province and the world renowned Garden Route and is sometimes referred to (by the people who know her best) as the "friendly city" or the "water sport capital of Africa" . Their description of PE, not mine.

The visual impact of the farm is a stated concern within the Draft Impact Assessment Report itself. Pg 43 of the report states: "Due to the flat sea surrounding the site, the extent of the project would be high, even though the height of the proposed project is limited to 2 m. The project would be long term and large in scale. The intensity of the visual impact would vary depending on the size and location within the boundary of the proposed development area i.e three fish cage farms of 70 Ha each (sea floor footprint, with 2,5ha cages visible, up to 5ha inclusive of safety markings) making up a total of 210 Ha (sea floor footprint with up to 7,5ha cages visible and up to 15ha inclusive of safety markings such as mooring buoys and navigational markers) or 9 fish cages of 70 Ha each making up a total of 630 Ha (sea floor footprint). Location in close proximity to diving or yachting receptors, as well as locations in front of the beach front, would result in high levels of visual impact and subsequently, high significance given the importance of tourism for the city of PE."

Understanding shark attacks is fraught with complexity, as with the limited research available it is hard to tie a parameter to a consequence. However, any situation that increases the presence of sharks in an area can then statistically increase the potential of a bather/surfer shark encounter. If you swim in the sea - this is not a good thing!

Re your comment that no attacks in Hermanus/Gansbaai area, please note there was a recent attack at Hawston, just outside of Hermanus, in March this year (http://www.zigzag.co.za/news/environment/shark-attacks-surfboard-at-hawston-surfer-unscathed/), and a fatal attack on a bodyboarder at Kogel Bay, just down the coast, late last year. More likely due to the proximity of Seal Island than fish farms, but then we are fortunate enough not to have a congregating area for whites near our bathing beaches. This may change if the fish farm is present.

Dolphins get caught in nets, it's a fact, not emotive. The Natal Sharks board acknowledges that dolphins are an unfortunate by-catch of their nets "Between 2005-2009 the average annual catch was 591 sharks (the bulk of the catch comprising 14 species, 13.3% released alive), 201 rays (mostly comprising seven species, 50.8% released alive), 60 turtles (mostly comprising two species, 54.3% released alive), 43 dolphins (three species) and 30 teleosts (bony fish)." It is proposed that nets will be placed in various area's of the farm. Marine life will be affected by these.

DAFF may have been researching this for the last 21 months, but they certainly haven't been eagerly sharing any of their findings with the public. If they had, a lot more people would have known about this a lot earlier. Yet not many of the watersports user groups knew anything about this. If DAFF were keen to encourage public participation, could they not have run an article in the Herald, instead of a classified ad on a weekend in December?

GM stuff is a scary concept. People are only now becoming more aware of issues such as Monsanto. The fish in the farms are not feeding naturally, but are being fed commercial fish food, as well as receiving antibiotics. What assurances are there that this will not have health implications. I'd prefer not to take the chance.

Of course we are concerned about the implications on wave quality, as it will have a detrimental effect on the past-time we all so love. As a surfing community we will obviously object to any development that could impact on our sport. If you had a passion for something, I would think you would react similarly and not be a passive bystander.

Increased employment and investment in specific local businesses? Maybe, but a far larger loss of overall employment and investment if our beaches become polluted and we lose tourists, and events such as Ironman.

And lastly, no biotech isn't my field of interest, but marine research is - have completed a study commissioned by the President of the Maldives on the tidal energy potential of their count

Andrew

6/24/2013 10:45:46 pm

Dave from PE....Your arrogance is spectacular and your condescending remarks need tempering!
I don't claim to know as much as DAFF appear to know but I do swim long distance open water swims that are further than 2km out into the bay. I have also read up a little on fish farms and my common sense tells me that the choice of location for this farm is very short sighted.... Millerslocal had the decency to respond with grace and facts and I sincerely hope that the NMB public are given proper opportunity to oppose this proposal as I do believe it was done in a way to avoid public debate.

Theo Panagis

6/24/2013 12:27:35 am

It seems as though the location of the fish farms has not been well researched. It is clear that the only beneficiaries in this whole scheme will be the fishing company involved. No consideration has been given to the impacts on tourism, pollution and environment. Precedents of cage fishing such as this around the world has been proven to be detrimental to society and the environment. It is strange that the authorities did not suggest to locate the cages in the aquaculture zone earmarked at Couga IDZ. Lack of intense research will lead to disaster.

6/24/2013 12:43:37 am

Theo, Theo, Theo.

"It seems as though the location of the fish farms has not been well researched."

By whom?
This statement is only even vaguely true if you read the blog post above and take it as gospel.

"Lack of intense research will lead to disaster."

Like I said, DAFF have being researching this for nearly two years. How is that not intense? Just because you and the rest of the surfing community don't read your local paper, doesn't mean that DAFF hasn't been doing its homework.

Finally, "cage fishing such as this around the world has been proven to be detrimental to society and the environment."
Simply untrue. There are many hundreds of projects worldwide which have had negligible effect on the environment while providing huge benefit for the local community, economy and food security. The aquaculture business in SA is huge (hundreds of millions of Rands pa) and is of massive importance.

Please, base your arguments on facts, not your ill-informed beliefs.

Jag

6/24/2013 12:59:38 am

Hi Dave from PE.

How much are you being paid for this project? Why has this not been in the media?

The last time I checked SA was a democracy and it is our right to voice our views any way we like. I'm sorry if some of the lines in this article were incorrect but the point is, we care about our waves and our coastline. Not saying you don't but you'd understand our concern.

I'm sorry that you had to refer to photos on this site to show how educated you are compared to surfers in PE. Seems as if you are really qualified in what you do and you have an IQ of at least 120 to copy and paste links! How do you even do that? It’s impressive that you’ve been working really hard on studying the ocean over the last 21 months! It must have been really hard work and you must be a freaking genius! Because us surfers don’t work at all and have no jobs...all we do is surf and watch the ocean. I’m sure none of us even have degrees in marine biology or maybe oceanography! Flip I don’t even know how I’m typing this right now...

I hope you got my sarcasm in that last paragraph mate ;)...So it looks like you have a massive problem with this article? Point is we have the right to voice our opinions until the deadline and even after the deadline. I’m sure our friends down at The Herald will eat this up and it will be on the front page sometime this week. Maybe some of the facts are assumed but they are general concerns when fish farms are mentioned.

But here’s a cool fact for you and I’m even going to use my copy and paste skills on this one! Hermanus: http://www.zigzag.co.za/news/environment/shark-attacks-surfboard-at-hawston-surfer-unscathed/

Gansbaai: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/8024829/Poacher-killed-by-great-white-shark.html

“There are several fish farms near Hermanus and Gansbaai and they haven't had a shark attack in years.”

So where are you getting your facts from mate? So can we believe your facts? In 21 months of research did you maybe try googling it? See us surfers also like to surf the web and not only waves! (Well the ones that can read and write.)

I think some apologies are in order mate! There is no need to be arrogant and rude about other peoples views. In my opinion we should setup a meeting with local surfers, beach users and other watermen. Where views and facts can be shared. I’m sure ML won’t mind arranging something.

Your friend

Jag  xoxo

Here are few more articles which you might want to add to your research: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/fish/fish-farming/offshore/sharks-and-fish-farms-a-deadly-attraction/

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/fears-fish-farm-could-cause-shark-and-pollution-problems-dismissed-20130123-2d7i9.html (hmmm...so chemicals are involved hey?)

6/24/2013 01:31:44 am

Hi Jag,

I must admit that I am being paid an awful lot of money to disprove already disproven theories being spouted at the last minute by uninformed blogging surfers.
Actually, it's nil. I need to talk to my agent.

Boet, this has been in the Herald as long ago as October 2011. I'm aware that it's hardly a riveting read at the best of times, but that doesn't mean it's not there. Doesn't mean that you can't be informed.
Of course one can voice one's opinions. All I'm asking is that they actually be based on facts.
I'll admit that I was unaware of the Hawston shark attack, but then Hawston is right on the far side of the bay from the fish farm at Gansbaai anyway. And as for the Gansbaai poacher, well, actually, that was "years" ago. Compare and contrast the number of attacks in fish farm free zones (Fishhoek, Port St Johns) and you'll see that my point still stands.
Your links: one from an unashamedly anti-Fish Farm site and one from the SMH which cites "fears", not actual "facts" and then dismisses the claims anyway. And yes there are chemicals involved. I never said that there weren't. But no genetic mutations. No three-eyed, panga-wielding killer cob. Ill-informed scaremongering.

I don't think I was rude to anyone. I'm sorry you felt that way. I'm merely voicing my opinion based on facts, not assumptions. And anyway, the time for public comment is through - a whole 28 minutes ago.

I hope you have a special evening.

Your friend,
Dave.x

P.S. Your cut and paste skills are exemplary. Go to the top of the class. And jump off.
P.P.S. Not really. That last bit. You're great.

6/24/2013 02:38:44 am

I'm sure there are ways the public can still voice their opinion. In fact there is no set date which can't be challenged in a court of law if it is seen that the public was ill informed. Which I feel is the case in this situation.

And yes you were an arrogant, stuck up prick in your first comment. The fact that you are making such a big deal about this deadline makes me wonder if DAFF has something to hide about their findings/research. You can hide behind your

I’m not saying those links support my argument but they do show that there is a general concern worldwide that fish farming increases shark activity. The only reason the Aussie article dismisses that is because the proposed area in that case was already had a lot of shark activity. There are no solid facts as I believe fish farming of this sort is a relatively new practice. The effects will only be measured in the future. Are you willing to be partially responsible if someone is attacked by a curious shark in PE in the near future?! The sad thing is that you probably won’t be affected. Surfers and other beach goers will be the ones who are affected. Now stop your childish analytical comments and stop hiding behind your research and look at the bigger picture! It could endanger the environment. The fact that people may get hurt is my primary concern. It takes one shark to be lured inshore and one attack to take a life.

How about you tell us who you are seeing that you’re getting so hyped up about this....

6/24/2013 01:03:26 am

hi dave

http://mype.co.za/new/2013/03/fish-farm-off-pollock-beach/

Jen connacher

6/24/2013 05:14:22 am

Port Elizabeth is known as an industrial city, just passing through as far as lots of tourist see it. I love Port Elizabeth, and the 'Pipe' Surfing beach is very special, even though they allowed building of all the flats , beautiful walks , why must they spoil the beauty and the sheer joy that we share together being surfers, swimmers, walkers, please go away with your Fish farm go away

Rudee Hemming

6/24/2013 09:26:30 am

Alan link

6/24/2013 05:05:29 pm

See the 27 March 2013 notification of the Pollock Fish farm proposal here: <a href="http://mype.co.za/new/2013/03/fish-farm-off-pollock-beach/">http://mype.co.za/new/2013/03/fish-farm-off-pollock-beach/</a>

The 21 May 2013 notification of public meeting for the proposed fish farm is here: <a href="http://mype.co.za/new/2013/05/pollock-beach-fish-farm-public-meeting/">http://mype.co.za/new/2013/05/pollock-beach-fish-farm-public-meeting/</a>

Yes I was at the public meeting and my feeling was that the proposed fish farm will be go back for a bit more research and as a result the possible implementation will be very far off.

Dive groups, tour operators, the fishing industry, sailors and general public were represented at the public meeting at the Algoa Bay Yacht Club on 21 May 2013.

My suggestion is that if you want to contribute then you get hold of someone who was at the feedback meeting and address your concerns via that person/s.

Comments are closed.

Blog

Feck off with your Fish Farm

Author

Archives