Aquaculture Now Legal As Agriculture In Pennsylvania
(Continued from Page A3o]
facilities that their impoundments
along low-lying areas, generally
on flood plains, could be consid
ered wetlands and be affected by
laws intended to protect real wet
lands that serve to filter water,
moderate its pH, and retain it
through dry periods.
The law states, “Aquaculture
facilities licensed ... are not wet
lands ... so long as such facilities
were created and have been conti
nuousvly operating for any pur
pose, including effluent mitiga
tion, prior to Sept. 23, 1985.”
It goes on to clarify that facili
ties constructed after that date also
receive legal protection from being
considered a wetland, as long as
they were not created upon, or cur
rently exist upon, wetlands.
It also allows normal mainte
nance and improvements on facili
ties, ”... notwithstanding any sta
tutory provision relating to
wetlands.”
The pre-September 1985 facili
ties are also exempt from having to
have state permits for maintenance
or improvements.
Those familiar with current fed
eral proposals aimed at controlling
nutrient management of livestock
operations (espcically large opera
tions), should recognize the per
mits developed and proposed in
the state under the National Pollu
tion Discharge Elimination Sys
tem (NPDES).
Under the Clinton Administra-
Clean Water Act initiative,
the federal Environmental Protec
tion Agency has been attempting
to get states to develop NPDES
permits for certain livestock
operations.
The permits are controversial
because they imply regular and
unusual federal oversight and con
cern of local farming businesses,
and because the granting of such
peimits ate open to public hear-
Commitment to Agricultural Industry
Stan Michonski
Assistant Vice President
Agricultural Lending
Call (717) 581-6020
ings, which some consider could
open up farms to attact from nui
sance neighbors or residential or
recreational developers.
While the Pennsylvania agricul
tural industry has mostly sided
with efforts to make farming con
cerns mote the jurisdication of
state government rather than local,
that is done because a number of
farms and farming operations
don’t easily fall within local
boundaries, but almost all fall
within state borders. (There are of
course exceptions.)
State oversight, and its overid
ing protection (mostly from local
land-use battles), had been seen as
preferable because local govern
ments had been creating local ordi
nances restricting normal and
progressive agricultural
operations.
Most state-issued NPDES per
mits (issued by the states under
authority and direction provided
by the federal government) deal
with industrial and municipal
operations involving direct dump
ing of waste water into streams and
earth moving activities involving
more than five acres.
More recently versions of the
permits have been developed to
address non-point sources of
potential water pollution
agricultural operations.
For the most part, only since the
1970 s through the 80s did aquacul
tural operations begin to receive
second glances for potential nutri
ent pollution of streams.
Fish manure and uneaten food
that passes through some of the
state’s many trout facilities (many
of the largest owned by the state
Fish and Boat Commission) had
started to become somewhat of an
issue as fisherman and stream
biologists pointed to the effluent
backwater areas of some state and
private fisheries.
Those backwaters generally
appeared heavy with bacteria and
Our name alone tells you where our Interests lie.
We’re locally-owned and operated. We know Lancaster County
and can respond with timely answers to your loan requests.
Whether you need financing for buildings, land, livestock or
machinery, working capital or a loan tailored to specific needs,
look to the bank that is committed to your industry and has been
for more than 135 years. Bank of Lancaster County.
At Bank of Lancaster County, we take pride in providing
our customers with exceptional service targeted toward
their specific financial needs. We understand your business.
And, we’re committed to developing long-term relationships.
Our Agricultural Lenders are available to meet with you
at a time that fits your schedule ... on your farm.
Why not give Stan Michonski or Mary Henry a call?
We’re looking forward to talking with you about
banking on your terms ... on your farm.
different algea, and did seem to
have at least some impact on the
streams.
Under the new aquaculture law,
a general permit is to be developed
by the state Department of Envir
onmental Protection (DEP) far
aquacultural facilities, and aqua
cultural facilities that discharge
waters into streams would be
required to obtain a permit and
comply with its provisions for test
ing and reporting.
(The permit application fee is
not to exceed $lOO per facility over
a S-ycar period.)
Further, all state agencies are to
work with DEP to develop a con
solidated permitting process for
aquaculture.
The law also directs the State
Treasury to establish an Aquacul
ture Development Account, the
funds of which are to be used to ”...
stimulate the growth of the aqua
cultural industry in ...”
Pennsylvania.
(Funds for the account are to
come from all fees and charges the
law generates, except for monies
generated from the NPDES permit
fees.)
The uses of the account funds
are described in the law as being
for the the administration of PDA
aquaculture programs, including
the PASS survey; up to 10 percent
deposited every year may be used
for research; and the remainder
after administrative costs, to be
used to provide low-interest loans
to aquacultural producers for deve
lopment, expansion and moderni
zation of facilities.
The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat
Commission is the independent
state agency given responsibility
for the protection of the state's
fishes, reptiles and amphibians.
While it has a visible force that
appears to place heavy emphasis
on propagation of sport fish and
enforcement and education of
sport fishing and boating laws, the
Bank of Lancaster County,^
The Better Bank.
Lancaster Farming, Saturday, October 31, 1998-A3l
PFBC has had responsibility and
authority to control the introduc
tion of Gsh and other aquatic spe
cies into the waters of the state.
It also is involved with water
quality issues, and actually has had
a fairly long memorandum of
understanding with the DEP (when
formerly DER) for the enforce
ment of water pollution and envir
onmental laws.
For example, it used to be that
the PFBC could help with stream
improvement work, but the land
owner would be required to get
permission from DER for the
work. The PFBC can now design
and approve such work without
having to directly involve DEP
staff.
As protector of the state’s wild
and natural fisheries, the PFBC has
had authority to determine what
species of fish could be released,
raised or propagated in waters
flowing into the state’s free flow
ing waterways.
(Closed-loop, or self-contained
aquacultural systems arc covered
under different rules. For example,
such systems avoid the PFBC bans
on raising certain fish species,
such as tilapia, that have been
banned from production in open
ended aquacultural systems since
the mid-1980s, one of the late
Ralph Abel’s last acts as PFBC
executive director.)
While the PFBC executive
director himself has the final
authority to ban the instate prop
agation and release of fish species,
the Aquaculture Development
Law seems to provide a modifica
tion of the cxcercise of that
authority.
It directs that, “The commission
shall determine which species of
fish are allowed to be propagated
in each watershed. (The law
defines the state as comprised of
five major watersheds, each to be
treated separately. The PFBC may
further subdivide those water-
sheds, if deemed necessary for the
protection of indigenous or
approved species, and make spe
cies propagation approval determi
nations based upon the increased
distinction of watersheds.)
“On or before Jan. 31 of each
year, the (PFBC) shall supply the
(PDA) a current list of species
approved for propagation and the
conditions under which each spe
cies may be cultured.
“As the commission approves a
new species for propagation
throughout the year, it shall notify
the department of the species and
watersheds.
“Except triploid and other non
reproducting forms, species may
be propagated in the same water
sheds within which they are allow
ed to be stocked."
As an initial listing of approved
species, the law sets it to be the
PFBCs listing of approved spe
cies (as of Jan. 1, 1995) for prop
agation or stocking within those
watersheds.
The law sets up separate
registrations and fees for the prop
agation of fish species, and for the
sale or dealing of approved
species.
The fee for registration to propa
gate species is $l5O for five years.
The fee for dealing those species is
$5O for five years.
(A change from annual
registration.)
Those who are registered to
propagate species are automatical
ly registered to sell them.
There are some health concerns
included in the law.
“Transportation of species of
fish into Ids commonwealth is lim
ited to sources of species whose
health inspection reports have
already been approved by the
department (PDA).”
continued next week.)
Mary Henry
Assistant Vice President
Agricultural Lending
Call (717) 464-4520
I=*
tOUAI Mlisnc
' (SOCK
Member FD.I C