Until the spring/summer period of 1990, aquaculture, in Cyprus, as such had received very little attention either from Government departments - with the exception of the DOF - or from the public. However, since then, public concern has grown at every level - central and local - and doubts have arisen about whether this worthy enterprise was well-suited for the economy, the culture and environment of Cyprus. During the spring/summer period of 1990 dense growths of the seaweed Cladophora were reported in the coastal waters of Liopetri, approximately 3 to 6 km from a fish farm site. Subsequently, large quantities were uprooted and washed ashore on the attractive bathing beach between Ayia Thekla and Ayia Napa. Large accumulations of decaying seaweed in shallow waters and on the beach led to complaints from tourists, hoteliers and members of the local community, due to its smell and unsightly appearance. It led also to losses in the tourist and hotel industry. Opinions were voiced that since an earlier problem with seaweed Ulva occurred in the vicinity of a fish farm located in the Leopetri area, it was most likely that this new problem was attributable to the same source.1 In order to address this problem, the DOF initiated a study of the causes of the proliferation of Cladophora, specifically to discover the role, if any, of effluent discharges from the fish farm and decided to take practical measures for the prevention of possible future problems. And amongst these the Government sought assistance from FAO for the drafting of a legal framework for aquaculture.
Indeed, the DOF, being the authority with the power to regulate aquaculture has isolated fish farming as a field for which specific regulations can be enacted.2
Under the present fisheries legislation, there is no definition of aquaculture. Instead the term “fish farm” is defined as “any place or any installations where rearing or breeding of fish is carried out for the purpose of selling them or fish ova are produced for the purpose of selling them”.3 Fish includes “any aquatic animal whether mammalian or not and shell fish, but not including sponges”.4 This rather comprehensive definition provides a clear guide to the legislative intent of the DOF: the emphasis is placed upon fish farming for purposes of sale of the fish and no consideration is given for culture of fish for other purposes, such as, for experimental purposes. Furthermore, from the context of the law, it is clear that marine as well as fresh water fish farms are concerned1 and that a global licensing system is envisaged whatever species is intended to be cultivated or method to be used.
3 Fisheries Law, Regulation 2 (1).
4 Section 2, Fisheries Law, Cap. 135
So far, the DOF is the only department of the Government which has endorsed a policy to encourage the development of aquaculture in Cyprus. Some other “ad hoc” stimulating measures have been taken. For instance the import of feedstuff for fish culture is not subject to an import licence and the interest on government loans for starting, expanding and improving fishery (including aquaculture operations) is 5,5% (instead of 7% as is the case for agricultural activities). On the contrary, the present Declaration of Town and Country Planning Policy, elaborated by the Ministry of Interior and adopted by the Council of Ministers2, seems more cautious to encourage the development of aquaculture operations and entails a rather precautionary approach with no incentives provided.3 It singled out this activity as a particular one, which, even though important, may cause some nuisances to the surrounding area. Aquaculture operations are therefore limited to certain areas4 and subject to strict conditions, listed hereinafter:
“ any damage to the natural environment, to the public health, any pollution of the waters (marine and fresh waters), soil and subsoil, and of the shore areas must be avoided;
a fish farm installation will be allowed at a plot ratio less than 0.25:1; in the case of development in the areas of “protected landscape” this ratio should be less than 0.01:1. The earthen ponds are exempted from this rule;
any proposal for aquaculture development within tourist zones can be allowed if it does not cause any harm to the tourist development; Consequently, the Town and Country Planning Department5 should take seriously into consideration the view of the Cyprus Tourism Organisation before adopting any Town and Country Planning Decision of interest for this Organization;”
Despite this statement, there still exists some confusion as to its practical implementation and there seems to be some reluctance to implement strict policy decisions. The main reason for singling out this activity is obviously because of its possible impact on the surrounding aquatic environment giving the controversy surrounding the aquaculture operations and the environmental consequences of aquaculture development. However, aquaculture can also suffer from pollution from domestic wastes, industrial effluents, pesticide pollution etc.. Therefore the problems are beyond the aquaculture activity and need to be addressed within a general policy on the protection and conservation of the environment, and more particularly the coastal environment (Integrated Coastal Zone Management), at least as far as marine aquaculture is concerned.
