On 11 November 2008 the NT put in place laws , by way of licence condition, under the Fisheries Act that require fish retailers serving imported seafood for public consumption to state if the product is imported.

The conditions apply to menus in hotels, restaurants and cafes as well as takeaways. These fish labeling laws are considered, by Industry, to be extremely beneficial in assisting consumers in making informed seafood choices.

The NT is the first Australian jurisdiction to implement such laws. Seafood labeling laws in other jurisdictions cease at the back door of food outlets, leaving consumers unable, in many instances, to determine if the seafood in their meals is harvested in Australia or if it is imported.

The fish retailer seafood labeling laws will have been in place for a year when this project will commence. The NTSC feels it is important to identify what impact the labeling measures are having along the supply chain (i.e. from harvest to the consumer).

There is a significant need to understand whether the seafood labeling laws have lead to changes in seafood purchasing behaviour.

Of particular interest is quantifying whether there has been a negative impact which may have lead to decreased seafood consumption in general or a switch away from local product by either consumers or retailers.

This information will assist the NT seafood industry and NT Government (NTG) to assess the impacts of the current labeling laws.

The ‘Blue Mud Bay’ Court decision found that waters over Aboriginal land are the same as ‘land’ under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (ALRA) with similar access requirements. This means that ownership of the intertidal zone (including the waters) rests with the indigenous land trusts. This is significant as land granted under the ALRA encompasses over 80% of the NT coastline.

As a result of the decision, existing Fisheries legislation was ruled invalid in the area. Awaiting the High Court appeal, permits under the ARLA have been issued by the NLC to allow fishing to continue in line with previous conditions under the Fisheries legislation.

Traditional owners, commercial and recreational fishers are now actively discussing long-term options and solutions to this situation. If the appeal fails, the NLC offered a 12-month transition period whilst a satisfactory resolution is reached.

This is a unique situation in Australian fisheries and there is significant opportunities to discuss how best to progress the issues at Industry level. It was considered prudent to make contact with people who have extensive experience in incorporating indigenous fishing rights into the fabric of the day to day operations and management of fishing activities and to discuss possible implications arising from future proposals by NT Industry groups. A fact-finding trip, with a view to meeting and discussing issues with a range of groups in NZ, was considered the best course of action.

The trip will enable stakeholders to become aware of best practice resource management use that takes into account indigenous participation in commercial operations, along with recreational use of fish stocks.

The timing of the trip is critical to allow the delegation’s findings to be considered during the decision-making period immediately following the High Court ruling.