Cumulative impacts across fisheries in Australia's marine environment
The need for cumulative impact assessment (CIA) is increasingly being recognized. The development process for Australia's Harvest and Bycatch Policies, and their associated guidelines have reinforced the need for assessment of cumulative impacts, and the EPBC Act has also explicitly required consideration of cumulative impacts.
Where multiple activities occur or are planned, an understanding of their combined effects on the environment is necessary to address policy requirements and achieve sustainability. The concept of cumulative impact assessment is not new – indeed cumulative assessment has been recognized for many years, and a range of methods have been proposed around the globe. However, no methodology for undertaking cumulative assessments has been accepted nationally or globally. In addition to considering the impacts across all fishing sectors (commercial, recreational, indigenous, as required by recent changes to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991) and all fisheries, there is also an increasing need to consider other users of marine resources and coastal waters (e.g. renewable energy, shipping etc), especially where space crowding may be an issue.
Target species stock assessments typically consider the species of interest as well as other sources of fishing mortality (e.g. discards), but they do not usually consider their effects on other fisheries sectors or the effects of other sectors on the focal fishery. CIA methods therefore need to consider interactive and indirect effects. To date, interactive effects are often viewed as additive (simple linear addition of one impact to another) with little consideration given to synergistic, antagonistic or non-linear effects. While the ERAEF toolbox used for assessment of bycatch and protected species has some potential options for cumulative impacts (e.g. SAFE method), at this stage they are insufficient for moving to the scales and complexities across multiple fishing sectors and fisheries.
Thus, sustainable fisheries management requires new approaches that consider all sectors and all fisheries and how they impact the environment. Such CIAs will be challenging given that empirical data are often lacking - a dedicated research effort is needed.
Final report
FRDC Resource: Development and ongoing maintenance of Australian Fish Names Standard 2019-2020
All Australian Standards developed by FRDC will demonstrate a net benefit and therefore have an overall positive impact on Australia’s seafood industry. This means that all FRDC developed Australian Standards must provide a value or benefit that exceeds the costs to the seafood industry with associated action plans to implement continuous improvement to ensure this is met.
Public, consumer and stakeholder confidence is vital to the well-being of Australia’s seafood industry.
Australian Standards are not legal documents. However, when a government references a standard in legislation, it becomes mandatory. An Australian Standard does have status and is recognised as being a credible document. Usage of the names included in the Australian Fish Names Standard is not mandated in Australia but is listed in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Standard 2.2.3 - Fish and Fish Products as an advisory note (see https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2011C00569)
Standard fish names removes confusion, strengthens consumer confidence, creates market efficiencies and consistency, underpins effective fisheries monitoring and improves management of food fraud / food safety.
The use of standard fish names achieves outcomes that are consistent with the aims of industry and governments:
1 Improved monitoring and stock assessment enhances the sustainability of fisheries resources.
2 Increased consistency and efficiency in seafood marketing to improve consumer confidence and industry profitability.
3 Improved accuracy and consistency in trade descriptions enables consumers to make more informed choices when purchasing seafood and reduces the potential for misleading and deceptive conduct.
4 More efficient management of seafood related public health incidents and food safety through improved labelling and species identification reduces public health risk.
Within the next decade, the AFNS must:
• Be all inclusive including increased stakeholder awareness
• Improve the AFNS database to ensure all data is current
• Meet stakeholder expectation
• Be world’s best practice
• Be a national benchmark for sustainability
• Be part of an ongoing continuous improvement processes
• Be a transparent process to create trust
Report
This work builds on the following FRDC funded projects:
• 2012-209, “Develop and promote the Australian Fish Names Standard (AS-5300) and ensurereaccreditation as a Standards Development Organisation [Michelle Christoe, SSA Executive Officer–novated to
• FRDC 2012-209.40, “Develop and promote the Australian Fish Names Standard (AS-5300) andensure reaccreditation as a Standards Development Organisation” [Alan Snow Konsulting]
• FRDC 2015-210, “FRDC resource: Australian Fish Names Standard (AS-5300)” [Alan Snow Konsulting].
The operating procedures of the Fish Names Committee have continued to improve, and proposed amendments have been evaluated in a highly rigorous and professional manner.
The list of approved names in the Australian Fish Names Standard has continued to expand to meet stakeholder needs through harmonising with the Status of Australian Fish Stocks (SAFS) reports and the addition of commercially important invertebrate species.
It has been twenty years since the Fish Names process commenced through Seafood Services Australia (SSA). As such, it is an opportunity to consider what has been achieved in twenty years and what is still to be achieved.
Wild catch Barramundi Workshop to explore future options to improve fisheries
WINSC 2018 Annual Conference Sponsorship
The need exists to bring together WINSC members from wide geographical and demographic spheres as well as from a diverse range of women involved in the Australasian Seafood Industry to hold an annual conference and AGM to build the capacity of its seafood women to contribute to their industry
Our Pledge: Australian seafood industry response to community values and expectations
Despite considerable investment in RD&E to understand why the Australian seafood industry has been experiencing diminished levels of socio-political and community acceptability, there is still uncertainty regarding the significant values of different segments of the Australian community for coastal and marine systems, their management and industry (Essence Communications 2015). Further, there is evidence these values and associated expectations are highly changeable and can have significant individual, business and national repercussions. While the seafood industry already operates from a strong values-based position of its own - ‘sustainability’, there is evidence the community's concerns have expanded to include animal welfare, supply chain integrity, modern slavery for example.
Understanding community values and expectations is important but not enough. Industry must articulate and demonstrate its commitments to addressing kncommunity expectations. This is critical to breaking the reactive negative cycle that threatens resource access, mental health and viability of our industry. A means of monitoring and tracking industry's success in responding to the community's changing expectations and values must also be developed.
Seafood Industry Australia's (SIA) members have identified social licence. This project is a tangible commitment to a national conversation and action to address community values. It is an opportunity to build seafood industry unity on the basis of a set of shared values and supporting practices.
Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries (ACPF) has initiated a lot of this listening and values-related work relevant to wild catch prawns. ACPF is ready to design, implement and evaluate activities that embed these values as messages and convey the supporting or changing behaviours as proof. ACPF needs to ensure that its outputs reflect the direction of the Australia seafood industry and sees advantages in liaising with SIA as it produces outputs at sector level. In doing so, it will provide a test case for how other seafood industry sectors can undertake to acknowledge and respond to community values and expectations, and make a national set of shared industry-community values their own.
Report
Seafood Industry Australia commissioned Futureye to review existing research into the Australian communities attitudes toward seafood, as well as other market research, that has been undertaken since 2014. The findings from this review were used to make recommendations to Seafood Industry Australia about what to address in their pledge to demonstrate the industry’s intent to earn its ‘social licence to operate.’
Project products
Seafood Directions 2019
The Australian Seafood Industry operates in a diverse and dynamic environment and although the volume produced in Australia is small by world standards, the value and quality of our product and sustainability of our practices are globally recognised. For the Seafood Industry to continue to be a world leader in seafood production and quality there must be an opportunity to learn from each other and plan for the future. We must also use the event as an opportunity to generate media interest and recognition for the broader seafood industry.
The role of Seafood Directions is to provide a significant opportunity for fishers, managers, researchers, industry representatives and others who work in support of the industry, to examine key contemporary and strategic issues and develop blueprints that will ensure a sustainable, profitable and socially resilient seafood industry in Australia.
The need for Seafood Directions is indicated by the ongoing support of key stakeholders of the seafood industry, as is evident by the level of industry sponsorship and attendance at the conference. We know Australians love seafood, and therefore using the conference to 'showcase' the amazing people and products of the seafood industry will be an important addition to the 2019 conference.
Final report
Water treatment to control influent water biosecurity risk on Australian prawn farms. Effectiveness and impacts on production ponds.
The prawn aquaculture industry is committed to a strategy of enhanced farm biosecurity to reduce the potential for production losses caused by disease agents. This has been brought to the forefront of development priorities for industry by the recent white spot virus incursion into southern Queensland, but it is also driven by considerations that current farming practices are vulnerable to other disease agents that could emerge in the future. It is well recognised by aquaculture disease experts and the industry that a critical pathway for disease incursion is via the water sourced from local waterways which for Australian prawn farms is the adjacent estuarine creek or river. Treatment of farm influent water to eliminate or reduce disease agent load, particularly that associated with live vectors of disease, such as crustaceans or fish, is seen as the most basic course of action to address farm exposure to this risk.
In consultation with local and international technical experts, industry has identified that filtration and some type of chemical disinfection is the most practical approach for prawn grow-out farms. However the level of information available on design criteria and effectiveness of proposed treatment systems is lacking, particularly in relation to Australian farming conditions. Information derived from overseas experiences of farming prawns under threat of multiple diseases has been instructive, but due to significant differences in farming systems, the local industry sees a need to generate additional information that has direct relevance to Australian farms and practices. Given the anticipated high investment by farms to implement significant upgrades to water treatment practices, improved information for systems design parameters and relative risk reductions for different options under consideration are a high priority.