Australian Prawn Farms - Emerging disease investigation
On Board Processing and Packaging Innovation in the Australian Wild Harvest Prawn Fishery
National Social and Economic Survey of Recreational Fishers 2019
Currently there is a lack of national scale, consistent and robust data on the motivations and behaviours of recreational fishers, and lack of robust data on the social and economic contribution of recreational fishing. Where many commercial fisheries have regular collection and estimation process for economic data, this is not the case for recreational fishing in most of Australia. This lack of data also includes behaviour and motivations and how they are changing. These data are useful for informing discussions on resource allocation and in understanding and managing recreational fisheries more generally. If these data are to be used to inform governments and the general public, there is a need to make sure it is collected in a robust way that is representative of the Australian population. Large scale representative data sets are often expensive to acquire and as a result do not get undertaken regularly. One off surveys only provide useful data for any particular point in time, but understanding trends can often be more useful. This study aims to implement and test methodologies to provide a robust and representative sample, while trying to reduce costs to allow for more regular data gathering. To do this requires addressing another need: that of testing new survey methodologies for collecting data from recreational fishers that enables assessment of social and economic contribution. Recreational fishing surveys traditionally use probability based phone or mail surveys, however both methods are experiencing rapid decline in response rates and representativeness. It is expected that going into the future, online surveys that use a range of appropriate recruitment methods will be the most common survey method. There is a need to invest in establishing robust approaches to using these methods, and in understanding how their findings differ to those of traditional probability based surveys.
Final report
- The purpose/objectives of data collection
- Data collection methods, including design of survey instruments and survey recruitment materials, survey sample recruitment methods and sample achieved
- Data processing methods, including data coding and cleaning, and weighting methods.
Evaluation of Cobia and Giant Groper production and health in multiple growout systems, as an alternative species to farm in WSSV affected areas of South East Queensland
Assessment of Pacific oyster family lines for OsHV-1 tolerance
Cumulative Impact Risk Assessment Tool for Aquaculture in Australia
Difficulties with current legislation in Australia at State and Federal level make it challenging for marine farms to protect themselves, but equally for the community to have faith that aquaculture development is not harming the marine environment. An example from Tasmania is the recent contamination of Macquarie Harbour, whereby tailings from Copper Mines Tasmania (CMT) dam in Queenstown entered the harbour and undoubtedly caused environmental harm to salmon and other species. Because CMT and salmon farmers operate under different Acts CMT was not responsible for the incident but rather the government. Consequently, no investigation or clean-up ensued.
Additionally, the scope of statutory tools, such as EIS under the Tasmanian Marine Farm Planning Act 1995, is not regional and does not consider the compound interactions of and on production activities. A good example is the recent Storm Bay salmon farming expansion; while the EPBC listed handfish species in Tasmania were listed in the marine farming development plan, with a brief context, management of these species was not considered in the EIS because that process only includes direct impact of the lease position. Arguably, cumulative impacts from all development in the area will have varying impacts on the species, impacts which are not being considered under current government legislation, but are potentially the source of public ire.
For aquaculture to pursue sustainable efforts environmentally, economically and socially in the increasingly crowded near shore space requires proactive planning and transparency that is not currently possible given existing assessment tools. In particular, assessment of cumulative impacts must be addressed. Cumulative impact assessments (CIA) are gaining momentum across multiple industries due to a recognised need to apply them in the pursuit of sustainable management. CIAs are being undertaken with the protection of marines resources at front of mind, but so far there has been little consideration of aquaculture. An approach to CIA that makes aquaculture the centre point is required if we are to consider its impacts or conversely, its effectiveness.