Fresh News

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

10) Fish eyesight tests In an unusual joint research project between Australia and Japan, scientists are planning to conduct eyesight tests on fish.

The Australian Maritime College in Tasmania has created a special project to send a PhD student to Japan to research the visual capabilities of fish. It's hoped the findings could then be used to reduce the impact of trawling on vulnerable species by changing the way fishing gear looks to fish.

Paula Kruger spoke to fishing technologist Steve Eayrs, who says scientists have little understanding of the way a fish sees the world.

STEVE EAYRS: The idea of the scholarship is to have an Australian student spend six months in Japan working with the Tokyo University of Fisheries – and they are one of the world leaders in this area, and have been doing this research for quite some time now. The idea is to have our student go there for six months to learn about the process of studying fish eyesight and relating that knowledge to the fishing environment.

PAULA KRUGER: So, whose idea was it to study the eyesight of the fish with the view to reducing the impact of trawling?

STEVE EAYRS: Well, I guess it was probably ours. We've been involved in investigating ways to reduce the catch of unwanted animals in fishing gear, in particular trawls. And, you know, we've been looking at gear modifications over the past few years and really this is just a development of that idea.

PAULA KRUGER: But do you believe it's possible to have certain designs on fishing gear that would repel some fish, like endangered fish, while attracting others?

STEVE EAYRS: Well, certainly that's the goal, is to look at that area. The work overseas has been quite successful in this regard. And so, you know, what we hope to do is to, in the first instance, investigate fish visual response and then apply it to the trawl situation, and determine whether it does actually work or not. At the moment, we just don't know.

PAULA KRUGER: And so, why is it that this is an area that we haven't had much research done in Australia?

STEVE EAYRS: Well, I guess it's only been really in the past decade or so that we've really begun to focus… put a lot of effort into reducing the catch of non-target animals in fishing gear, and, you know, we've sort of taken a step-wise approach, I guess.

We've looked at some fairly simple modifications, ones which can be easily implemented by the fishing industry. We've had some success there. In order to go further, to make further progress, then we're now at a stage where we can begin to look at some of the more sophisticated options to reduce the capture of these animals.

ELEANOR HALL: Steve Eayrs from the Australian Maritime College in Tasmania speaking there to Paula Kruger.

Friday, 11 July , 2003 12:46:15 Reporter: Paula Kruger

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

2 SSA Network 8 – Agenda

The SSA Network meeting agenda meeting agenda can be downloaded from
http://www.seafoodservices.com.au/files/network8agenda.pdf

Register now to attend the meeting to be held at the Sydney Fish Market
on 31 July - 1 August. You can register online by logging on to the SSA
Network meeting page at
http://www.seafoodservices.com.au/network/meetinglogin.php

Please confirm your attendance by simply clicking on the
' Confirm attendance’ icon on the meetings page - this will take just a couple of minutes.

All people with an interest in the seafood in are encouraged to attend. Remember –
it is free - however please confirm your attendance to enable appropriate arrangements
to be made at the venue.

Hope to see you in Sydney

Ted Loveday

Managing Director
Seafood Services Australia

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

4 Fishing for answers on Maori coastal rights THE SEABED CASE

As wave after wave of frustration and confusion swells around Maori claims to foreshore and seabed and the Government's response, iwi have gathered in Paeroa today in an attempt to navigate a way through.

The Hauraki Maori Trust Board is organising the hui and expects up to 700 people to attend. Regardless of the numbers, there is little doubt about its importance. The Government will be watching nervously.

From a Maori perspective, the Crown's refusal to engage properly with iwi over their interests in the coastal marine environment, historically and today, contravenes their common law and treaty rights.

As a Hauraki spokesman, John McEnteer, says, the Appeal Court decision fundamentally challenges the platform on which the Crown's stance has been based - assumption of ownership giving it the right to determine coastal management regimes.

When within days the Government was promising to legislate to assert Crown ownership of the foreshore and seabed and to protect public access rights, Maori were gutted by the assertion "customary title" would be extinguished and annoyed at the unilateral decision-making.

There was suspicion that the Government was playing on public ignorance and fear. If the sighs in the Beehive were audible, so too were they within Maoridom.

As Marlborough claimant spokesman John Mitchell wearily said: "We have said repeatedly - we have shouted it from the rooftops - that the challenge here is not to the existing rights of the citizens of New Zealand."

The backlash meant that the Government changed course and backed away from talk of extinguishing customary title, which could cover a continuum of entitlements ranging from basic seafood-gathering rights to exclusive ownership.

The contentious "ownership" word was excised, although Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen - in charge of a group of ministers and Maori MPs charged with steering the Government through the storm - said the statutory framework being prepared would ensure exclusive freehold titles to foreshore and seabed were not created.

It hasn't been a good look for a Government that prides itself on being decisive and which emphasises the need for good faith in treaty negotiations. Iwi may have been more positive about a legislative rather than a judicial outcome following the ruling, but if the game plan was to change when they were out in front, it had to be with their agreement.

Associate Maori Affairs Minister John Tamihere defended the Government, saying it had to first assure Pakeha their "barbecue on the beach" rights were sacrosanct.

Secrecy surrounds just what the Cullen group is up to, and iwi are concerned it has already prepared a legislative skeleton and will present them with a fait accompli.

The political futures of the Government's Maori MPs could be severely damaged if they confirm suspicions they have become Prime Minister Helen Clark's lapdogs.

Behind the scenes, Cullen's group has been at odds over the issue of consultation. Some believe the Government should be clear about its intentions and not appear to offer room to move.

Others such as Tariana Turia warn the Government has already inflamed the situation and must now be seen to engage in proper negotiations.

Tamihere, whose barbecue focus raised eyebrows in Maoridom, also said Maori MPs had told the Government, "You dealt with mainstream, now you have to deal with us", and warned of a Maori revolt if the "tyranny of the majority" meant the issue was dealt with inadequately. The rights under question were real, he said.

Today's hui will also seek to establish a group of negotiators to encourage the Government into talks. The Maori Council, which met to debate the issue yesterday, and the fisheries commission are other likely players.

The commission has long lobbied governments on their marine policies on behalf of iwi. It has been strong in its criticism, as has the Waitangi Tribunal, of the inadequate protection of Maori treaty rights around foreshore and seabed in the Resource Management Act and customary fishing laws.

The commission has been equally worried about this Government's approach to the development of its Oceans Policy, the Marine Reserves Bill and impending aquaculture legislation.

Central to the commission's argument is the assertion that Maori have internationally recognised and treaty-protected rights as an indigenous people. "Maori rights are a priority - we are not just another interest group," one Oceans Policy submission stated. Iwi claims to foreshore and seabed have been lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal, and others are waiting to be heard or are now being filed in the Maori Land Court pending the Appeal Court's decision.

All iwi claim customary occupancy and use rights, as well as spiritual interests in the the foreshore and seabed but what they want out of the claims and other drivers which are fuelling them differ from bay to bay, hapu to iwi.

The Marlborough case arose out of concerns iwi were being denied access to valuable marine farming tenders in the Sounds. As one observer noted wryly it has been successive Government moves to privatise the marine environment and its bounty - not the other way around - that has led to Maori initiating court cases.

A Waitangi Tribunal report last year slated the Government's handling of the aquaculture space tendering regime. It found the Government had made no attempt to fully investigate the nature and interests of Maori rights in marine farming and made only a limited effort to consult.

It planned to preserve some ability to recognise treaty or customary rights in the future, but given the "gold rush" for limited coastal space, it may all be gone by then, the report said. Reservation of marine space is set to be one outcome of a negotiated and multi-layered settlement that the Government is now investigating.

In Hauraki, economic interests centre around valuable minerals in the seabed. Other possible outcomes are likely to focus on changes to proposed or existing marine-based legislation as, says commission chief executive Robin Hapi, the ruling creates a case for greater weight to be given to iwi management and guardianship interests and rights.

"While the focus is on the foreshore and seabed, this issue has wide implications for Maori. The notion of partnership needs to be thought through."

Maori legal experts believe if left untampered, the ruling and the historical evidence of Maori usage of foreshore and seabed, would enable the Maori Land Court to establish customary title in many areas.

A key part of the debate will address how potential law changes would impact on the breadth of rights the Maori Land Court can award to claimants found to have customary title. But the Government will have to go some way to convince Maori of the merits of supporting a negotiated political solution, rather than a judicial one.

THE SEABED CASE

Q. What is the foreshore and seabed case?

A confederation of eight tribes, Te Tau Ihu a Maui, secured a stunning decision in 1997 when they won the right in the Maori Land Court to have the foreshore and seabed of the Marlborough Sounds declared Maori customary land. They had argued that even if land next to the foreshore had been sold, their customary title to it remained unless it was expressly part of the sale or had been expressly extinguished in law.

The Crown argued that no such claim should be heard in the Maori Land Court because the foreshore and seabed could not be classed as land, and that even if it were, the Crown assumed ownership first through sovereignty and through case law and statute law.

The Crown won in the High Court but the case burst back into headlines three weeks ago when the Court of Appeal ruled that the iwi were entitled to pursue their claim in the Maori Land Court.

The Waitangi Fisheries Commission funded the iwi legal costs to the tune of more than $1 million.

Q. The Government says the Court of Appeal decision is a narrow, technical one relating to jurisdiction. Is that correct?

It is not untrue, but it disguises the significance of the Court of Appeal judgment. The Government seeks to minimise its significance and potential impact. Because the issues are emotionally charged the political stakes are enormous. Behind the unanimous "narrow and technical" decision of the five judges was a clear view that previous law was wrong and that Maori may still hold customary title to the foreshore and seabed if, on a case-by-case basis, iwi could prove a strict legal test and a test of tikanga (custom).

It must be noted that there was no suggestion by the Court of Appeal that the iwi would easily win. Chief Justice Sian Elias says: "I have real reservations about the ability for the appellants to establish that which they claim."

Q: What would happen if the case was allowed to proceed and the Marlborough foreshore and seabed were declared Maori customary land?

That's the $64 million question. It is easier to say what would not happen. The land would not necessarily be converted to freehold land, as has automatically happened in the past. The Native Act 1894 converted tribally-owned Maori land to freehold land and did so until 1993 with the enactment of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. Under the latter act, however, the Maori Land Court can award land the status of "Maori customary land" - one of six statutes of land - without it having to convert to freehold title.

But what rights an iwi or hapu could exercise over the foreshore and seabed which was declared their customary land is unknown.

The Government doesn't want to run the risk of finding out.

Q. Is it unusual for the Government to override court decisions?

No. It is perfectly valid for Parliament to change the law if a court interprets a law in a way that Parliament had not intended. The problem arises, however, if a court identifies a property right, or in this case, a potential property right. Eliminating that through a law change may be seen as expropriation and therefore warrant compensation.

12.07.2003, By RUTH BERRY

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

5 Changes afoot for snapper closures

There has been a shift in policy over the South Australian Government's controversial closure of the state's snapper fishery.

Previous closures have been in August and November, in a move which some fishers have said has not done enough to protect the valuable species.

But fisheries' director Will Zacharin says the August closure will now be scrapped, to be replaced by a longer closure later in the year, which will again apply to both recreational and commercial fishers.

"The catch rates in November, because they are higher, have a greater impact on the fisheries, so there is a greater saving in every day that you take in November compared to August," he said.

"So we usually take 20 days out of August, but we're only extending the closure in November by six days."

But commercial and recreational fishers' liaison officer Tony Balestrin says the move does not go far enough.

He says it still leaves the door open for serious over-harvesting during the species' critical spawning season.

"As far as I'm concerned, it's just a bandaid measure again. If they're dinkum, if they're fair dinkum about looking after fish stocks there should be a closure in November and December at least - in the spawning season," he said.

Thursday, 10 July 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

6 Fangtooths And Viperfish Among More than 100 New Species Found in Exploration of Sea Mounts

A joint Australian-New Zealand research voyage has discovered more than 100 new deep-sea species, many with names suggesting they would be more at home in science fiction than reality.

The species are either unrecognised or are new to science, and the haul includes the fossilised tooth of an extinct ``megalodon'', a shark twice the size of the Great White.

Sydney Morning Herald - June 23, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

11) AQUACULTURE: Love Hormone Turning Frigid Fish Into Frisky Breeders

A SOUTH African company has developed a hormone that makes frigid fish frisky - and which its developers say could have a major impact on starvation in Africa and elsewhere. The hormone has fish which previously resisted breeding reproducing in record numbers.

Called Aquaspawn, the hormone increases sperm and egg cell production according to Lorenzo Vivian Read, whose Touws River-based company Spawnrite developed the hormone. "It's 100% successful and works on all fish," said Read.

Scientists working on the hormone say its importance goes beyond increasing the sexual activity of fish.

The product has already saved endangered fish that had almost seen their last days.

"In South Africa we have saved quite a few red data [endangered] species," Read said. "The Clanwilliam Dam, where the yellowfish were nearly extinct, we refilled with 500,000 fish."

The remarkable hormone, which took a decade to develop, could be used to alleviate starvation worldwide.

"The product can provide low-cost protein to Africa , and restock all the big lakes which are depleted from over-fishing," Read said.

The hormone is being used at various universities and breeding facilities around the country and internationally with "phenomenal" success.

Thomas Hecht, professor of fisheries science at Rhodes University in Grahamstown, said studies showed that Aquaspawn was "an absolutely fantastic product".

Published on: July 09, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

3) More monitoring for bluefin tuna fishery

The government body overseeing Australia's southern bluefin tuna fishery says it can expect greater monitoring under changes to be announced next week.

The Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) has been overhauling the industry's management plan in the first major change since it was introduced in 1995.

AFMA spokesman Simon Latimer says the exceeding of quota by the Port Lincoln-based industry in recent years is among problems to be addressed.

He says changes will include vessel monitoring using satellite tracking.

Friday, 11 July 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

7) State Raids Lobster Operation

(July 11) -- A task force of lawmen and state agents raided a ranch just outside the tiny town of Mina, Nevada Thursday. They weren't looking for terrorists or master criminals. Instead, they were searching for lobsters.

Agents destroyed several thousand Australian freshwater crawfish being raised on the ranch. The Channel 8 I-Team has been working on a story about the lobster ranch for the past few months, but this week's raid means the lobster is out of the bag.

Of all the sights on the long drive between Las Vegas and Carson City, the residents of U812 Lobster Lane outside of Mina easily rank among the most intriguing.

Bob Eddy tired of trying to make a living as a cattle rancher, so in the mid 90's, he switched instead to Australian redclaw crawfish, lobsters, for all intents and purposes. "Basically they all thought I was crazy. They still do," said Bob Eddy, lobster rancher.

But it turned out, the natural hot springs that run thru his ranch are the perfect environment for raising the critters. Eddy tossed some old tires in his tanks, built a greenhouse above, imported pairs of amorous, mating age red claws, then let nature take its course. A female can produce 1500 offspring a year, and in about a year, the kids grow to about a pound each.

Customers, including state lawmakers, describe them as delicious. Eddy started selling them at a roadside stand for up to $14 a pound but he had much grander plans -- an entire aquaculture industry in Nevada and a fast food lobster restaurant in struggling Mina.

But it isn't meant to be. Eddy says he originally asked the state if the red claws fell under regulations and was told they didn't. So he invested money and eight years of his life pursuing his dream. It was only after a news item in Reno two years ago caught the attention of state agents that his trouble began.

He applied for and received a commercial license, but state wildlife, concerned that his lobsters might get out and upset the ecological balance, wouldn't renew the license, then told him that anyone who bought live lobsters would need a license of their own.

"If someone comes by in a motor home, they're not going to Carson City to get a permit to come back and buy lobsters," said Eddy. He can't sell them frozen without a federally approved processing plant. He can't sell to restaurants unless the restaurants have a state license. And earlier this year, the state attorney general got an order that he can't even own lobsters anymore.

Agents arrived on Wednesday and destroyed his entire stock. Eddy estimates he had as many as 500,000 lobsters, counting the tiny babies, and he vows that someone is going to have to pay for his loss, a loss, he says, that extends beyond his ranch. "Nevada is broke and needs new taxes but won't let a new business start? It's a catch 22," said Eddy.

His lobsters may be gone, but this won't be the end of the story. And soon, the I-Team will be ready to tell the rest of it. The court order which allowed state agents to destroy Eddy's lobsters stated that the rancher had stubbornly disputed the state's authority to regulate his business and that he had ignored previous orders from state wildlife officials. Eddy has represented himself in various legal battles up to this point but may begin shopping for an attorney.

George Knapp, Investigative Reporter, Eyewitness News the news leader

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

9) New dietary intake limits for mercury

Experts convened by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) have studied the data and agreed to reduce the safe intake level for methylmercury, the most toxic form of mercury, in foods.

Forty-eight scientists from 17 countries participated in the 61st meeting of the Joint Expert Committee for Food Additives and Contaminants (JECFA) from 10-19 June at FAO's Rome headquarters.
Established by FAO and WHO in 1956, JECFA meets regularly to provide safety and risk assessment advice to countries and to the Codex Alimentarius Commission. Codex – meeting this week in Rome to discuss world food trade and food safety- recommends international standards for food safety and quality, as well as codes of practice and guidelines.

After looking at new data for methylmercury and, crucially, in order to sufficiently protect the developing foetus, the experts decided to revise the PTWI, recommending that it be reduced to 1.6 µg per kg body weight per week.

The foetus is exposed to methylmercury through contaminated food eaten by the pregnant mother. This new recommendation changes the prior recommendation for a dietary limit of 3.3 µg per kg body weight per week.

According to the committee some fish species – such as swordfish and sharks - are the most significant source of methylmercury in food.

However, not wishing to steer consumers away from real health benefits found in the large majority of fish species, the committee stressed that when providing advice to consumers and setting limits for methylmercury concentrations, public health authorities should keep in mind that fish play a key role in meeting nutritional needs in many countries.

01/07/03

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

12) New Fish On The Block

THE Dutch Fish Marketing Board reports that the tropical farmed catfish, Pangasius has become popular with consumers in the Netherlands over the last few years. The fish is farmed in cages in the Mekong Delta, processed in modern facilities and exported around the world as frozen fillets. There are three species, which take from six to fourteen months to reach a market weight of one kilo.

The colour of fillets varies from bright white to light pink, depending on species and processing technique. The flesh has a neutral taste and a strong structure. It is popular with cooks in larger institutions as it has a relatively low cost.

Since the inception of the industry in the mid-1990s, Vietnamese catfish producers have been targeting their rapidly expanding production at US markets, selling Pangasius as a substitute for the similar N. American catfish, Ictalurus punctatus. However, US catfish producers have been successful in restricting imports through the imposition of trade tariffs, so Vietnamese producers are now focussing on other markets

Published on: July 07, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

8) Faster processing for fish

Processors of fish products could soon be using faster pasteurisation methods thanks to scientists in Europe.

A new minimal processing method, using a radio-frequency heating unit, is under development for the fast pasteurisation of vacuum-packed fish products such as cod or salmon fillets.
Ever-increasing demands on the food production industry means that minimal processing methods, such as modified atmosphere packaging, aseptic processing and high pressure treatment, are improving all the time.

The new method, developed through the EU funded project QLK1-CT-2001-01788 (RF-FISH), is based on the application of the lightest possible treatment that yields a fresh-like, convenient, safe and high quality product.

Radio-frequency heating (RF-heating) at 27.12 MHz for instance has been used for several types of foods, in particular for post-baking of biscuits and cereals, drying of foods, and thawing of frozen products. Heat is created inside the food item mainly via its electric conductivity.

The researchers, based in Norway, Iceland and Germany, came up with a method based on the fast RF-heating of vacuum-packed fish products immersed in de-ionised water of very low electric conductivity, following fast cooling or freezing (cook/chill or cook/freeze).

Preliminary results show that heating times of one to two minutes (compared to 30 minutes in the conventional autoclave process) may increase the temperature to above 75°C. At these temperatures, vegetative microorganisms are inactivated and shelf-life at 4°C goes beyond 10 days.

Further information about the project can be obtained from the co-ordinator Thomas Pfeiffer

11/07/03

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

13) Human Activities Put Pressure on Great Barrier Reef

The world's longest reef is losing its dugongs and nesting sea turtles at a rapid rate, according to the first comprehensive assessment of the Great Barrier Reef since 1998.

Australian Environment Minister Dr. David Kemp released the "2003 State of the Reef Report" last week at a reef conference in Townsville, Queensland.

"The Great Barrier Reef is under mounting pressure," Kemp told delegates. "The numbers of nesting loggerhead turtles have declined between 50 and 80 percent, and dugong populations adjacent to Queensland's urban coast are estimated to be only three percent to what they were in the 1960s."

The annual flow of sediments and nutrients from land based activities into the reef has increased four-fold since European settlement, according to the report.

In the past few years the reef has suffered two of its worst ever recorded coral bleaching events caused by unusually hot sea water.

Snorklers explore the Great Barrier Reef (Photo courtesy CRC Reef Research Centre)
"Indeed, this is sobering news but it is not unique to the Great Barrier Reef," Kemp said. "The report states there are similar pressures elsewhere in the world, which has seen a loss of up to 25 percent of the world's coral reefs."
The Australian government has implemented dugong protection areas in conjunction with the Queensland government to protect dugongs from drowning in fishing nets, said Kemp, and has introduced plans to manage potential conflicts of use and tourism development in high use areas of the reef.

Reef based tourism is estimated to be worth between A$1-2 billion a year and commercial fisheries worth about A$400 million annually.

Kemp said the Australian government is working with the Queensland Fisheries Service to develop a new sustainable line fisheries management plan for the reef and to introduce mandatory use of turtle excluder devices and bycatch reduction devices to stop turtles from dying in trawl nets.

Many parts of the Great Barrier Reef are still in very good condition, but the report warns there is no room for complacency on the part of industry, the community and governments.

Kemp's emphasis was on the efforts made by the current government headed by Prime Minister John Howard to make the reef "sustainable on an ecological, economical and recreational basis."

Runoff onto the reef's coastal zone from land based activities such as agriculture (Photo courtesy Australian Institute of Marine Science)
Through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA), the Commonwealth government has jointly developed the Reef Water Quality Protection Plan with the Queensland government to protect the reef from land based pollution.
The central government has proposed a six-fold increase in protected areas and marine sanctuaries within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park – in consultation with industry, communities and key stakeholders – as part of the recently released Draft Zoning Plan under the Representative Areas Program (RAP).

The government has invested A$3 million over three years to boost the surveillance capacity of federal and state law enforcement authorities in detecting illegal fishing operations resulting in a 300 percent increase in the number of offenders apprehended, Kemp told the delegates.

But the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) today blamed the Australian government for allowing single hull oil tankers to continue to ply the Australian coast, right through the middle of the Great Barrier Reef and other marine protected areas.

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority does not require oil companies to indicate the type of vessel they have chartered to transport oil into Australia. The agency which oversees shipping and marine safety has no way of knowing if a vessel on its way to Australia could pose a potential threat until it arrives at an Australian port, said Serge Killingbeck of the ACF.

For the first time, the reef is being viewed as a potential source of new medicines to fight cancer. On June 22, the Townsville based Australian Institute of Marine Science signed a five year memo of understanding with the U.S. National Cancer Institute and handed over its first consignment of 400 samples from Queensland marine organisms.

The agreement allows extracts from Queensland organisms such as soft corals, sponges and starfish to be examined for anti-tumour activity at the NCI’s laboratories which have screening facilities that are not available in Australia. The organisms will be analyzed for compounds that may prove successful against human cancers.

"This world first, five year agreement puts the international spotlight on the huge value of Queensland’s unique biodiversity," said Queensland Premier Peter Beattie.

Bowling Green Bay in front of the Australian Institute of Marine Science facility in Townsville. (Photo courtesy Indo-Pacific Sea Turtle Conservation Group)
The newly introduced Representative Areas Program aims to protect biodiversity in each of more than 70 habitat areas of the Great Barrier Reef.
With just under four weeks left in the second community consultatation phase for the Representative Areas Program, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) today announced that more than 2,150 submissions have been received.

During the first public consultation phase last year more than 10,000 submissions were received.

GBRMPA Chair Virginia Chadwick says the early flood of submissions was a good sign for reef protection. "Most of the submissions have been very constructive and early next month we will set about the enormous task of analyzing each submission," she said.

"One message we are really trying to make clear is that this is not a fisheries management issue. This is about protecting all the living things in various habitats including coral reefs, seagrass beds and in deep water areas," Chadwick said.

Members of the public have until August 4 to turn in their submissions, either by mail to: GBRMPA, 2-68 Flinders Street, P.O. Box 1379 Townsville, Queensland 4810, Australia or online at: http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au.

CANBERRA, Australia, July 10, 2003 (ENS)

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

14) Farmers call for prawn industry reform

The Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA) says local producers cannot compete with imported prawns unless their product can be identified by consumers.

APFA spokesman Martin Breen says prawns from China sell in Australia for $7 a kilogram while Australian farmers can only produce them at between $9 and $11 a kilogram.

He says industry reforms are needed.

"There's no possible way we can compete with that sort of price differentiation unless we differentiate ourselves in the market and consumers in Australia would much rather buy Australian seafood," Mr Breen said.

"But it's difficult for them to go to a shop and know which prawn came from Australia and which one came from China."

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

105) Anger Builds Over "Horrendous" Scallop Plans

THE SCALLOP Association today continued its attack on Scotish fisheries minister Ross Finnie’s scallop fishery plans.

In a statement, association secretary John Hermse said Mr Finnie cannot blame EU Fisheries Commissioner Franz Fischler for the purely unilateral Scottish measures to "protect" stocks.

"There is no sound scientific rationale behind the measures which are not supported by the majority of the scallop industry."

He maintained Hamish Morrison,chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation "sold the pass" by stating in a letter to the Scottish Fisheries Department that there was "consensus within the Industry" to support the limitations.

"No consensus exists within the SFF in particular and the scallop industry in general most of whom are not SFF members. So what was the reason for that claim?" Mr Hermse went on.

"The suggested limitations will directly affect up to 17 of the medium and large scallop Scottish vessels. However, the knock on effect for the processing sector will be horrendous. These medium/large vessels are generally nomadic and fish further offshore and in poorer weather conditions therefore ensuring continuity of supply. Without this dependability we will lose contracts to customers who demand consistency of supply. Many jobs will be lost in the processing sector not only in the North East but also on the West coast of Scotland and in England where the scallop processors rely on these vessels for their supply.

"There is no decommissioning or compensation to soften the financial impact of these measures."

Published on: July 09, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

15) Sea Lice Regime Is Working, Say Farmers

THE British Columbia Salmon Farmers' Association has reported the results of sea lice monitoring in April and May 2003, undertaken by Stolt Sea Farm and Heritage Salmon, operators of salmon aquaculture sites in the Broughton Archipelago, and reviewed by the British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.

Results show a continued decline in sea lice levels, with dramatic declines in particular on fish of more than seven kilograms in weight as a result of harvesting and treatment.

“We have seen continued declining levels of sea lice at our farm sites in the Broughton Archipelago, which is completely consistent with what we expected. Salmon farmers have rigorous sea lice monitoring and treatment regimes, and the results demonstrate that,” said Mary Ellen Walling, Executive Director, BC Salmon Farmers' Association. “It is normal for healthy fish to have some sea lice on them. However, it is possible to control sea lice on farm sites through strategic fallowing, growing a single year class at each site, treatment and harvesting. These are the actions Stolt and Heritage have taken. As an industry, we know it is our responsibility to not contribute significantly to the sea lice population that naturally occurs in the marine environment.”

“The monitoring results we have seen to date confirm that the sea lice monitoring and treatment regime the salmon aquaculture industry has in place works,” said Ms. Walling. “We take our responsibility to raise healthy fish very seriously.”

Published on: July 08, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------

16) New Scottish Fisheries Watchdog Out To Tender

A NEW Scottish Fishery Protection Vessel (FPV) has been given the go ahead to go to tender. The vessel will be a replacement for the FPV Sulisker and will cost around £15m.

Scottish Fisheries Minister Ross Finnie said:

"The Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency (SFPA) has made clear to me its needs for enhanced offshore marine surveillance. I have therefore agreed to allocate up to £15m of end of year flexibility (EYF) savings to the SFPA to allow the early procurement of an 80 metre vessel to replace the Sulisker.

"The new vessel will be longer and faster than any now available to the Agency and will give it a capacity to operate in deeper and more difficult waters. The vessel will be powered by a modern, fuel efficient, low-emission diesel electric propulsion system.

"This continued investment in the SFPA’s marine surveillance capability supports the Agency’s key role in ensuring the sustainability of the Scottish fisheries sector."

Published on: July 12, 2003

---------------------------------------- Back to top ----------------------------------------