Prev
Next

Super trawler not the only fishy issue that stinks

Suzanne Pope

by Suzanne Pope

21 Aug 05:40am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Aquaculture, Environment, Farming, Fish, Fishing

36 comments

The decision to allow the super trawler Margiris to fish in Australian waters has aroused a wave of opposition.

Fish farming arguably does a lot more damage than this hefty beast. Picture: Pierre Gleizes, Greenpeace

A coalition of environment groups has taken out a full page ad in The Australian. A flotilla of over 200 boats sailed up the Derwent River in protest. A 35,000 signature petition opposing the trawler has been presented to Parliament, and in a recent reader poll in the Adelaide Advertiser, 92 per cent of respondents were opposed to the ship being allowed to fish in Australian waters. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has referred to issue to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

The opposition is not surprising. It’s hard to believe the huge nets of the factory ship won’t trap large quantities of by-catch, unwanted species which usually die before they are released. The trawler could locally deplete the fish population, reducing the food available to southern bluefin tuna, dophins and seals in certain locations.

But is all the oppostion based on concern for fish populations? The super trawler is Dutch owned and the fish caught will be exported to West Africa, mostly for human consumption. Would there be less opposition if our very own super trawler were involved? You have to wonder when there are examples of wasteful fishing practices in Australia that don’t arouse this level of opposition.

Tuna farming is one such practice. It is not surprising that Brian Jeffries, chief executive of the Southern Bluefin Tuna Association, is all in favour of the Margiris. He hopes it will eventually help to feed the voracious feedlot tuna industry, which is a net consumer of fish.

According to SA scientists, it takes 10-17 kg of baitfish to produce 1kg of tuna in the feedlot pens at Port Lincoln. Around 60,000 tonnes of baitfish are fed to the tuna each year, of which 40,000 tonnes are sardines caught along Australia’s southern coast. This catch is much larger than the quota granted to the Margiris, its value as human food is reduced 10-17 times by being fed to tuna, and the product is exported to Japan. Why is there no similar outcry to that against the Margiris?

If it turns out that penguin colonies around southern Australia are declining due to starvation, then perhaps this large sardine catch will have something to do with it.

While tuna farming is by far the worst example, it is not the only aquaculture industry that is a net consumer of fish. This is a fact that is generally ignored. Aquaculture appears in the public mind almost like a modern version of the loaves and fishes – fish are miraculously produced with minimal input.

A recent article on ethical eating in the “Body and Soul” liftout of Adelaide’s Sunday Mail advised consumers to eat Tasmanian salmon (farmed) instead of flake. It’s certainly good advice to avoid the shark meat sold as flake. There are 64 species of shark listed as endangered on the red list of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The gill nets used in the South Australian shark fishery have been shown by local scientists to entrap seals, including the Australian sea lions from Kangaroo Island, whose numbers are still low. As a result, some limitations have been placed on this fishery to protect the sea lions.

However, Tasmanian salmon are hardly a low eco-footprint alternative. They too are carnivorous and are fed specially formulated pellets. Over the years, a larger percentage of plant material has been incorporated into the pellets, but fish meal and fish oil also have to be included.

Around one third of the world’s fish catch is “rendered”. Rendering means that small fish are boiled in an energy intensive process to produce fish meal and fish oil, which is increasingly used by the aquaculture industry. It takes 4.5 kg of fresh fish to produce 1 kg of meal, and 20 kg of fresh fish to produce 1 kg of fish oil.

There is a ratio used to express efficiency of various aquaculture industries called the FIFO ratio: fish in : fish out. In the case of farmed salmon the ratio is 4.9, according to an article in the journal Aquaculture. What this means is that 4.9 kg of fresh fish, rendered into meal and oil, goes into producing each 1 kg of salmon. Efficiency may continue to increase slightly, but the salmon industry will remain a net consumer of fish. There are no loaves and fishes.

It’s quite reasonable to be concerned about the effect of a super trawler on fish populations, but it’s short-sighted to overlook the huge consumption of wild caught fish by aquaculture industries just because they are local rather than foreign owned and they produce a luxury product.

Comments on this post will close at 8pm AEST

Most commented

36 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • ronny jonny says:

      06:09am | 21/08/12

      Ethical eating is indeed a tangled web. I think the only meat that is acceptable is fresh, wild caught and killed. This way you avoid issues like the above where vast amounts of fish are consumed to produce a higher valued product. Eating th e"rubbish fish” from the super trawler is far more ethical than eating salmon from a fish farm that has been fed the product from said super trawler.There is also the issue of introduction of exotic diseases from aquaculture such as the devastating pilchard kill we suffered some years back as a result of a virus introduced by tuna farms using imported feed from the nothern hemisphere. The virus was until then only found in the northern waters. It was denied by the tuna farm lobby but it seems a pretty strange coincidence. It does amuse me to think of all the hippies smugly munching their tuna and salmon thinking they are Saving The World when they are actually eating petroleum and penguins.

      Reply

    • Little Joe says:

      06:47am | 21/08/12

      Once again we witness an ignorant environmental story published in ‘The Punch’. Suzanne failed to mention that if the tuna were not grown in farms that they would probably consume a similar amount if not more bait fish in the wild.

      Journalism is such a sad, ignorant profession!!!

      Ps. I am surprised that Gillard did not apply a resource Tax to the Super Trawler spouting, “These are our fish, our resource and all profits will be sent offshore.”

      Reply

    • Admiral Ackbar says:

      12:21pm | 21/08/12

      Little Joe that’s silly. Everyone knows that Tuna in the wild feed off sunshine and rainbows.

    • M says:

      06:49am | 21/08/12

      Interesting article that one. How does one balance commercial fishing operations and the environment in a way that both keeps the industry alive (secures jobs) and manages the environment in a sustainable way? This question will become ever more important in the coming decades with the world population expected to grow and as india and china’s middle class continue to want everything we in the first world have had for the past half century.

      Reply

    • Mahhrat says:

      07:54am | 21/08/12

      A friend of mine has a PHD in these things, and he is very worried about exactly this balance.

    • Little Joe says:

      08:38am | 21/08/12

      @ M

      As stated many times, when Peak Phosphorus occurs in less than 50-years fishing fleets from Asian Countries will cruise the world with escorts strip mining the seas.

    • M says:

      09:02am | 21/08/12

      Mahhrat, it’s an issue that everyone around the world will have to come to terms with sooner rather than later. Our consumption lifestyles are not sustainable in the long term. The golden age of Western civilisation has been and gone.

      @ Little Joe, I’ve never heard of peak phosphorus, but after some quick googling I’m more than a little worried. Looks like the distopian future predicted in Sci Fi isn’t actually all that far away.

    • Little Joe says:

      09:41am | 21/08/12

      @ M

      I was sure that we debated this before as I have posted it many times!!!

      Anyway, it’s good to be informed.

    • M says:

      10:35am | 21/08/12

      Might have been one of the other M’s cruising around here, it’s news to me.

    • daniel says:

      11:01am | 21/08/12

      M,

      In my view, the only way to truly balance the environment with supply and demand is to engage in more research to establish commercial cloning operations.

      Not only would we be able to provide a source of food for the world but we’d also avoid plundering the planet’s natural resources. However, I don’t think Green groups will take a liking to this idea.

    • M says:

      11:33am | 21/08/12

      Daniel, how would that help? You can clone as many fish as you want, but you still need to feed them dont you?

      The way I see it, If they’re gonna raise fish on farms, they’re gonna have to raise the fish that feed the fish there as well. Hell of a lot more intensive, sure, but if you want the product you have to pay the price. Of course, it’d never work without either subsidies or commercial fishing being banned, but it’s a nice thought.

    • Michael says:

      12:23pm | 21/08/12

      M, we could stop burying or cremating people, pulp the dead after harvesting the organs for the living and feed the pulp to the fish or make fertiliser from the pulp same with all dead creatures.

      Re-cycle.

    • Big Jay says:

      12:43pm | 21/08/12

      @M - “The way I see it, If they’re gonna raise fish on farms, they’re gonna have to raise the fish that feed the fish there as well”

      See Andrews comment below regarding the food chain (tuna) being a bit top heavy. My thinking was they’ll have to start farming bait fish too, which is fine except you would have grow the plant life to feed the bait fish. If this is landbased we’re screwed, if it can be done on/in the ocean we might get somewhere.

      Furthermore, not some much cloning but selecting genetics is probably going to be desired.

    • M says:

      01:08pm | 21/08/12

      Big jay, the genetics angle is one to consider. If we’re going to move forward with food production we need to get on board with genetic engineering for higher yeilds in both crops and animals.

      besides, it’s not like we havent been genetically engineering our food for thousands of years anyway, we’ve just done it the slow way up until now.

    • Big Jay says:

      07:42am | 21/08/12

      I think the negative tone of this article is what is driving govts (state and fed) to make the very poor decisions they have been making in regard to marine management.

      Marine aquaculture and ocean ranching are relatively new (fledgling) industries. I think we need to encourage industry because ocean fishing is already proving unsustainable. Increasing populations across the globe will make this worse, added to that is more of the worlds people are increasing their protein intake.

      Australia ought to persist marine aquaculture (and probably freshwater too) and try and crack the code and become a pioneer and leader in the industry after working through all the environmental and genetic issues.

      All I see is various govts making it harder for commercial fishers by regulating our fisheries only to import seafood from poorer (un)regulated overseas fisheries, and fish farms forced to cut through all manner of red and green tape rather than receiving good research and commercial support.

      Reply

    • gobsmack says:

      07:45am | 21/08/12

      Another issue that boils down to unfettered human population growth.

      Reply

    • youdy beaudy says:

      08:01am | 21/08/12

      It should not be allowed as far as i’m concerned. I find it amazing that if it were an Indonesian fishing boat fishing in Australian waters, just even a small boat to feed a village the government would probably arrest the fisherman and confiscate their boat and burn it but they would allow a long line trawler to enter our waters and kill everything. Now you can buy krill oil for the omega oils and i think, well, what are the whales going to eat. But who really gives a damn about the whales anyway.

      Can’t understand how this government would allow this to happen. I say, go and deplete your own waters and get the hell out of ours. Eventually there will be nothing left to eat from the oceans or the land and when everyone is starving then the government can pat itself on the back and think of a so called good job done and move on to stuff up something else.

      World food crisis coming big within the next five years. Better brush cut those grave yards in particular the 3rd world countries because a lot of people are going to suffer and die from starvation. Good job government. What right do these people have to do this. I would suggest a torpedo and the words friendly fire to sort it out for good. Get the hell out of our ocean long line fishing vessels is what i say and many others too. Go and denude your own seas and leave ours alone.! I can’t believe it that the government would allow this farce and ignore the petitions put.

      Reply

    • Sharon says:

      08:30am | 21/08/12

      Another example of an avaricious industry with no regard for environmental sustainability, and all ably supported by our government.  There are so many more sustainable and humane food choices. One day the human race will look back on the path of destruction we continue to carve in disbelief and disgust.

      Reply

    • M says:

      09:11am | 21/08/12

      Did you read the linked article?

    • Sharon says:

      08:33am | 21/08/12

      Another example of an avaricious industry with no regard for environmental sustainability or the suffering of other creatures. All ably supported by our government. One day the human race will look back at the destructive path that we continue to carve in disbelief and disgust.

      Reply

    • iansand says:

      08:39am | 21/08/12

      Read “Cod” by Mark Kurlansky.

      We know more than we knew at the time of, and before, the collapse of the Grand Banks cod fishery but we still do not know enough.  Until we do know enough the precauitionary principle should apply.  We should tread very carerfully.

      Reply

    • andrew says:

      08:48am | 21/08/12

      we have had some great successes in aquaculture over the last couple of decades. More and more fish species are able to be bred in captivity (allowing for greater survival of eggs/fingerlings) and then released into the wild for restocking programs. The main example that come to mind is Australian Bass, though many other species of both fresh and saltwater are also stocked. In the near future i believe southern bluefin tuna will be farm bred and raised too. It’s not all evil

      Reply

    • Big Jay says:

      09:09am | 21/08/12

      @Andrew - I appreciate what you’re saying but the author is concerned about the environmental damage done by farmed southern bluefin tuna, amongst other species. At the moment, its not evil but it’s pretty serious.

      Farmed marine fish is they way to go I think, but we need to identify problems and OVERCOME then, not just stop at the first hurdle.

    • andrew says:

      11:00am | 21/08/12

      the only negative effect of aquaculture i can think of is that in the case of southern bluefin tuna, we are effectively artificially making the ocean’s population pyramid top heavy - as bluefin tuna are near the top of the food chain. For sustainable seafood we really need to look at eating more of the prolific breeding, fast growing species and less of the depleted predatory fish. As another poster mentioned previously, it doesn’t matter if we are eating 1kg of wild caught or farmed salmon/tuna whatever, that fish has eaten many kg’s of smaller fish to get to that size. Potentially increased aquaculture could lead to reduced pollution from fewer commercial fishing vessels, lost nets etc.

    • Borderer says:

      09:01am | 21/08/12

      We don’t even need to try and work out what allowing foriegn vessels to fish in Australian waters will do, merely look to what happened to England’s fishing industry during the “Cod Wars”.
      The only people allowed to fish in Australian waters are Australian, simply if they are foriegn and rape the waters eight ways to Sunday, they can simply sail away with little consequence. At least by dealing with only locals, not only can we better regulate catches but also operational practices as well. How exactly do you check the catch of a ship that never lands at an Australian port?
      Our fishing industry could be the envy of the world if we took steps to actually manage it properly and given the levels of fish stock depletion globally, it could earn as much as some of our mineral exports should a responsible approach be taken. How long till they take the industry seriously?

      Reply

    • M says:

      09:39am | 21/08/12

      This strikes me as a very reasonable question.

    • Tim the Toolman says:

      10:21am | 21/08/12

      You there!  Off this site!  That comment alone has exceeded the rationality quotient of The Punch for this week.

    • Big Jay says:

      10:28am | 21/08/12

      Agree…Very reasonable question.

      As well though, I wonder whether the push is (should be) for better wild caught marine fisheries management, or greater tech/evolution in the marine farming industry.

    • Borderer says:

      12:28pm | 21/08/12

      @Tim - Sorry, I’m sure it has everything to do with the carbon tax….
      - better?
      @Big Jay - The answer is wild fisheries management, we have tens of thousands of kilometers of coastline, massive quantities of fish, it would seem silly to farm outside of in demand species like tuna or oysters. By setting up a sensible, well thought out management of marine resourses, for example, by protecting the majority of coastal waters from commercial fishing (sport anglers only). Breeding grounds are safe which means more fish for commercial catches, better for the environment as people (sport anglers) are actually supported rather than banned and want to protect places to fish. Rotation of allowed commercial fishing zones for non-migratory species etc.
      There are of course exceptions but these exceptions need to be well thought out as well as the punishment to law breakers.
      For example, foriegn vessels caught fishing in Australian waters, massive fine for the skipper (jail for repeat offense), vessel is siezed and destroyed or purchased back from the government, crew deported.
      Current policy seems to teeter between a free for all and a ban everything approach, neither is responsible to industry and environment. Policy also seem to be written by those with an agenda be it money making (factory ship) or Green (Ban everything), resource management should be conducted by those with a long term vested interest, not a quick profit or those off with the fairies.

    • andrew says:

      01:55pm | 21/08/12

      @Big Jay if you pull a net through a tuna farm you will catch…..... Tuna!
      pull a net through the ocean you will catch…...... everything, most of it unwanted by catch.
      Seems a bit of a no brainer to me. Acquaculture is the way of the future, providing the fish are bred in captivity and not simply wild caught then fattened up in pens to be killed.

    • Big Jay says:

      02:37pm | 21/08/12

      @Borderer - Appreciate your comments. No doubt you’ve seen the reaction from the latest Federal govt marine park policy draft/proposal. I think that sits somewhere closer to your line of thinking but still has copped some bad press (though I think most of that is from the extremities you pointed out).

      I think we should should go down the path of farming and sorting out the issues regarding fish genetics, environmental sustainability and probably supply chain too. Developing the knowledge around ocean farming in Australia, and exporting the product and also the intellectual property is the way to go.

      I’m pretty sure most countries have or will overfish within their ocean boundaries. Even relatively civilised countries like New Zealand have butchered the management of their fisheries. This places pressure on the market so cheating like crossing ocean boundaries and over-catching quotas will become rife. Also govt’s love money, so will be inclined to increase quotas when prices are up (see mining, where this is accepted wisdom, to the point of influencing politicians as such).

      There is no way wild catch will keep pace with demannd from growing wealth and populations in south-east asia and other developing regions and expecting other countries to adopt our more sane policies

      Having said all that, the state and fed govts do need to take the industry more seriously and help either form of fishing, if not both.

    • Sarah Bath says:

      01:41pm | 21/08/12

      Any fishing should be banned along with agriculture manufacturing animal meat.  Go back to sustainable herbiculture. Protect our health and protect our environment. Tax all meats.

      Reply

    • M says:

      02:13pm | 21/08/12

      We’ll have to tax vegetables as well so we can pay for all those jobs we destroyed.

    • james thomson says:

      02:41pm | 21/08/12

      Why not just stop eating fish?

      Reply

    • ronny jonny says:

      03:18pm | 21/08/12

      Who in Australia eats much fish anyway? I mean regularly, not a bit of flake or some canned tuna? I think it is more an occaisional luxury for most people. The high prices and the demand all come from overseas where you have coutries like Japan exporting their environmental damage out of thier own waters, much as they do with logging. So surely we can introduce tighter quotas and policing and refuse access to these gigantic trawlers without affecting domestic consumers too much. All we can afford now is Basa from Vietnam anyway.

 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter