The Challenges with 'Wild' Harvesting Fishe for Food

1 ‘The Challenges with Wild Harvesting Fish for Food’ Mary Howard (GAICD) 2012. Seafood Directions Conference th 29 Oct 2013 The Challenges with ‘Wild’ Harvesting Fish for Food. “The NSW Example” Author: Mary Howard (GAICD) Secretary Hawkesbury River Commercial Fishing Association Inc. Director NSW Women’s Industry Network Seafood Community Holder of an Advanced Certificate in Aquaculture (freshwater) Grafton Tafe. 1998. Runner Up: in the RIRDC 2006 Rural Women’s Award Winner: of the 2010 Sydney Fish Market ‘Excellence in Environmental Practice’ Award 1 | P a g e 2 ‘The Challenges with Wild Harvesting Fish for Food’ Mary Howard (GAICD) 2012. Finalist: in the National Seafood Environmental Award 2010. ABSTRACT Rural and Regional Law and Social Justice Author: Mary Howard Organisation: NSW Women’s Industry Network Seafood Community. Position Title: NSW Director “The Challenges with Wild Harvesting Fish for Food” The Australian Government’s mandate to meet its World commitments is challenging all wild harvest fisher’s historic rights as they lose access to traditional fishing grounds. Individual State governments are adapting to regulate and legislate to balance a whole community access right by sharing with recreational fishing and the environment. Socially, communities are demanding sustainable fishing practices. Commercially retailers are endeavouring to capitalise from the sustainability debate by introducing sustainable marketing labels based primarily on the sustainable practices of the wild harvest fishery. Environmentally communities are demanding expansion of protected grounds of specific biodiversity and species protection. Politically, recreational fishing communities are demanding exclusive access rights. The impost from these the various changes adopted can be demonstrated by looking at the management of NSW Fisheries over the past decade, the resource allocation changes, assessing the productivity of the commercial fisheries over time and the changes that had been made during that time. Understanding the impacts of boundary changes, with cross over fishing when grounds are lost and technological changes are introduced and not understood by the media and community. I argue there’s a failure for government to: a) properly and fairly evaluate the whole of community impacts to Aquatic ecosystems; b) determine their rights to access, locally harvested sustainably fished product; c) evaluate the impacts to the existing industry from increasing imports; d) identify the bias standards in new legislation. 2 | P a g e 3 ‘The Challenges with Wild Harvesting Fish for Food’ Mary Howard (GAICD) 2012. INTRODUCTION Australia’s Fisheries management comprises Commonwealth waters that are managed under Commonwealth legislation, which are those waters to the edge of our Marine jurisdiction at the limit of the Australian Economic Zone (EEZ) some 200 nautical miles to sea outside of the State and Territory three nautical mile mark. State legislation and regulations cover those waters out to the three nautical mile mark. (Definition: Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities). NSW is by 2012 committed to National strategies to conserve marine biodiversity via a variety of intergovernmental agreements such as: Inter government agreement on the environment (Commonwealth of Australia 1992). National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity 1996 Commitment to the NRSMPA (ANSECC TFMPA 1998) (ANZECC TRMPA, 1999) Kearney R .Emeritus Professor of Fisheries 5/9/2011. Wild harvest fisheries in Australia have been and are continually and constantly reviewed, restricted, and restructured. The Australian population continues to grow and the increasing demand for seafood has resulted in an increase in imports into Australia to the extent that 70% of fish consumed in Australia is imported. (Independent Scientific Audit of Marine Parks 2011) Historically, the importation of Seafood into NSW has always been necessary. The intent of this paper is to focus on the impacts and difficulties that have been and continue to be faced by NSW wild harvest commercial fishermen. Each working day fishermen can face extremes of climate that can result in high or low productivity from droughts, floods, fish kills, shark attacks,toxic algae, chemical contamination, state planning instruments and major infrastructure developments, pollution and aquatic weeds as well as possible poisonous and pain full fish species contacts. Then, there is the management restrictions that each fishery group and each fisherman must have instilled in their minds to personally survive, comply with the law, as well as, be productive and viable. In NSW there remains a multitude of State Acts and regulations and updated versions that fishermen are required to comply with and that impact their operations such as; Fisheries and Oyster Farmers Act 1935 The Environmental Planning and assessment Act 1979 Fisheries Management Act 1994 and Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 Fisheries Management (General) Regulation 1995 and (Aquatic reserves) Regulation1995 The Native Title (New South Wales) Act 1994 and Marine Parks Act.1997 The Fisheries Management Amendment Act 1997 commenced 1st July 1998. Fisheries Management and Environmental Assessment Legislation Act 2000. The Environment Protection and Bio Diversity Conservation Act. The Fisheries Management Amendment Act 2000 and Bill 2001. For more than three decades, each working day has been challenged by pressure from fisheries management compliance requirements, since the 1980’s with a freeze on new boats and new commercial fishing licences; 1995 recognised fishing operations, defining catch history and restricted fisheries; then Share Managed Fisheries in 1997, followed by the creation of Recreational fishing only havens (RFO) in 2002 resulting in a loss of 27% of estuary area access and the introduction of Marine Parks and Aquatic reserves between 2002 and 2007resulting in a loss of 34% of area access of coastal waters, and more recently, external consumer pressure with the growth of ‘sustainable’ third party labelling. In 2012 the same process continues with more restructure of commercial fishing businesses and full cost recovery. 3 | P a g e 4 ‘The Challenges with Wild Harvesting Fish for Food’ Mary Howard (GAICD) 2012. The culture of management and the politics behind the management of the NSW Fisheries resources has and continues to affect fishers and their families and targets them as the root cause for ‘Sustainable Fisheries’. Which simply is not true, restrictions, so great that boat renewals and upgrades for pride in the fleet have been and still are placed on hold and fishers that have historically fished are actively steering family members away from entering the industry. The commercial fleet of boats subsequently are aging, as well as the average age of commercial fishers in general, the decisions not only affecting fishermen and their families but boat builders, and closing some Co-Operatives across the state. It is bias (v. t. give bias influence - the Concise Oxford Dictionary) and ironic that the Government terminated the Commercial Fishing Advisory Council because it was deemed to be lobbying Government and cancelled its ability to raise funds by cancelling the levee that 1300 fishers paid but that same NSW government supported the Recreational fishing lobbyist with a secure method of funding to achieve their wants of removing commercial fishers , who were providing product and a significant source of protein for the greater proportion of the community. The recreational fisher numbers considered to be in excess of two million strong at that time (according to studies quoted) and important to tourism and bait and tackle retailers. This policy undermines the government’s strategy to provide security and value in commercial fishing share managed businesses. In 2012, a new review now proposes a policy to again levee the commercial fishers to reinstate a commercial fishing peak industry body and recreational fishers numbers are cited as one million or 17%. The Government is seen as promoting and fostering the expansion of recreational fishing with the introduction of the recreational salt and freshwater fishing licence fee, income of $12.5 million and establishment of a trust that gives the recreational fishers control on the spending of 90% of the funds. This has given the recreational fishers security of ongoing income, allowed recreational fishers to borrow $20 million from the government to buy-out commercial fishing endorsements across NSW, in what was called a voluntary (sic) buy back, promoted in the distribution of approximately 50,000 discussion papers (Fisheries 2000/2001 Annual report) considered as necessary for the ‘sustainability’ of fish stocks and adversely focusing only on commercial fishing practices. Similarly and at the same time, the promotion and expansion of Aquaculture specifically for recreational restocking programmes of lakes, impoundments, rivers and estuaries with fingerlings intended exclusive for recreational fishing. A state government programme of funding incentives offering $1.00 for $1.00 investment opportunities and the fostering of Aquaculture fish farms in general also receiving funding and promotion, meanwhile the aboriginal fishers were continually frustrated by the failure of government to recognise their historic fishing rights. Fisheries progressive policies are devaluing commercial fishers to the benefit of business growth in

Load more