May 18, 2008
Climate Change and the Commercial Fishery (Again)
I posted a graph from L.B. Klyashtorin via Walter Starck on May 4, 2008, with comment from Walter that "I have never seen a more succint and telling argument to refute carbon dioxide government climate change".
The graph though was not of the highest quality, and so Louis Hissink has had it redrawn:
The original post is here: http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003005.html
Thanks Louis for the better quality graph.
Posted by jennifer at 10:16 AM | Comments (24) | TrackBack
May 04, 2008
Climate Change and the Commercial Fishery: A Note from Walter Starck
I have never seen a more succinct and telling argument to refute carbon dioxide governed climate change than the following graph from a study by L.B. Klyashtorin pubished as a technical paper by the United Nation's Food and Agricultural Organisation.
from http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y2787E/y2787e1l.gif
The study entitled 'Climate change and long term fluctuations of commercial catches: possibilities of forecasting' concludes that 60-year climate oscillations correspond to the regular fluctuations of the populations and catches of the main commercial fish species.
"Analysing roughly 30-year alternation of the so-called "climatic epochs" characterised by the variation in the Atmospheric Circulation Index (ACI), the study revealed two ACI-dependent groups of major commercial species correlated positively with either "meridional" or "zonal" air mass transport on the hemispheric scale.
"Climate periodicity serves as a basis for a predictive model of the population and catches of major
commercial fish species. The model has two basic limitations.
(1) It is applicable to the abundant fish species only (commercial catch > 1.0 - 1.5 million tons) yielded over large areas, such as North Pacific or North Atlantic as a whole;
(2) The model is intended to analyse and forecast the long-term trends in the population of major commercial species with the assumption that general intensity of commercial fisheries will stay at its average level over the last 20 - 25 years.
"The concept of generating forecasts of anthropogenic climate change and consequent changes in fish production is beyond the scope of this study. However, there is a clear link between fish production and climate, so projecting future climate changes is of importance. Not only can climate be used to forecast commercial fish yields, but also it may be possible to estimate general changes in biological production on the global scale. It is therefore important to maintain databases on routine fisheries data and climate indices in the long term, in order to track these critical processes."
This study trashes most of the classic examples of fishery collapse due to overfishing. Incidentally, the Pacific Dedadal Oscillation (PDO) has this year switched into its cooler phase.
Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) catastrophists are now belatedly accepting natural influences on global temperature to explain the current cooling. If natural cooling is possible then warming must be also and a similar amount of natural influence to that now being attributed to cooling would reduce the greenhouse contribution to the previously observed warming to little or nothing. AGW is beginning to look like the more and more convoluted epicycles invented to maintain the geocentric theory before it finally had to be abandoned.
Walter Starck
Townsville, Australia
------------
Klyashtorin L.B. 2001. Climate change and long term fluctuations of commercial catches: the possibility of forecasting. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 410, 98p. FAO (Food Agriculture Organization) of the United Nations, Rome.
Posted by jennifer at 10:07 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
April 04, 2008
Fish Productivity and Climate Change: New book by Klyashtorin and Lyubushin
'In Cyclic Climate Changes and Fish Productivity' L.B. Klyashtorin and A. A. Lyubushin consider the relationships between climate changes and the productivity of ocean ecosystems.
Analyses of climate index fluctuations and populations of major commercial fish species for the last 1500 years allowed the authors to characterize the 50-70 year climate fluctuations and fish production dynamics.
Their simple stochastic model suggests that it is possible to predict the likely trends of basic climatic indices and thus some commercial fish populations for several decades ahead.
The results obtained allow the old question to be revisit: which factors are more influential for the long-term fluctuations of major commercial stocks, climate or commercial fisheries?
The book is available from VNIRO Publishing (230 pages,160 figures, 2 color insets). Price: $59 (hard cover) including mailing. You can also order by mail from Russia, Moscow, 117997,Profsoyuznaya st.90, ”Science-Export”; by fax 7(495) 334-7140; 7(495)-334-7479; and by email naukaexport@naukaran.ru. Upon receipt of the order an invoice will be forwarded. The book will be mailed to you after receipt of payment. Mailing usually takes 3-6 days.
Posted by jennifer at 07:22 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 04, 2008
Certified Tasmanian Seafood or Not: A Note from Jane Rankin-Reid
"Fishermen are worried a certification row will confuse consumers, says Jane Rankin-Reid in Saturday's Mercury newspaper.
Fishermen are unhappy with radio advertisements sponsored by the Marine Stewardship Council promoting their March 2nd "Sustainable Seafood Day". "Buy only sustainable seafood products branded with the MSC gold label", the advertisement urges listeners.
"We haven't been advised of Sustainable Seafood day", snorts Rodney Treloggen, CEO of the Tasmanian Rock Lobster Fisherman's Association. "This aggressive campaign is really only about internal certification industry rivalry. Its very bad for the local fishing industry to send false messages to consumers when we're working so hard to protect our fish stocks and have achieved so much in this region." Many Tasmanian Rock Lobster Fisherman's Association members has undertaken a voluntary industry initiated program, the award winning, Clean Green, MSC's main Australian rival, which also runs best practice environmental and fishery stock management awareness courses for local fishermen. "We've yet to see the market need to sign up for MSC's certification program" says Treloggen. It's very expensive at $200,000 per fishery. I'm not sure of the benefits to Tasmania, given the success of our own sustainability initiatives." All exporting Australian fisheries must be certified with the Federal Environmental Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act. "We must be certified every 5 years and if we don't get it, we're can't export. It's more far reaching than MSC certification", says Treloggen.
The Marine Stewardship Council is a prominent UK charitable foundation, sponsored by leading British supermarket chains, Tescos, Marks and Spencers, Whole Foods Market Inc and multinational food corporation Unilever, Europe's largest seafood importer. Seafood sustainability certification has become big business in Europe with consumers increasingly urged to shop with their consciences. But MSC's certification outreach has had little impact in Australia to date with only two regional fishing bodies, the West Australian Rock Lobster and the Australian Mackerel Icefish (Heard and MacDonald Islands) fisheries signed on to its program.
The MSC's fifteen month certification process is "onerous", according to West Australian Fishing Industry Council CEO Guy Leyland, but worth it for Australian fisheries aiming to sell in US and UK retail markets where consumers are increasingly demanding independent third party sustainability certification for their seafood products. Although West Australian rock lobster is the only Australian fishery certified in WAFIC's catchment to date, very few if any of its MSC gold labeled products are actually available to Australian consumers. Why promote the MSC exclusive "Sustainable Seafood Day" when there are so few certified products available to Australian seafood buyers? "It's political", says Leyland. "It's about creating consumer awareness so there'll be demand for sustainability certification".
"That's a complete load of…", says Treloggan. "It's a negative scare campaign, manipulating local consumers to reject Tasmania's award winning Clean Green standards. Why promote a consumer branding program with no products available if they're not trying to muscle in on local certification turf and create serious doubt in Australian shoppers' minds about the integrity of our industry?" In Britain earlier this month, another aggressive MSC sponsored sustainable seafood campaign backfired badly, when condemnation from the UK's statuary marine agency Seafish, the Scottish Salmon Producers' organization and rival certification body Friends of the Sea accused MSC of "confusing rather than educating consumers", by sponsoring the World Wildlife Foundation's "Stinky Fish" Sustainable Seafood Shopping Survey. The WWF's online viral marketing campaign is anchored by an animated puppet, Stinky Fish who interrogates restaurant owners and fish sellers about their seafood's sources. Launched in mid January, Stinky Fish advises seafood shoppers to only buy fish that bears the exclusive MSC gold label for sustainability fishing assurance because "everything else is stinky!" Although MSC staff initially believed Stinky Fish would raise awareness about sustainable fishing amongst a hard to reach online audience, "they did not foresee the negative reaction that the video would engender with its partners and colleagues in the seafood industry", MSC said in a statement last week. As the charity distanced itself from the fishing furor, it advised WWF to immediately remove any reference to MSC from its website.
"Seafood Sustainability Day" is designed to raise Australian consumers' awareness quickly", says Duncan Ledbetter, MSC's Asian Pacific representative. "You've got to remember that as much as 70% of seafood sold in Australia is imported. A lot of the fish products available in Coles and Woolies are not from sustainable fisheries, so looking for a sustainability label is a good thing". Ledbetter insists that MSC's radio advertising campaign doesn't condemn non certified seafood but Australia's fishing industry experts worry that sending confusing messages to shoppers will do far more harm than good.
from The Mercury in Tasmania, Saturday March 1, 2008
Posted by jennifer at 02:35 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
October 12, 2007
Fisheries Management in Australia: A New Book by Daryl McPhee
Whether it’s throwing a fresh local prawn on the BBQ or dangling a line off the local jetty, fisheries resources are economically and socially important for many Australians. Australian fisheries have undergone significant management changes over the last decade and Australia is now recognised as a world leader.
This book is the first comprehensive analysis of fisheries management in Australia. It provides practical insight into the cross-disciplinary tools of fisheries management. It takes the reader away from the outdated notion of “managing the fish” to the reality of managing human behaviour. It does so without losing track of the fundamental need to consider the ecosystem and its components.
The book covers a diverse range of contemporary topics including: sharing fisheries resources between commercial and recreational fishers, marine park planning, current regulatory and policy environments, consultative and participatory frameworks, by-catch mitigation and fisheries habitat management. It is a must for tertiary students studying fisheries, fisheries management professionals, the fishing industry and anyone else with an interest in how our valuable but finite fisheries resources are managed.
... and the book will be released by Federation Press in January and retail for $66.
Congratulations to Daryl.
Posted by jennifer at 08:16 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 04, 2007
Starck Reminder: Australia Doesn't Need to Import Fish
"THE protection of Australia's fisheries is pushing seafood imports to record levels, driving overfishing in other countries and exposing consumers to unacceptable levels of antibiotics and other contaminants.
"Marine biologist Walter Starck said Australians were being forced to consume lower quality seafood imports, many from seriously depleted fisheries, even though Australia had a relative abundance in some species that was being underutilised."
So begins the front page article entitled 'Fish bans raise food poison risk' in todays The Weekend Australian.
Yesterday Crikey.com.au ran a similar article citing figures from Walter Starck published at this blog in November 2005.
"Australia has the third largest territorial fishing zone ... 'green management' has reduced our catch to the smallest in the OECD. We now import an ever-increasing amount of the fish we eat. Here are some fishery production figures (in metric tonnes) from 2003"
So, is there a chance we might see some policy changes? We don't need to import fish. We shouldn't be importing so much fish.
I see the current situation, at least in part, a consequence of the WWF Save the Reef Campaign. This campaign was explicitly about shutting down our northern fisheries and at the same time generating membership for WWF.
Posted by jennifer at 08:16 AM | Comments (62) | TrackBack
June 13, 2007
Mudtrails from Fishing Trawlers in Gulf of Mexico
"The pervasiveness of the influence of bottom trawlers on the Gulf of Mexico is evident in these images from NASA’s Landsat satellite. Showing two different areas of a single scene captured on October 24, 1999, the images reveal dozens of mudtrails streaking the Gulf in the wake of numerous trawlers, which appear as white dots. The amount of re-suspended sediment dredged up by the trawlers gives the water a cloudy appearance.
Read more at: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=17668
You can subscribe to Earth Observatory's weekly email at: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/
Posted by jennifer at 10:08 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
March 24, 2007
Grey Nurse Sharks, on Sunday
Dear Jennifer,
Don't miss the Sunday programme tomorrow on Channel 9. Ross Coulthart exposes phony claims about the "threatened" grey nurse shark.
The eco-nazis have already made a press release 'Bogus Grey Nurse Sharks Claims Quashed' responding to the story before it is even broadcast. Obviously they know they are in trouble.
Best,
Walter
Posted by jennifer at 06:33 PM | Comments (25)
February 10, 2007
Ice Packs Thwart Fishing & Strand Bears
According to Fishupdate.com:
"Fish merchants on the Humber may be throwing up their hands in frustration at the worrying decline in fish supplies from Iceland since the beginning of the year. But the underlying cause is something they would never have guessed at - a massive deep freeze around the west coast of the country.
While the rest of the world shudders at the prospect of global warming and all that it threatens to bring in the form of floods and soaring temperatures, Iceland has been bucking the trend - and it is having a dramatic effect on fishing activity around the island.
Thick packs of ice, which have not been seen for almost 40 years, have been moving into the western fjords across some of the best fishing grounds, followed by bitter winds and plummeting temperatures...
Read the article here: http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/6564/Ice_packs_(and_polar_bears)_thwart_Iceland_fishing.html
And it goes on to report that ice drifting in from Greenland has been carrying dozens of polar bears.
And Ann Novak sent me a link to a picture of a stranded bear, click here:http://www.bt.no/miljo/article337253.ece
Posted by jennifer at 04:18 PM | Comments (23)
January 31, 2007
Coral Reefs May Benefit From Global Warming
ON Friday in Paris the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will launch a new report, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, with an up-to-date assessment of likely temperature rises because of global warming. Three related reports will be released later in the year, including a report on the likely effects of the rise in temperature. The report on impacts is likely to include a chapter on Australia and a warning that corals on the Great Barrier Reef could die as a consequence of global warming.
The idea that the Great Barrier Reef may be destroyed by global warming is not new, but it is a myth. The expected rise in sea level associated with global warming may benefit coral reefs and the Great Barrier Reef is likely to extend its range further south. Global threats to the coral reefs of the world include damaging fish practices and pollution, and the UN should work harder to address these issues.
Read the complete article here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21144521-7583,00.html
Posted by jennifer at 08:33 AM | Comments (152) | TrackBack
November 29, 2006
Fishers Snagged: Not Farmed, Then Not Organic
According to an article in yesterday's New York Times the market for organic foods continues to grow with sales reaching US$13.8 billion in 2005 compared with US$3.6 billion in 1997.
But there's not much 'organic seafood' about because of problems with definitions and also what fish eat.
Now I would have thought a wild Atlantic salmon would automatically qualify as organic. But according to the US Agriculture Department to be organic you need to be farmed: read the full story here including that: "Environmentalists rightly argue that many farm-raised fish live in cramped nets in conditions that can pollute the water, and that calling them organic is a perversion of the label. Those who catch and sell wild fish say that their products should be called organic and worry that if they are not, fish farmers will gain a huge leg up."
Posted by jennifer at 08:17 AM | Comments (31) | TrackBack
October 14, 2006
About Walter Starck
Walter Starck grew up on, an island in the Florida Keys and began catching fish in salable quantities off the family dock at age five. At 6 he helped his grandfather build his first boat with which he began diving using a face mask.
He started scuba diving in 1954 (before scuba was a word). In 1964 he completed a PhD degree at the Institute of Marine Science of the University of Miami. In the process he determined that the world of academia was not to his taste so started his own business as well as a private research foundation. In 1968 he took delivery on a purpose built 150 ton research vessel, El Torito, and spent the next two decades exploring widely from the Caribbean to the Western Pacific.
Walter arrived in Australia in 1979 before boat people became unfashionable and established a home base on a 164 acre rainforest property on the north shore of the Daintree River.
His research interest has centered on coral reef biology and has included research grants and contracts from the National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research and National Geographic Society as well as various private foundations and individuals.
Walter has been a research associate of the Institute of Marine Science in Miami, the Bishop Museum in Hawaii, The Australian Museum in Sydney and the Western Australia Museum in Perth.
His wide experience of reefs around the world has encompassed the full spectrum of conditions ranging from heavily impacted to untouched as well as several opportunities for decade or longer familiarity with individual reefs. His views on reef biology derived from direct observation are not always in accord with popular theories.
But the articles that Walter now writes are increasingly read by practical environmentalists. His paper 'Threats to Great Barrier Reef' was the most popular online publication at the IPA website last year and shortened versions where published in 'Go Fishing' (Aug/Sept 2005) and 'News Weekly' (18 June 2006).
His presentation, based on the paper 'Marine Resources and The Growing Cost of Precaution', was a highlight of the recent Australian Environment Foundation Conference.
You can read more on Walter Starck's perspective at his website www.goldendolphin.com, click Eco-Issues for a list of recent environmental writings.
Walter's favourite quote is by John Maynard Keynes:
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Quotable Walter quotes include:
"You are never so comfortable as when doing what you've always done but never so alive as when doing what you've never done."
"One of the most important lessons of history is that most people most of the time are wrong."
"The eco-bureaucracy has become a sheltered workshop for those afflicted by the saviour syndrome."
"Environmental management is characterized by the application of hypothetical solutions to imaginary problems."
"Ecology is above all holistic. Everything we do or don't do has consequences. We can't save nature by locking it up."
Walter is no fan of environmentalism and I once jotted down this comment from him:
"Environmentalism is about much more than concern for a healthy environment. You could describe it as a quasi-religious bend of new-age nature worship, junk science, left-wing political activism and anti-profit economics."
Posted by jennifer at 10:18 AM | Comments (23) | TrackBack
October 09, 2006
Keeping Wildlife In the Freezer
When I worked for the sugar industry, there was a guy who lived in Ingham, in Far North Queensland, who used to regularly pull the same fish out of the freezer when there was a fish kill and get it on television as an example of poisoning from acid sulfate soils.
It seems activists also keep wildlife in their freezers in Tasmania and have no worries pulling a possum killed by a motorcar out of the freezer and parading it as an example of 1080 poisoning. At least that's the message we get from Pier Akerman writing in The Daily Telegraph on Saturday in a piece entitled 'Hello, wasn't that the ex-possum again?'.
While some activists have no real interest in the truth, just a particular barrow to push, you would like to think journalists from the Australian national broadcaster, the ABC, were a bit more diligent. But it seems they don't even have a particularly good system for keeping track of file tape/news footage... click here.
Posted by jennifer at 06:13 PM | Comments (62) | TrackBack
August 30, 2006
Farmed Fish are our Future: Conference in Adelaide
Aquaculture is the fastest growing food producing sector in the world according to those promoting a fish farmer's conference in Adelaide this week.
Farm Online have reported that there are 1,000 delegates at the conference and aquaculture is being talked-up with conference organising committee chair, Bruce Zippel, saying, "Many Australian primary producers are looking to supplement their incomes or moving into a more rewarding vocation .. and fish farming is seen as very attractive".
Aquaculture apparenty provides about 27 percent of total world seafood supply and some experts predict that within 25 years half of the fish we eat will be farmed.
Posted by jennifer at 08:50 AM | Comments (25) | TrackBack
August 29, 2006
Shifting the Environmental Impact of Fishing Somewhere Else
"Australia has the third largest fishery zone of any nation. It also has the most over-managed, heavily restricted and least productive fishery sector in the world," according to marine biologist Dr Walter Starck.
"The total Australian wild caught fishery harvest is less than half that of New Zealand and less than a tenth that of Thailand which has a fisheries zone only 5 percent the size of Australia's.
"Seventy percent of the seafood we consume is imported, all of it from regions far more heavily fished than our own."
Dr Walter Starck will be in Brisbane on 23rd September to speak at the inaugural Australian Environment Foundation conference.
Show your support for the new more evidence-based approach to environmental issue advocated by the AEF and register for the conference: http://www.aefweb.info/display/conference2006.html .
--------------------
I'm a director of the AEF.
Posted by jennifer at 08:49 AM | Comments (23) | TrackBack
August 12, 2006
More Tuna Than Agreed?
The Australian Fisheries Management Authority's managing director, Richard McLoughlin, claims Japan has been exceeding its quota of southern bluefin tuna for the last 20 years and not just by a few fish. In an article in today's Sydney Morning Herald entiled 'Revealed: how Japan caught and hid $2b worth of rare tuna' he claims they have been catching 3 times their quota.*
But last time I read-up on the issue, it was apparent Japan never agreed to operate within the quote that it had been allocated. This is what I wrote at this blog on 1st June last year:
"I was concerned to learn that the Southern bluefin tuna fishery is shared with Japan, Indonesia, Taiwan, Korea and New Zealand. The total global catch peaked in 1961 at 81,605 tonnes and was then in general decline for three decades. Since 1990 the total catch has ranged from between 13,231 tonnes (1994) to 19,588 tonnes (1999). Stock assessments suggest that the parental biomass is low but stable and unlikely to recover to target levels unless all countries agree to abide by national allocations as determined by the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. While Australia apparently operates within its allocation, Japan has not agreed to operate within its allocation, and Indonesia does not recognise the Commission."
The Sydney Morning Herald article does not appear to have been properly research and it doesn't look like the Japanese were given an opportunity to tell their side of the story? Furthermore, is it appropriate for Mr McLoughlin to describe the Japanese action as 'fraud' if they never agreed to a quota?
-----------------
*According to the Sydney Morning Herald article: Mr McLoughlin was speaking at an ANU seminar in a speech recorded and posted on the internet and the official findings of an inquiry into the issue were presented at an international meeting in Canberra in July, but kept confidential. I've had a quick look for the speech on the internet but couldn't find it. If you can, please post the url as a comment or send me an email jennifermarohasy@jennifermarohasy.com.
Posted by jennifer at 01:10 PM | Comments (27) | TrackBack
June 25, 2006
No Fishing, Just Feeding The Fish in Darwin
There was some comment earlier today by Luke and Ann about feeding fish following my blog post on lungfish. Anyway, I was fascinated to learn last year that at Doctors Gully, Darwin, Australia, fishing is banned, but feeding is encouraged.
A friend feeds the fish:
My daughter Caroline feeds the fish:
The message on bottom sign in the following picture includes: "It has taken years to tame the fish. Please do not frighten them by grabbing, kicking or picking them up."
Fish that come to be fed include: milkfish, mullet, catfish, bream, barramundi, cod and mangrove jack.
Posted by jennifer at 04:28 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
May 18, 2006
More Oil Equals More Fish
The 3,739 oil Platforms in the Gulf of Mexico make for great fishing according to Humberto Fontova writing in Brookes News. He claims that 85 percent of fishing trips from Louisiana offshore are to the platforms, that there is 50 times more marine life around the platforms than in surrounding areas, and he has some harsh words for armchair greenies:
“Environmentalists” wake up in the middle of the night sweating and whimpering about offshore oil platforms only because they’ve never seen what's under them. This proliferation of marine life around the platforms turned on its head every “expert” opinion of its day. The original plan, mandated by federal environmental “experts” back in the late ‘40s, was to remove the big, ugly, polluting, environmentally hazardous contraptions as soon as they stopped producing. Fine, said the oil companies.About 15 years ago some wells played out off Louisiana and the oil companies tried to comply. Their ears are still ringing from the clamor fishermen put up. Turns out those platforms are going nowhere, and by popular demand of those with a bigger stake in the marine environment than any “environmentalist.”
Every "environmental" superstition against these structures was turned on its head. Marine life had EXPLODED around these huge artificial reefs. Louisiana produces on third of America’s seafood In fact a study by Louisiana State University shows that 85 percent of Louisiana offshore fishing trips involve fishing around these structures and that there’s 50 times more marine life around an oil production platform than in the surrounding Gulf bottoms. Louisiana produces one-third of America's commercial fisheries — because of, not in spite of, these platforms.
All of this and not one major oil spill in half a century — not one. As more assurance, today’s drilling technology compares to the one used only 20 years ago about like the Kitty Hawk compares to a jumbo jet. The one that gave us the Santa Barbara Oil Spill in 1969 compares to today’s like a fossil."
What did happen when Hurricane Katrina struck? Where there no oil spills and accidents then?
Posted by jennifer at 02:00 PM | Comments (13)
November 26, 2005
Let's Import Our Fish
'Getting in Deeper?' was the title of a letter to the Courier Mail on Friday which read:
Now that we are going to have to import more fish because of cutbacks to commercial fishing we can expect an increase in Indonesian illegal fishing in our waters to meet the extra demand for imports.
So cynical!
When I read in the The Australian and The Courier Mail last Thursday that a $220 million Federal Government package will be offered to more than 1,000 commercial fisherman as an inducement to exit the fishing industry, I emailed Dr Walter Stark and asked what he thought about it all. I commented that I thought some fisheries were under real stress including the orange roughy, not to mention southern bluefin tuna.
Walter emailed back:
Orange Roughy are very slow growing, have a restricted habitat range on the continental slope and gather in schoals above the bottom where they are easy to detect and catch. Needless to say they are very vulnerable to overfishing. As to the broader issue of halving the Commonwealth licensed fleet because of overfishing, it's nonsense.Here are some fishery production figures (in metric tonnes) for 2003, the first is aquaculture the second for wild caught.
Australia 38,559 / 219,473
Vietnam 937,502 / 1,666,886
Malaysia 167,160 / 1,287,084
Thailand 772,970 / 2,817,482
Mexico 73,675 / 1,450,000
Bangaladesh 856,956 / 1,141,241
Philippines 459,615 / 2,169,164
Burma 257,083 / 1,349,169
U.S.A. 544,329 / 4,938,956The figures speak for themselves, especially in view of our much larger and less impacted coastline and marine environment.
Australia has the world's third largest Exclusive Economic Zone, behind the United States and France, but ahead of Russia, with the total area actually exceeding that of its land territory. France is so large because of its overseas departments.
In terms of EEZ area Australian fisheries harvest rate is about 1/20 that of the U.S. Australia 's continental EEZ area comes to 6,048,681 Km2 and the island territories bring the total to 8,148,250 Km2. Disregarding the latter the wild caught harvest comes to just under 40 Kg/ Km2 per year or 0.4 Kg/Ha.
I don't think overfishing is much of a threat. The strong impression I received from some pretty impassioned fishermen at the Seafood Directions conference at Sydney in September was that poor catches are not the difficulty. The real problem causing the widespread malise in fisheries is government imposed restrictions, demands and charges.
Tom Marland has commented:
As a result [of the restrictions] retailers will be forced to import more seafood under the Howard Government plan to replenish Australia's vulnerable fish stocks.Fisheries Minister Ian Macdonald commented yesterday that "It is a fact well accepted by the industry that there are too many boats chasing too few fish in many of our fisheries."
Under the proposed plan The Australian Fisheries Management Authority will reduce the allowed catch in 17 key fisheries in southern, eastern and northern waters from next year, and enforce more sustainable fishing practices.
Australian Conservation Foundation marine campaign co-ordinator Chris Smyth said the package was long overdue, given that the number of over fished species had risen from three to 17 since the Howard Government came to power in 1996.
While the fish caught in Australian waters will be reduced, especially in the 'exploited and depleted' Great Barrier Reef region it does not make any mention about a decrease in consumer demand for seafood in Australia.
In a recent article written by Walter Stark titled Threats to the Great Barrier Reef it was stated that in regards to the over fishing of the GBR the evidence does not quite stack up.
For instance the GBR currently has a harvest rate of 17kg/km2 compared to other pacific reefs which average 7,700 kg/km2. This may be put down to the fact that the GBR covers a large area. However, currently only 30% of the reef is available to commercial fishing operators which corresponds to 60kg/km2.
So while the bans on commercial fishing will be implemented to 'rejuvenate' a comparably under utilised resource in Australian water other reef environments in the Pacific, South East Asia and the Caribbean will be placed under increased pressure from the increased demand from Australian imports.
This position smacks of out of sight out of mind and is a direct 'exportation' of Australian environmental responsibility. While Australians will sit down to a smorgasbord over over-priced, over seas imported seafood this Christmas they can sleep well in the knowledge that the GBR and other Australian marine resources are safe to the detriment of over-exploited and environmentally unsustainable international fishing zones.
..........
Thanks to Tom Marland and Walter Stark for most of the information for this post.
Posted by jennifer at 06:20 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
October 24, 2005
Food Fashion & Fisheries
There is much 'food for thought' in the following piece, from ABC Online:
Marine historians picking through 200,000 US restaurant menus since the 1850s, schooner logs and archaeological sites are finding that capricious human tastes have let some species thrive while other stocks have been over-fished for centuries.
Americans scorned lobster until the 1880s while the ancient Romans loved fish so much that their catches depleted the Mediterranean, according to the study that may give clues about how to restore damaged world fish stocks.
"We can only model the future of the oceans based on past evidence," said Poul Holm, a Danish environmental researcher who is leading a team of about 80 experts in an international project on the History of Marine Animal Populations.
US restaurant menu prices back 150 years, for instance, chart sometimes inexplicable swings in tastes and prices of seafood including swordfish, lobster, abalone, oysters, halibut, haddock and sole.
"Back in the 1860s no one wanted to eat lobster," said Glenn Jones, a researcher at Texas A&M University at Galveston, who leads the menu project.
Giant lobsters weighing nine kilograms were common in New England.
Read more here ....
Posted by jennifer at 02:01 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack
September 21, 2005
Minister Likes His Tuna
The Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell has decided not to include the southern bluefin tuna on the threatened species list, according to the news at ABC Online.
The report states that the Minister made the decision on the basis it would not be good for tuna to be listed as threatened despite a recommendation by the Government's scientific committee to make tuna fishing illegal and that only around 3 per cent of the stocks that existed in 1960 remain. (I would like to see this data - my understanding was that while stocks are low they are not this low.)
Democrats' environment spokesperson, Senator Andrew Bartlett,has commented, "To just say that it will be detrimental to the survival of the species listed, I think is extraordinary and is a contempt of the law as it stands".
What I don't get is how the Great Barrier Reef coral trout fishery that was sustainable gets more and more restrictions placed on it, while the southern tuna fishery which is apparently under pressure is left to operate.
In the case of tuna the Minister has stated, "The future of the industry for communities like Port Lincoln are crucial". What about coastal Queensland fishing communities?
I have previously commented that southern bluefin tuna (Thunnus maccoyii) is classified as overfished by AFFA. The fishery is shared with Japan, Indonesia, Taiwan, Korea and New Zealand.
The total global catch peaked in 1961 at 81,605 tonnes and was then in general decline for three decades. Since 1990 the total catch has ranged from between 13,231 tonnes (1994) to 19,588 tonnes (1999). Stock assessments suggest that the parental biomass is low but stable and unlikely to recover to target levels unless all countries agree to abide by national allocations as determined by the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. Australia operates within its allocation, Japan has not agreed to operate within its allocation, and Indonesia does not recognise the Commission.
Maybe the solution is for the Australian government to put pressure on Indonesia and Japan. So why doesn't Minister Campbell put some efforts in here - rather than jumping up and down over whaling when Minke whales populations (the species the Japanese and Noreweigans want to harvest) are not under threat.
In summary, as I see it, coral trout and minke whales can be sustainably harvested but the Minister opposes whaling and is putting coral trout fishers out of business. The Minister acknowledges problems with the southern bluefin tuna fishery but will do nothing.
Posted by jennifer at 09:11 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
September 02, 2005
Energy for Aquaculture (Part 1)
I have always been interested in the relative efficiencies of different food production sytems.
I wrote and posted the piece on fishing last night (Let them eat fish)while trying to come to terms with how much money the Australian government is spending to close down a perfectly sustainable fishery - all in response to environmental campaigning driven by a belief we should not fish Great Barrier Reef waters.
The Australian aquaculture industry's share of the $2.2 billion Australian commercial fishery has been steadily increasing and now represents around 34 per cent,
http://www.abareconomics.com/research/fisheries/fisheries.html .
I guess the trend is to close down 'wild fisheries' and eat more from 'aquaculture'. But is this efficient?
I have been shown around aquaculture facilities and they seem really energy intense. We are taking the pressure off wild populations in building these facilities I am told.
But where is the balance between sustainably harvesting wild populations and energy intense aquaculture?
Posted by jennifer at 09:51 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
September 01, 2005
Let Them Eat Fish
On 4th July last year the area zoned 'Green', and thus off-limits to commercial and recreational fishers in Great Barrier Reef (GBR) water, was increased from 4.5 per cent to 33.3 per cent of the total GBR area. This was the culmination of a hard fought campaign spearheaded by World Wildlife Fund (WWF).
There had been limits on the number of commercial licenses and numbers of fish that could be caught - but this 33.3 per cent represented a massive increase in the actual area off-limits to fishers.
The Federal Government had promised compensation to assist fishermen, related businesses and communities affected by the implementation of the new zoning.
Just yesterday, commercial fishermen said the compensation bill resulting from closures on the Great Barrier Reef could top $100 million. According to ABC Online:
The Federal Government has announced it has already spent more than $40 million buying out fishing licences and supporting businesses affected by the fishing bans.The Commonwealth says 120 applications have been processed so far and it believes there could be 300 more by the end of the year.
Greg Radley from the Queensland Seafood Industry Association says the total compensation bill will be expensive.
"I would assume that it was somewhere between $60 and $70 million at this stage," he said.
Alexandra de Blas (ABCRadio National Earthbeat) report in January 2003 that:
Alexandra de Blas: So it's worth about $50 million in Australia now; what fish do we supply, and to where?Geoff Muldoon: Since the advent of the trade in 1993, the export of live reef fish from Australia has comprised almost entirely of coral trout. Somewhere between 90% and 95% of all fish that are exported live are coral trout. The trade has increased from around about 100 tonnes per year to about 1200 tonnes per year of coral trout. We've seen basically a fishery that was primarily selling frozen fish shift almost entirely to supplying live reef fish. The overall catch of coral trout on the Great Barrier Reef hasn't actually increased very much at all, in fact it's remained relatively stable since about the mid '90s.
Alexandra de Blas: How do our practices here in Australia compare with the practices in Asia and the Pacific?
Geoff Muldoon: Our practices compare very well. Within Australia, fishermen are only permitted to remove coral trout by hook and line techniques, that is, a hook on a handline will be baited with a pilchard, hung over the side of the vessel and the fish will be brought up by the fisherman, kept alive in tanks on the boats, which contrasts very strongly with the cyanide and dynamite fishing and gill net fishing and trap fishing approaches adopted in sort of less developed countries of the world.
Alexandra de Blas: Jeffrey Muldoon, from the International Marine Life Alliance. His organisation and others, are working to ensure that Australia's standards are adopted around the world.
Australia exports all its fish by air, which reduces mortalities to 2%, a huge reduction on the 50% losses recorded on the transport boats used in Asia.
Australia has traditionally imported relatively large volumes of low value fish and exported small volumes of high value fisheries products, see http://www.abareconomics.com/outlook/PDF/abare_seafood.pdf .
Coral trout are the most heavily line fished species on Australia's GBR. The annual yield (total line fishery) for the entire GBR (before the increase in Green zone area) had been calculated at 17 kg/km2 by Walter Starck, see http://ipa.org.au/files/IPABackgrounder17-1.pdf, pg 4.
This is very low relative to other Pacific Reefs which average 7,700 kgs/km2 with a sustainable yield calculated at 10,000 kg/km2, see comparison and http://ipa.org.au/files/IPABackgrounder17-1.pdf, pg 5.
I tend to think that government is paying off and retiring fishers who could be out catching fish.
Posted by jennifer at 11:23 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
August 11, 2005
On Jared Diamond and Environmental Law
I had mentioned that I was reviewing Chapter 13 of Jared Diamond's not so new book 'Collapse'.
There have been some offline requests for copies of the review which has now been published by British Journal Energy and Environment. The chapter can be downloaded from the IPA website at,
http://www.ipa.org.au/publications/publisting_detail.asp?pubid=443 .
I recently also completed a paper for the AFFA inquiry to 'secure a profitable and sustainable agriculture and food sector in Australia'. This long submission includes some detailed recommendations including the need to overhaul environmental regulation and legislation in Australia. It can be downloaded here,
http://www.agfoodgroup.gov.au/publications/Institute%20of%20Public%20Affairs.pdf .
Posted by jennifer at 04:13 PM | Comments (5)
April 28, 2005
Counting Coral Trout
It was the WWF Save the Reef Campaign that really developed my interest in environmental campaigns and through my public criticism of the same I have meet some wonderful characters.
Dr Walter Stark grew up in the Florida Keys and was awarded his PhD at the University of Miami the year after I was born - in 1964.
Walter now lives in Townsville and has a tremendous general knowledge of the world's coral reefs.
Just today his review article titled 'Threats to the Great Barrier Reef' was published by the IPA. It is an interesting read and includes information on everything from the population dynamics of crown-of-thorn starfish to global warming.
I found the fisheries information particularly interesting.
There exists 20 years of data on coral trout numbers estimated from surveys where divers count individual fish. Not a bad job.
Walter contends that arguing "that the GBR is overfished at an annual harvest of 17 kg/km2, when over a broad range of other Pacific reef areas an average of 7,700 kg/km2 is sustainable, is beyond ridiculous."
If you have a query and post a comment below, Walter may post a reply.
If you don't have time now to read the detailed review, On Line Opinion has published a shorter piece which is also a good read.
Posted by jennifer at 10:46 AM | Comments (23)