Plenty of fish should be left in sea: submission

Australia Institute

The Australia Institute Tasmania has called for stronger measures to address depleted fish stocks and prevent future overfishing in a detailed submission on the Tasmanian Government's Draft Harvest Strategy for Wild Fisheries.

The recommendation of ensuring fish levels stay at 48% of unfished biomass is in line with CSIRO recommendations that guide Commonwealth fisheries strategies.

Other recommendations and key points:

  • Tasmania requires not just a harvest strategy policy, but an integrated approach to managing the state's waters and coastal environments.
  • Fisheries management is made more difficult because the Tasmanian Government has not published a State of the Environment Report for 14 years, breaking its statutory requirement.
  • Tasmania's main marine law is currently under review, but the draft Harvest Strategy does not mention the review of the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995.

"Tasmania is a long way behind other states on managing our oceans," said Eloise Carr, Director of The Australia Institute Tasmania.

"The current process is a step in the right direction, but there are still gaping holes in Tasmania's fisheries management.

"For example, it is common practice to have a target for how many fish should be left in the sea, set as a percentage of unfished levels. The current proposal does this but sets the level too low.

"Queensland provides such a reference point for all fisheries, with a goal of 60% by 2027.

"The CSIRO has found a stock biomass target set at 48% of original/unfished biomass is generally appropriate across a range of fisheries. This has been guiding all Commonwealth fisheries since 2007.

"Tasmania cannot afford to get snagged without proper targets and ambitious timelines for achieving them."

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.