Source: The Leader
Fisheries scientist, Dr. Matt Ives, a spokesman for staff at the Cronulla Fisheries Research Center, has issued a detailed response to statements made in Parliament by Primary Industries Minister Katrina Hodgkinson.
Dr. Ives said the minister’s comments ‘‘included a number of inaccurate statements designed to support this rash decision to close the best research institute in the State.’’
Minister: Port Stephens fisheries research centre is so advanced that they have bred the endangered southern blue fin tuna up to adolescent stage, which is an incredible feat.
Dr. Ives: This statement is inaccurate and misleading. The southern bluefin tuna used in this experiment were held in marine conditions in South Australia — the fertilized eggs were shipped to Port Stephens hopefully to be on-gown in the hatchery there, but in the first year of the experiment all the eggs died. At the second attempt the next year some eggs survived into larvae and one fish survived for approximately 50 days under controlled hatchery conditions. It is misleading to say that this ‘‘incredible feat’’ involved growing southern bluefin tuna to the ‘‘adolescent’’ stage (which would involve survival of large numbers of fish for many years).
Minister: The relocation will not only be a good thing for fisheries management and local communities.
Dr. Ives: There is no evidence to support the conclusion that the relocation will be a ‘‘good thing for fisheries management’’ in NSW. The loss of a huge proportion (possibly the majority) of experienced research and management staff in this specialised field cannot be seen as ‘‘a good thing’’ for the future management of NSW commercial and recreational fisheries. This loss cannot possibly be covered by the remaining staff or by employment of ‘‘new’’ inexperienced staff, and the Minister (who is charged with sustainably managing the state’s fishery resources on behalf of the owners of the resources, the public of NSW) does not seem to understand how big a problem this might be. The relocation will be a DISASTER for the future of fisheries management in NSW.
Minister: Members can be assured that supposed concerns about water quality at that site are totally unfounded.
Dr. Ives: That the Minister can so easily dismiss one of the major concerns expressed by scientists both within and outside the Department is a worry. Does she have access to robust scientific advice to support this statement, and if so why doesn’t she quote it? The quality of the estuarine water available at the Port Stephens site is NOT suitable for holding marine fish, or for doing many kinds of controlled experiments involving marine fish — it is good for aquaculture research, which is why the station is situated where it is. Note that even the ‘‘fresh’’ water for use in the bathrooms, kitchens and laboratories at the Port Stephens site is NON-POTABLE. Staff have to drink bottled water.
Minister: There would be no better marine facilities with the scope and flexibility for research in aquaculture production anywhere in NSW or Australia than Port Stephens.
Dr. Ives: The use of the term ‘‘marine’’ here displays the Minister’s lack of knowledge about her portfolio. Yes, the facility at Port Stephens is an excellent facility for aquaculture research (primarily oysters) due to its ESTUARINE location. For MARINE research the Cronulla facility has far better facilities than Port Stephens and this is acknowledged by the wide range of scientists from outside the department who have criticized the proposed move to Port Stephens. The quality of the water available at Cronulla for wild fisheries research is second to none. Other research facilities purchase water from our site because it is of such high quality. At Port Stephens, such high quality water has to be trucked in daily. They truck in thousands of liters of high quality water a day. At Cronulla we produce millions of liters every day.
Minister: All the technology, equipment and research undertaken at Cronulla is completely transferable and will travel to the new locations as required.
Dr. Ives: This sweeping statement is seriously incorrect. For example, it is obviously impossible to ship a 20 meter long in-ground marine aquarium pool from Cronulla to Port Stephens. Yes, a lot of the office-based equipment could be transferred to Port Stephens or other sites, but there will need to be new buildings and laboratories constructed (or leased) to house it - at enormous cost. (In a time of reduced budgets, why unnecessarily waste such a large amount of precious funds?) The amount of computing and laboratory equipment to shift is not insignificant and it will not fit into the existing infrastructure at Port Stephens or any of the other sites. A lot of the research projects operate in the Sydney area — these cannot be simply ‘‘transferred’’ to the new locations.