Fish farm maps on the nose
Gerard Castles claims the Tasmanian government has drawn up secret maps for the statewide expansion of aquaculture
THERE is a cover up happening at the highest level of the Tasmanian government about its plans for the salmon industry. On the one hand we have the government’s so-called Ten-Year Plan, which seeks to draw the teeth of the crisis besetting the salmon industry by implying there will be no growth in the salmon industry—or none that will concern Tasmanians—and making almost identical promises of “independent regulation” as it made after the Macquarie Harbour disaster. And Tasmanians know what resulted: a blank cheque for the salmon industry to do whatever it wanted no matter the science or community anger.
In fact there is no plan other than a plan to develop a plan over the next year— a classic piece of Yes Minister nonsense.
On the other hand are the notorious, so called, “secret” maps that suggest the government’s intention is to open the northern coastline, part of the south-west, and the East Coast up to Schouten Island to the salmon farms.
When they were released at an overflowing public meeting at Cygnet on September 18 —drawing statewide publicity— the government denied there were any secret maps.
Yet two days and furious government denials later, on September 20, Associate Professor Jeff Ross, a senior scientist at the Institute of Marine and Antarctic Science, admitted in an Independent Scientists Forum that the maps do exist.
Then on September 28 in an update to its Ten-Year Plan quietly posted on a DPIPWE website, the government admitted there was a Marine Spatial Planning Committee tasked with identifying “potential sustainable growth areas for new offshore finfish marine farms”.
The maps Neighbours of Fish Farming (NOFF) produced at the public meeting were based on government maps (of which I have copies) prepared by IMAS for the Marine Farming Spatial Planning Project which exists under DPIPWE — Guy Barnett’s department.
Each map has a legend titled “Finfish Aquaculture Suitability Score” grading Tasmanian coastline from 0 to greater than 7 on its suitability for salmon farming including an assessment of whether an area was to experience “marine user conflicts”.
NOFF’s maps grouped the DPIPWE legend into three categories for clarity:
0-5 was termed No Grow and shown as blue banding,
5-6 was termed Unlikely and shown as yellow banding,
6 to >7 was termed Grow and shown as red banding on the NOFF maps.
Areas shown as white were termed “Unknown” as it is not clear from the DPIPWE maps what their status is.
I am prepared to sign a statutory declaration that the NOFF maps are exact copies of government produced maps. If there are no maps, is Minister Barnett willing to stand by his denials with a sworn affidavit?
Minister Barnett and the government are misleading Tasmanians and not being truthful about their intentions or those of the salmon industry.
Minister Barnett needs to clarify these matters in a statement to parliament in which he answers the questions below truthfully.
Did Finfish Marine Farming Spatial Planning Project produce maps showing Finfish Aquaculture Suitability?
Has the Premier and the Premier’s chief of staff seen these maps?
Were maps produced for the committee by IMAS scoring Tasmania’s entire coastline on a “Finfish Aquaculture Suitability” rating from 0 to >7 using “current technology” and “future technology” with detailed breakout maps for Southeast, Northwest and Northeast?
If the Minister is willing to answer in Parliament “no” to all of the questions above, then he and his government can stand by their claims these maps do not exist. If he answers any other way, if he dissembles, or uses weasel words, he could be guilty of misleading parliament and the public.
The Minister further needs to answer these questions:
Does the committee’s terms of reference state “DPIPWE will undertake an exercise to reevaluate the existing map of proposed ‘grow’ and ‘no grow’ zones to investigate potential growth opportunities for offshore finfish marine farming.”?
If the East Coast is excluded from the Marine Spatial Planning Committee’s deliberations as DPIPWE claim on their website, why is
the East Coast considered for salmon farming on the maps?
These maps and the questions they raise go to the heart of the problem of the salmon industry’s chokehold on Tasmanian government. They raise serious issues about a government that gives every appearance of lying to Tasmanians about its intentions and the intentions of an unpopular industry.
They raise the prospect of salmon farms and their immense damage now being visited on Tasmanians almost everywhere where there are coastal homes and shacks and popular waterways.
They suggest that in their curious service to the salmon industry, the Gutwein government is willing to do anything it can to hide this toxic truth from the Tasmanian people.
The Minister must come clean to restore confidence in the salmon industry and to demonstrate that the government is acting in good faith as the government of the people and not the servant of an industry that gives every impression of having gone rogue and lost the confidence of the Tasmanian people.
Killora Community Association spokesman Gerard Castles is a communications consultant with 30 years’ experience.