|
Tasmanian Fisheries 1880-1990
The following essay written in 1994 summarizes the linked files that cover nine periods up to 1990.
Island communities
look outward to the sea with a mixture of awe and hope. The cause of their
isolation also offers protection and the prospect of wealth. Tasmanians accept
without conscious thought that the sea is "full of fish". Successful
catches by neighbours and friends on weekend or holidays, the renowned profitability
of abalone diving combined with regular media stories on crayfish and scallop
successes reinforce this belief. Visits by large foreign fishing vessels sustain
another tenet that is as old as white settlement - our waters are still to
yield new riches. Faith in fisheries development as the answer to economic
growth in Tasmania has been a recurrent theme in the culture of the state.
The Derwent estuary and adjacent waters provided a valuable supplement to
the diet of the first settlers. A large catch of jack mackerel in Sullivans
Cove helped to save the pioneers when Collins moved the camp from Risdon Cove.
Crayfish, "plentiful and tasty", oysters, trumpeter and cod were
readily available in Hobartown in the first quarter of the last century as
evidenced in Knopwood and Boyes diaries etc. Whaling and sealing constituted
the first important industry for Van Diemans Land. Initially the bays and
coastal waters including Bass Strait produced large quantities of the fur
seal and several species of whales. Later the southern ocean and Macquarie
Island provided the product and Hobart became a major distant water fishing
port. In 1837 fisheries contributed £135,000 to the economy - mostly
from whaling when the colony had a population between a half and two thirds
that of NSW. The reminders of this history can be seen in the architecture
around Sullivans Cove particularly Salamanca Place and Battery Point. The
economic contributions made by these fisheries are more difficult to see today
but was crucial to the viability of the colony. Less well known is the contribution
of the oyster industry to the colonial economy. The local (native or mud)
oyster Ostrea angasi was found in abundance in places such as Pipe Clay Lagoon,
Cloudy Bay, Ralphs Bay, Great Oyster Bay and Port Esperance. The fame of this
shellfish soon spread to Sydney and by the 1860's 20 million oysters worth
£90,000 were produced in that year, most being exported and this was
the colony's most valuable primary industry. Unregulated harvesting prompted
legislative action in 1853 - "The Act for the improvement and Regulation
of the Oyster fisheries in Van Diemans Land". But these attempts failed
resulting in the loss of a valuable industry and calls to investigate oyster
culture (Calder Oyster Culture 1868).
The substantial inland waterways of Van Dieman's Land were found to contain
limited fish of table quality. Nevertheless fishing in rivers and lakes was
sufficiently intensive to require legislation to protect native fish (especially
mullet and "herring") within 8 years of the establishment of responsible
government. An Act for the Preservation of Fish in the Rivers of This Colony
became law in 1859. Almost twenty years earlier some of leading citizens formed
a group () that was to become the Royal Society of Tasmania and initiated
the first of a long series of discussions on fisheries development projects.
Memories of Scottish and Irish salmon prompted a scheme to acclimatise the
species 12,000 miles and a hemisphere away from its natural environment. The
objective was to produce a commercial fishery and a source of food. Whilst
the hoped for "salmon run" failed to eventuate brown trout, (a contemporary
introduction), flourished. Although more than a century was to elapse before
these introduced fish were legally sold for profit, the direct descendant
of the group that began the development became one of the world's longest
serving and successful guardians of recreational fishing. The story of this
project was best recorded by Morton Allport and P.S.Seager (1889) leading
contemporary figures and Nicholls (1875), and by later authors such as Lynch
(1970).
By 1880 a pattern that was to be regularly repeated for a century was already
in evidence -
| The productivity of the adjacent sea combined with individual initiative to satisfy a market opportunity. This "natural" fishing industry provided wealth, employment and stimulated general economic development. But individuals or pressure groups urge government intervention and support to produce "something better". A government decision to invest in fisheries is accompanied by a new administrative structure. |
Thus for
example although whales (particularly whale oil), fur seals and oysters were
the basis of important industries and capable of sustained productivity if
prudently and carefully managed. (Whaling contributed £2.25 million
to the Tasmanian economy between 1803 and 1870.) Nevertheless scarce resources
of skill and money, and government interest were applied to acclimatize salmon,
an "artificial" developmental project of doubtful commercial potential.
[Although the best available scientific skills were used together with extreme
care and considerable money we now know that to establish a self-sustaining
salmon run in the Southern Hemisphere is very difficult. Ironically the latest
intervention by the Tasmanian Government in fisheries development is to create
a commercial salmon industry using the same species but by containing them
in cages in farms rather than allowing the fish to run free. In 1987 the first
salmon grown in Tasmanian waters were sold - 115 years after the first live
specimens arrived in Hobart.]
Unmanaged fisheries rapidly decline and by 1882 a Royal Commission inquiring
into Tasmanian Fisheries found major neglect had lead to the destruction of
two major industries. The evidence collected described in considerable detail
fishing in the colony to that time. R.H.Johnston, one of the Commissioners,
produced a comprehensive "Catalogue of Tasmanian Fishes " including
information on their biology and behaviour. The Commission recommended placing
the management of fisheries under professional guidance, that research commence
and the oyster fishery be revived. Australian fisheries were to benefit immeasurably
from the consequential appointment of William Saville-Kent
as Chief Inspector and Superintendent of Fisheries in 1884. By 1888 he had
introduced new fishing techniques and established a substantial research facility
at Battery Point in Hobart where he maintained and cultured a range of species
including oysters, grayling, real trumpeter as well as trout. He proposed
to export cultured trumpeter to restock the waters off the coast of Devon
and to import European species such as the true lobster. The story of his
appointment, innovations, and resignation after conflict with the Salmon Commissioners
is a fascinating episode in public administration. After the departure of
Saville-Kent to take up fisheries positions in Victoria, Queensland and Western
Australia the government again ignored fisheries management and development
leaving it to an unfunded part-time board of Commissioners.
In 1906 the new Commonwealth Government
decided to seek the riches of fisheries development by acquiring a research
trawler, paying a bounty on locally canned fish and appointing a Commonwealth
Director of Fisheries. A year later they the held the first national Fisheries
Conference and to obtain broad support for their policy. This Conference lead
to the appointment of H.V.Dannevig as Director and the purchase of the research
vessel Endeavour. Both were lost in December 1914 off the west coast of Tasmania
whilst engaged in a program of surveying potential trawling grounds. The vessel
did valuable work and stimulated the development of the NSW fishing industry
but the taste was enough to satisfy the Commonwealth appetite for fisheries
development for forty years.
Dissatisfaction by some fishermen with the policies of the Fisheries Commissioners
particularly related to the use of crayfish pots prompted the Tasmanian House
of Assembly to establish a Select Committee in 1913 under the chairmanship
of J A Lyons to investigate "Deep Sea Fisheries".
The Report -
| "Strongly recommended that a new government department be established ... it cannot be expected that the body of gentlemen who are mostly anglers that in no way connected with fishing can successfully control the fisheries of the State". |
Three years later T
T Flynn, the first Professor of Biology at the University of Tasmania
was appointed Royal Commissioner to examine "Tasmanian Fisheries"
and he strongly supported the Lyons Report. Premier Braddon had withdrawn
financial support in 1894 and the Government of Tasmania provided no funds
for fisheries for more than 35 years. The Commissioners - the lineal successors
to the promoters of salmon acclimatisation, operated as best they could with
whatever funds could be extracted from reluctant commercial fishermen. Financial
difficulties, in part due to the war, prolonged the life of the Commissioners
until further agitation for change between 1920 and 1925 and the death of
P S Seager lead to a restructuring in 1925. A new Fisheries Act established
the Sea Fisheries Board with a mandate to both manage and initiate development.
A series of major private ventures began in 1911 with a proposal initiated
by the Tasmanian Agent-General in London with the support of Henry Jones but
failed to raise sufficient finance. The Tasmanian Fisheries Development Co
Pty Ltd the brainchild of TT Flynn and Robert Nettlefold was promoted in 1924
and backed by the State Development Board. The Board commissioned a feasibility
study by Dr G.F.Read who recommended St Helens as the centre of the scheme.
Lyons vigorously supported the project and introduced the Fisheries Encouragement
Bill in 1925 to grant it concessions and protection in the northeast. Seventeen
years later the government backed another major private development project
- International Products Pty Ltd. This project was investigated and supported
by a Select C'tee of both Houses of the Parliament and lead to The Fisheries
Industries Establishment Bill providing for government share-holding in the
company. Both these were schemes to transplant an integrated British fishing
industry -fishermen, boats and processing factories to Tasmania.
 |
 |
|
An
A class fishing boat of the 1920s
|
The
smaller B Class boat
|
A second national conference in 1927 largely repeated the recommendations
of 20 years earlier and established a pattern that continues to the present.
The Tariff Board and the Migration Commission showed some interest in fishing
but had little impact in Tasmania. Despite the efforts of Flynn this wave
achieved little except to permanently break the grip of anglers from the administration
of sea fisheries. The extremely difficult economic conditions were largely
to blame however Flynn was excluded from membership of the Board because of
his involvement with Tasmanian Fisheries Development CO Pty LTD due to the
activities of some Fisheries Commissioners referred to in the Royal Commission.
This may have left the Board short of the vigorous committed leadership required
to fully grasp the opportunities available in 1925. This wave died with the
departure of Flynn to take up the Chair of Biology at Belfast University.
In 1930 the Trustees of the Ralston Bequest, that financed his position at
the University of Tasmania,"for some reason" asked him "to
discontinue work on fisheries". After 1931 the income from the bequest
could only afford £400 pa forcing Flynn to seek a position elsewhere
when the University could not or would not meet the balance of the professorial
salary.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
top - The Fisheries Board's patrol vessel Allara with Tom Challenger at the wheel. mid - Traditional unloading of the catch lower - Greg Casimaty's Nelson. The first danish seiner. |
Top - Barracouta boat in Victoria Dock mid - New marketing, a fish punt under construction. lower - |
The Labour Government in 1934 initiated a further episode of government backed
development based on a close relationship with the newly formed CSIR. Premier
A.G.Ogilvie and Fisheries Ministers E.J.Ogilvie and T.G.D'Alton actively promoted
commercial fishing. A major objective was to utilize the demersal resources
discovered by the Endeavour and the pelagic stocks of tuna, sardines
and jack mackerel that were known to exist of the east coast. The 1882 Royal
Commission referred to them as (off) " our coasts at certain seasons
in great numbers, and could be captured if there was inducement to do so;
as it is some of these species come and go unmolested and almost unheeded".
The potential of these pelagic fish especially tuna for canning attracted
H Jones & CO and new companies backed by government funds. A substantial
revision of the Act in 1935 included a fishermen's representative on the Board
and restructured the administration of inland fisheries. Despite the restructuring
the Minister was under constant attack from some sections of the trout fishing
community seeking a fully funded fisheries department to include freshwater
fisheries.
A conference and Board of Enquiry in 1941 indicated the Government's frustration
with continued criticism of the way fish were marketed and the inability of
the Sea Fisheries Board to promote development. Another complete revision
of the Act in 1941 placed fisheries directly under ministerial control and
administered by the Department of Agriculture. Wartime demands for food (particularly
in canned form) and vitamin A and post war reconstruction initiatives stimulated
further initiatives.
| - CSIR promoted another national conference in October 1941 that recommended a Commonwealth Council for Fisheries Development and continued to work on pelagic fish around Tasmania. |
| - The state government built a modern trawler to stimulate demersal fisheries. |
| - CSIR imported the Pacific oyster from Japan to restock oyster beds and stimulate oyster farming. |
| - The state government backed the establishment of fisherman's cooperatives. |
| - Several private schemes to promote both crayfish and shark fishing were floated. |
After the term of D'Alton as Minister government interest waned and the Fisheries
Division was neglected by the Department of Agriculture during the 1950's.
Industry agitation climaxed in 1962 and a Select Committee the next year lead
to a revitalization of the Division and a new development wave. Over the next
decade a research section was established, a research vessel and laboratory
built and a Development Trust Account established. Aquaculture research began
and new management techniques were introduced. Concessional finance through
the Agricultural Bank allowed promising fishermen to buy new vessels. The
industry responded with substantial investment in crayfishing scalloping and
shark fishing for new boats, equipment and techniques allowing export markets
to be exploited. An entirely new fishery, based on the large marine snail,
abalone, quickly grew to become the industry's most valuable component. Oyster
farming resumed utilizing the Pacific oyster that had become established in
a number of estuaries particularly the Tamar. The economic conditions that
promoted the export based shellfisheries tended to depress demand for local
finfish, as imported prepackaged fillets were more convenient cheaper and
often of better quality. the pelagic stocks remained unfished.
This wave is unique in that it was not accompanied by an administrative restructure.
However when D F Hobbs the Inland Fisheries Commissioner died he was replaced
by D D Lynch formerly Deputy Director of Fish and Wildlife in Victoria: his
background in marine fisheries was interpreted by trout fishermen as the precursor
to an amalgamation of sea an inland fisheries. Hobbs and others had proposed
such a move that was logical an attractive to sectors of the government. The
vigorous opposition of anglers who feared the loss of the autonomy enjoyed
for over a century persuaded the government that the administrative efficiency
of the move did not outweigh the electoral risk. (A similar fate befell the
same proposal from a report from a Cartland task force and a flirtation by
Julian Amos during his term as Minister for Sea Fisheries in 1983). Thus in
1964, instead of an amalgamated fisheries department, the Minister for Fisheries
A C Atkins appointed a senior administrative officer of his department R H
Scott to head the Sea Fisheries Division. Roy Scott had been the Deputy Controller
of Fisheries for Tasmania during World War II when the Department of War Organisation
of Industry took national control of fishing inputs such as crews, gear and
fuel and prices were regulated. With the support of first, F W Hicks and later
A R Mead as Director of Agriculture, Scott set out to modernize fisheries
administration.
During this period the Commonwealth effort in fisheries which had been strong
lost direction and State Fisheries Departments in NSW, WA and Tasmania expanded
to take over much of the research and development work. CSIRO, until then
practically the sole fisheries research organization, moved towards oceanography
and closed its fisheries laboratory in Hobart that had operated since the
late 1930s. This expansion was in part due to the vacuum created by changes
in CSIRO and a general expansion of the public service but also to funds collected
by licence fee from the newly affluent export fisheries. Later South Australia
and recently Queensland and Northern Territory fishery departments have played
a much more important role in management, research and development. Despite
efforts by K R Allen and R Harden-Jones when in charge of the Fisheries Division,
CSIRO was unable to regain their previously pre-eminent position and have
recently been faced with the creation of a Bureau of Resources Research to
service the fisheries research demands of the Australian Fisheries Service.
Finally in 1972 jack mackerel were landed in quantity for the first time for
conversion to fishmeal by an integrated company Fish Protein Concentrate Pty
Ltd. The operation was based at Triabunna and financed jointly by interstate
funds supplemented by the newly formed Australian Industry Development Corporation
and infrastructure supplied by the state government through its Industrial
Development agency. Unfortunately the project failed after two years when
the processing technique proved to be unworkable. The fishery was revived
a decade later with different technology but the resource proved to be volatile.
(See for details)
Despite the substantial real growth in fisheries between 1965 and 1975 government
sought further development as the general economy began to decline. A visit
to Eire by a member of the government prompted the view that the superficial
similarity between the marine ecology of Irish coastal waters and the physical
geography of both islands justified the adoption of the Irish Fisheries Development
plan in Tasmania. Although L A Costello rejected the proposal as Minister
for Fisheries, after his resignation in May 1975 his successor Eric Barnard
accepted it and invited the Chairman of the Irish Sea Fisheries Board (BIM)
to report on ways to stimulate fisheries development in Tasmania. O'Kelly
spent less than a month in Tasmania but impressed Premier Nielsen who saw
the Irish model being applied throughout the primary industries and wanted
O'Kelly to direct it. The O'Kelly report concluded that the position of the
Fisheries Division within the Department of Agriculture and precluded Government
playing an active role in fisheries development due to the Department's conservative
attitude and without that intervention development would not occur. To overcome
the problem an autonomous but totally government funded Tasmanian Fisheries
Development Authority (TFDA) should be established as "a commercially
oriented organisation". The report was accepted and the concept implemented
by another major amendment to the Fisheries Act; O'Kelly was appointed Chairman
and chief executive.
Despite the superficial similarities a little more detailed comparison would
have revealed substantial and, for the TFDA, fatal differences existed between
Ireland and Tasmania. Tasmanian coastal waters did not contain large resources
of untapped "table fish" and Tasmania was certainly not adjacent
to the huge European market and certainly not a member of the EEC. Unlike
the situation in Eire Tasmanian fishermen had just experienced almost 20 years
of major capital investment (much of which was subsidised by the public purse),
substantial growth, record incomes and were technologically advanced, prosperous
and in a mood to protect their newly won gains. To achieve the development
objectives the TFDA transferred it's resources from the management of established
fisheries to finding new fish stocks, demonstrating new techniques, marketing
minor species and aquaculture. The government placed much trust in O'Kelly's
personal ability to achieve the desired goals and when he resigned after a
few months for family reasons difficulties began.
The 8-year life of the TFDA demonstrated that the bureaucratic restraint of
the Department of Agriculture was not the crucial factor inhibiting development
and repeated the lesson that governments (and their agencies) have great difficulty
in forcing the pace of fisheries development. In the face of an industry seeking
security not risk they have no chance. The experience of the TFDA in trawl
fishing, mussel farming and squid fishing is relevant. Tailored support to
sectors of the industry anxious to expand can be of considerable assistance
as can be seen from the TFDA's work in oyster culture, abalone management
and salmon farming. The goal of becoming a commercially oriented organisation
may have been unrealistic as the authority was not a solitary unit but bound
to Tasmanian Departments such as the Treasury and Agricultural Bank and the
Commonwealth and other state fisheries organisations. In addition it had no
product from which to generate revenue and its dominate role (at least in
the eyes of its "customers") was regulatory. Fishermen in "non-developmental
fisheries" resented the concentration of limited resources of skills
and finance on new fisheries and aquaculture. The resentment led to government
irritation (c/f 1924 and 1939) and Minister Beswick announced an enquiry into
the TFDA. The appointment of the Authority's father Brendan O'Kelly to conduct
it was greeted with some surprise. It took O'Kelly even less time to conclude
that a Department of Sea Fisheries should now replace the TFDA than he took
to recommend its establishment. His diagnosis was that failure resulted from
deviation from the original design (even though the legislation, organisational
structure and functions were endorsed and implemented by O'Kelly as inaugural
Chairman and Chief Executive). The cure was to restore Ministerial control,
end direct industry participation in policy development, and transfer fisheries
law enforcement to the Police Force.
After the establishment of the new Department the Government has been able
to announce two long awaited development successes - the full utilisation
of the jack mackerel resource and the first marketing of Tasmanian grown salmon.
But no sooner had the Department recovered its poise and rebuilt its staff
that a new Government sent the clock backwards, abolished its independence
and consigned it back to the subservient position it had held before 1977.
The Sea Fisheries Department was absorbed into the Department of Agriculture,
now renamed the Department of Primary Industries.
A history of fisheries research in Tasmania to 1985
If quoting please acknowledge the source
|