OVERVIEW OF CURRENT PRODUCTION

Sectors Operating

Commercial fisheries have operated continuously since European settlement. In recent years a number of other animal-product industries have been established or re-established in Victoria. The main sectors currently operating are:

a) commercial fishing (this Inquiry covers freshwater fishing only)

i) finfish

ii) yabbies

iii) bait

b) eels

c) aquaculture (that is, farming in water)

i) freshwater finfish

ii) marine fish (this Inquiry covers inland utilisation only)

iii) hatcheries

iv) yabbies

d) emus

e) kangaroo harvesting (now only outside Victoria)

f) game meat processing

g) an array of other minor sectors.

Processing of animals for skins, leather, oils, cosmetics and health-care aids, medicines and fertilisers is primarily undertaken by mainstream companies. The raw material obtained from native animals is, however, a minor part of their operation. For instance, the Victorian skin and leather industry revolves around sheep and rabbit skins, not the skins of native species, although these are also used. Companies producing cosmetic and health-care products may use (for example) emu oil, but only as one ingredient in a limited number of their products. The Committee has not investigated these types of processing activities. In contrast, the processing of native animals is a major part of the game meat processing sector - and is discussed below.

Each of the various animal product industries operates in distinct ways. Some sectors, such as emus and eels, are mostly `vertically integrated', where the one operator will both produce the raw product and process it for sale. Other sectors, such as the kangaroo industry and commercial fishing, involve more specialisation, with some operators focussing on the wild-harvest of the animal and others on the processing of the raw product.

Some sectors focus on one species - such as the emu. In other sectors, such as aquaculture, a number of species may be used.

Methods of Production

Native animals may be:

h) harvested from the wild;

i) ranched; or

j) farmed (including aquacultural production).

Wild-harvesting involves the removal of animals that are living in a wild population, or their eggs, for direct use.⁷ Ranching involves taking the immature animal or its eggs from the wild to be grown on in captivity for subsequent use.⁸

Animals used in farm production are bred in captivity from captive stock. In this case no access to animals in the wild is needed. A Victorian example is emu farming, which now depends totally on captive-bred animals.⁹

From the point of view of commercial production, each of the three methods offers different challenges. The size of the wild population and the level of sustainable harvest fluctuates with seasonal conditions. The result is uncertainty of supply for industries relying on wild-harvested animals and, to some extent, those involved with the ranching of animals. The difficulties associated with uncertain supply were raised with the Committee by representatives of the kangaroo-processing industry.

The rancher not only has to respond to the vagaries of wild supply but must also deal with many of the challenges that face farmers.

Unlike conventionally farmed animals, native animals do not carry the imprint of centuries of breeding on their behaviour and productive capacity. Their husbandry and health needs are often not well known.¹⁰ They are likely to contain considerable genetic diversity. Such factors place demands on farmers using native species to be particularly innovative, adaptable and able to withstand early low economic returns. Ability and resources to undertake their own research into production systems are also often required.

Not all species of native animal will be suitable for farming. For an animal to be suited to conventional farming systems it must breed readily in captivity and be reasonably easy to confine and feed.¹¹ Its social structure should be gregarious so that it is not unduly stressed or aggressive when kept with a large number of its own kind. It should be resistant to diseases that cannot readily be controlled. It should be well adapted to prevailing climatic conditions and be capable of rapid and efficient growth when supplied with readily available and economic feed. Ideally it should, with moderate management inputs, have minimal adverse impact on the land where it is farmed.¹² It should also provide a product for which there is a ready market or for which a market can easily be developed.

The various methods of production attract different regulatory regimes. For instance, in Tasmania if an animal is shot in the wild it is subject to game meat production standards, whereas if it is farm bred, domestic animal meat production standards apply. In Victoria, the processing of all meat is administered by the Victorian Meat Authority. As all wild-harvested native animals must currently be imported from other States, the actual slaughter, initial handling and transportation are subject to regulations in those States.

The different methods of producing native animals will also lead to different environmental outcomes. Management approaches to ensure sustainability of both the target species and ecosystems will also vary. For example, wild-harvesting where only large adults are taken will alter the structure of the target population and so can impact on its evolution and viability. This is less of an issue for captive populations, where more direct manipulation of the population will be undertaken anyway, but without impact on natural systems.

Taking eggs for ranching can threaten the target population and also species that prey on the eggs. Farming incurs the usual risks associated with animal husbandry, and also of polluting wild populations with populations that have been modified by translocation and captive breeding.¹³ This is not an issue for wild-harvesting.

Attitudes to Native-animal-product Industries

There was considerable divergence of opinions concerning native-animal product industries in submissions to the Inquiry. Opinions ranged from total opposition to support for a market-driven expansion of these industries provided sustainability objectives are met. In between was qualified support for the status quo, with no expansion of the species used in this way.¹⁴

The submission of Wartook Native Fish Culture represents those favouring sustainable use of native species, but with the caveat:

The commercial utilisation of any native fauna and flora should never be a threat to the conservation status of a species or population.¹⁵

A number of submissions to the Inquiry supported the concept of commercial use of kangaroos, in particular in association with population control.¹⁶ Generally the proposal was to involve commercial shooters and use carcasses for meat and leather products. Representatives of recreational shooters raised the possibility of kangaroos being used commercially also being available as game.¹⁷ This suggestion is discussed in Chapter 5.

Representative of these who oppose native-animal products is the submission by Animals Australia, in which the organisation states that:

Aware of the potential for cruelty and suffering to wildlife, Animals Australia opposes any increase in wildlife exploitation in Victoria, other than that which is due to the enhancement of natural habitats and facilities to benefit wildlife, Victorians and visitors from interstate and overseas who wish to enjoy and appreciate them in a non-threatening way ... Activities currently sanctioned that are known to cause pain, suffering and death ... should be prohibited.¹⁸