breakthroughs in testing for toxinsnzaquaculture.co.nz/old-archives/ac40.pdf · 8 across the ditch:...

ISSUE 40 ■ MARCH/APRIL 2011 $5.00

MAHURANGI TECH STRIKES A SILVER LODE

Breakthroughs in TESTING FOR TOXINSTHE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF NEW ZEALAND AQUACULTURE

SPACE DEBATE OVER FINFISH FARMING

SEA CUCUMBERS SHOW POTENTIAL

2 ■ NZ AQUACULTURE ■ MARCH/APRIL 2011

An informative journal for the aquaculture industry

Published by:VIP PUBLICATIONS LTD

4 Prince Regent Drive,Half Moon Bay, Manukau 2012

Ph 09 533 4336 Fax 09 533 4337Email [email protected]@skipper.co.nzwww.nzaquaculture.co.nz

General: Reproduction of articles and materials published in New Zealand Aquaculture in whole or part, is permitted provided the source and author(s) are acknowledged. However, all photographic material is copyright and written permission to reproduce in any shape or form is required. Contributions of a nature relevant to the aquaculture industry are welcomed and industry participants are especially encouraged to contribute. Articles and information printed in New Zealand Aquaculture do not necessarily reflect the opinions or formal position or the publishers unless otherwise indicated. All material published in New Zealand Aquaculture is done so with all due care as regards to accuracy and factual content, however, the publishers cannot accept responsibility for any errors and omissions which may occur. New Zealand Aquaculture is produced bi-monthly.

3 EDITORIAL

4 NEWSA look at what’s happening in the industry

6 VERTICAL INTEGRATION KEY TO SEA CUCUMBER SUCCESSCommercial pilot system is under assessment

8 ACROSS THE DITCH: Wild harvesters have few optionsGrowers can lower production costs to make savings

9 WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING THIS SUMMER? How to avoid histamine poisoning from eating smoked fish

10 OCEAN LAW: Finfish farming in the Hauraki Gulf? Options for finfish if aquaculture bill becomes law

11 TEST DETECTS SHELLFISH TOXINS New technology produces reliable results in 30 minutes

12 BIOTOXIN TESTING IS NOW RODENT-FREE! Scientific instruments replace mice for PSP detection tests

13 CHRISTMAS HAD A SILVER LINING Mahurangi Tech successfully hatches 20,000 silver carp

14 SEA LICE DID NOT CAUSE WILD SALMON DECLINE No simple explanation why Canadian population crashed in 2002

15 AQUARIUM CLINIC HELPS CHILD UNDERSTANDING Open attitude raises awareness

CONTENTS

EDITOR:Keith Ingram

ASSISTANT EDITOR:Mark Barratt-Boyes

MANAGER:Vivienne Ingram

ADVERTISING:Hamish Stewart

DESIGNER: Rachel Walker

CONTRIBUTORS:Paul Decker, Justine Innes, Nick King, Dorothy-Jean McCoubrey, Lauren McKenzie, Andrew Morgan, John Mosig

PRINTER: GEON

DISTRIBUTION: By subscriptionand insertion with Professional Skipper

ISSN 1176-5402 ISSN 1176-8657 (web)

ISSUE 40 ■ MARCH/APRIL 2011 $5.00

MAHURANGI TECH STRIKES A SILVER LODE

Breakthroughs in TESTING FOR TOXINSTHE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF NEW ZEALAND AQUACULTURE

SPACE DEBATE OVER FINFISH FARMING

SEA CUCUMBERS SHOW POTENTIAL

ON THE COVER:Boaties and mussel farmers live in harmony

on Great Barrier Island

TM

6 11 13

COV

ER

IM

AG

E: B

Y K

EIT

H I

NG

RA

M

MARCH/APRIL 2011 ■ NZ AQUACULTURE ■ 3

EDITORIAL

The overarching body for the New Zealand aquaculture industry could do better in its efforts to foster public goodwill. In fact, it would be fair to say that to date

their efforts have been abysmal. I have seen no evidence of Aquaculture New Zealand getting out and talking with key recreational boating groups or national organisations like the New Zealand Recreational Fishing Council. Any such communication has been fragmented at best or restricted to limited contact between boaties and farming groups.

The subject of aquaculture remains an emotive issue for most, especially when discussing a priority use of public water space. The recent application for the proposed Coromandel marine farming zone for fi nfi sh farming is a case in point.

A well-researched article by Suzanne McFadden in the December issue of Boating New Zealand magazine only highlighted the high level of mis-information that prevails within boating circles about the demons of aquaculture.

However, it did reveal a number of real concerns which still need to be addressed over priority of access and the need for good stewardship in managing shared water space.

The aquaculture industry still suffers from poor management practices when farming structures are abandoned or left in disarray. It is these images that the detractors of aquaculture quickly refer to when denigrating the industry.

Clearly, there is a responsibility for marine farmers to have a duty of care for their marine environment and any allocated shared use of water space to ensure they remain in harmony with their local community.

It would be fair to say that in the eyes of the public the image of the aquaculture industry does not fair well. This need not be so.

Demands on water space are growing, with the risk of the rights of boaties and recreational fi shers to retain freedom of access being eroded bit by bit. The increasing number of marine protected areas remains a signifi cant risk to amateur fi shers, as do the growing number of large tracts of water protected under the Submarine Cables and Pipeline Act. Port development, no-go or restricted areas and aquaculture all add to the list of threats to boaters’ rights of access

If our aquaculture industry is going to be allowed to grow, it must take along the people and foster goodwill among them.

I am mindful that the lessons we learned only a few years ago when we saw the huge rush of applications for marine

Industry needs to foster PUBLIC GOODWILL KEITH INGRAM

EDITOR

■■ $30.00 for 6 issues

ISSUE 39 ■ JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011

$5.00

AQUACULTURE CENTRE HAS PLENTY OF POTENTIALNEW BILL WILL HAVE AN IMMEDIATE

IMPACT

Virus strikes Pacific oysters

THE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF NEW ZEALAND AQUACULTURE

SUBSCRIBE NOW TOSUBSCRIBE NOW TOName ________________________________________________________________________________

Address _____________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________ Postal code ______________

Email _______________________________________________________________________________

■ ■ Enclose a cheque for ________________ ■ ■ Visa/Mastercard (only) _______________________

Card Number _________________________________________________________________________

Card Name __________________________________________________________________________

Signature __________________________________________________________Expiry date ——/——

GST No:68-684-757Post to:VIP Publications Ltd, 4 Prince Regent Drive, Half Moon Bay, Manukau, 2012

farming space covering most bays in the Coromandel region and Marlborough Sounds are being lost.

The public outcry at this time was hot, with Yachting New Zealand and many boating groups about to lead the charge and potentially a hikoi of a thousand or so boats and trailers to parliament.

I was attending the aquaculture law reform conference in Wellington at the time and by chance had breakfast with Graeme Coates of the New Zealand Marine Farmers Assocation. We discussed the problems of the risks associated with public access. A simple resolution soon evolved, once I had a clear understanding that unlike the major fi shing companies who were seeking exclusive ownership of water space along the lines of the quota management system, the small farmers only wanted the right to lease, with some certainty to grow their businesses.

They did not want to exclude the public, said Graeme. Rather, they encouraged recreational fi shers and boaters, as long as they did not damage the fl oating structures to enter the farms and fi sh.

“What about a feed of mussels?” I asked.“By all means,” he replied. “Most farmers will tell you what’s

on the top of the ropes is for the recreational fi shos, as long as they do not take more than their bag limit or damage the ropes.”

The upshot was that this unwritten agreement was soon publicised in articles in the boating and fi shing magazines and took the sting out of the public outcry. Suddenly, by welcoming the “reccies” and fi shers, the marine farmers were seen as good people and a high level of harmony resulted.

This was followed by a commitment for improved lighting of the farms on all corners and ensuring that boaties retained good access to the sheltered anchorages contained within, a win-win for all.

Sadly, this goodwill seems to have been allowed to diminish over time, followed by poor communication and the loss of contact with other legitimate user groups. Hence much of the current impasse, and media hype about the demons of aquaculture is rife.

While organisations like the Recreational Fishing Council are more than willing to work with the aquaculture industry to ensure shared utilisation of the public space is done in harmony, respecting each sector’s needs, the fi rst step must come from the farmers.

It’s never too late to be a good citizen and take the people along with you.

NEWS


PANEL CONSIDERS PUBLIC RESPONSE TO NEW FARMAn aquaculture ministerial advisory panel has just completed a series of public meetings on a proposal to create a new Coromandel marine farming zone.

The proposal seeks to amend the Waikato Regional Coastal Plan by removing the prohibition on new aquaculture in a 300ha zone in the Hauraki Gulf. Resource consent applications for farming fi sh such as kingfi sh and hapuku would be allowed to be lodged in the proposed zone. Consent applications would still need to go through the Resource Management Act and undue adverse effects on fi shing processes.

The proposal warranted public consultation because of its regional and national signifi cance, said the director of the Ministry of Fisheries’ aquaculture unit, Dan Lees. There was economic potential in farming kingfi sh and hapuku, but aquaculture sites had to be within environmental limits and take account of effects on other users.

The advisory panel of Sir Doug Kidd

as chair, Mark Farnsworth and Justine Inns conducted public consultations from December 17 to February 9 in Auckland, Coromandel and the Waikato. They will report their fi ndings on the costs and benefi ts of the proposal to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Phil Heatley, in late February. He is expected to decide whether and how to proceed with the proposal by May.

STANDARD RULES NECESSARY, SAYS MINISTERGreen Party co-leader Russel Norman rafted down the Wairau River on January 12 to kick off a campaign to highlight electricity company TrustPower’s plans to build a power scheme.

Norman visited freshwater crayfi sh farmer Pieter Wilhelmus at his business up-river from the Wairau Valley township and talked to farmers John and Joan McLauchlan.

Norman said freshwater fi sh farms were the canary in the coal mine on clean water. Some farmers had fenced waterways and

kept them clean, while few were doing a bad job. “The impact has been felt on a stream that should be crystal clear.”

Wilhelmus claimed he had battled problems with the river being polluted by deer and dairy cows, and farmers objected to his resource consent for fi sh farming being renewed. The cost of renewing the consent meant Wilhelmus and his wife, Coreen, had to work off the property and no longer farmed organic salmon, although they continued to grow freshwater crayfi sh.

Norman said the couple’s problems were a microcosm of what was happening in other parts of the country. “That’s why we need standard rules, a national policy statement on freshwater management, which is currently sitting on (Environment Minister) Nick Smith’s desk, waiting to be signed.”

The McLauchlans were doing the work for future generations who would want the Wairau River protected, he said. After being approved by the Environment Court, the future of the scheme would depend on whether the government would force farmers to sell their land to TrustPower.

SOCIETY SAYS COASTLINE WILL BE UP FOR GRABSNew Zealand’s wilderness coastline is under attack from the government’s plans to speed up the development of marine farms, Forest & Bird said on January 19.

The society was commenting on the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 3). The bill would loosen the rules for marine farming and encourage the industry’s development through government handouts, while limiting opportunities for the public to comment on proposals in their area.

“This will lead to another gold-rush for coastal space,” said spokesperson Dr Mark Bellingham. “It will also have serious consequences for coastal boat owners and fi shers, who will have to navigate their way around rafts of fi sh and mussel farms.”

He said the society supported aquaculture in suitable areas but the proposed legislation lacked the necessary environmental protection.

More marine farms would mean more buoys, longlines, shellfi sh frames and sea cages in coastal waters for raising mussels, oysters and fi nfi sh. On the seabed, the build-up of waste food and fi sh faeces would create a black, lifeless desert, Bellingham said. Increased nutrients from fi sh farms could lead to algal blooms.

He said the bill failed to identify areas which should be closed to aquaculture, such as signifi cant marine and coastal ecosystems, marine mammal feeding and migration sites, signifi cant coastal scenery and important recreational waters.

KIWI SALMON POPULAR IN SWITZERLANDA bold move to change manufacturing procedures to meet the needs of discerning Swiss consumers has paid off, says the chief executive offi cer of NZ King Salmon, Grant Rosewarne.

The company’s product development team worked for two years to meet very specifi c product requirements from Migros, Switzerland’s biggest supermarket chain. The co-op is owned by more than two million Swiss and its 604 outlets generated a turnover of SFr 22 billion (NZ$29.9 billion) in the last fi nancial year.

The changes included investing in custom-designed equipment to meet specifi c dimensions for smoked salmon products.

The resulting manuka-smoked product exceeded the customer’s requirements, said Rosewarne. “Frankly, we raised the benchmark. They asked for smoked salmon with a shelf life of 12 days from delivery. Their independent testing showed our products easily surpassed that.”

He said Migros loved the salmon and saw it as their fl agship, calling it “saumon royal”.“Swiss consumers look for an intense smoke fl avour. The oil in manuka-smoked

king salmon carries this well, compared to more common smoking methods.” He says the initial 12-month contract will extend essentially for as long as the product performs.

“We have really lifted the quality of smoked salmon on offer to Swiss consumers throughout the country. The investment is going to pay off for many years to come.

“If you can sell salmon to the Swiss you can sell it to anyone because they have the highest food produce expectations. It’s a real feather in the cap for New Zealand’s food production standards.”


COMPANY CONFIDENT OVER SEAFOOD FUTUREThere was room for some optimism over seafood in the current environment, with prices generally having continued their fi rming trend over the last nine months, Sanford’s managing director, Eric Barratt, said at the company’s annual meeting on January 26.

“On the aquaculture front, we are seeing mussel prices consolidating at a far more acceptable level than a year ago and salmon prices have continued a fi rmer trend over the last six months.”

Late last year Sanford acquired the Pacifi ca mussel business for $85 million. Pacifi ca Seafoods was the second largest producer after Sanford with around 20 percent market share. Production last year totalled around 16,000 metric tonnes from 77 marine farms on 392ha, along with an additional 140ha share-farmed or leased from other farmers in the Marlborough Sounds.

Last year Sanford also acquired a 40 percent interest in the 2700ha Pegasus Bay marine farm consent, a large open-ocean site just north of Banks Peninsula and a modern processing plant in Christchurch, along with various service vessels and associated properties.

The acquisition combined two of New Zealand’s largest Greenshell mussel producers. The partnership with the Primary Growth Partnership would domesticate and selectively breed New Zealand shellfi sh, particularly Greenshell mussels.

“Demand in Asia among the growing middle-class consumers looking for higher quality seafood is likely to outstrip our ability to supply,” Barratt said. Capitalising on the opportunity required long-term planning, while returns to shareholders and share price growth had been below acceptable levels.

“In the long term, the outlook for the seafood industry is bright,” he said.

FUNDING PROGRAMME TODOMESTICATE MUSSELSResearch into Greenshell mussels will benefi t by $26.1 million over the next few years, thanks to funding

from the Primary Growth Partnership announced on February 1.

In the seven-year programme, Shellfi sh: the Next Generation, from Sanford, Sealord Group and Wakatu Incorporation will domesticate and selectively breed high-value green shell mussels.

The PGP is a government-industry initiative that invests in research and innovation to boost the economic growth and sustainability of New Zealand’s primary, forestry and food sectors. Half the funding comes from the industry. The partnership has committed almost $218 million since the programme opened 16 months ago.

The government has set aside $190 million for the fi rst four years of the programme and will invest a further $70 million annually from the beginning of the 2013 fi nancial year.

The programme expands the reach of the PGP, said the director-general of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Wayne McNee. “The PGP now has proposals in place with most of the big primary sector exporters. I’m impressed with the quality and potential each business case demonstrates.”

The three companies are collaborating under the banner of SPATnz. Toni Grant, who chaired SPATnz’s steering group for the bid, said it was a monumental decision for the future of aquaculture in New Zealand. “This will enable the biggest development in the industry since we started farming mussels on longlines nearly 40 years ago,” she said.

“Domesticating the Greenshell mussel will give the industry the ability to grow market-directed, selectively-bred spat through to harvest.”

Once the project was completed it would create at least 1000 new jobs and add up to $230 million per year to the New Zealand economy, she said.

The funds proved the government was committed to helping the aquaculture sector produce $1 billion in annual revenue by 2025, she said. “This programme by itself will be responsible for creating a signifi cant portion of the growth necessary to reach the billion-dollar target.”

Dear SirI am seeking expressions of

interest from other fi sh farmers of being supplied mullet fry through the hormonally induced process. My intention is to create a list of names which a fi sh laboratory may consider as a critical mass of interest so as to proceed.

I am expecting that a fi sh lab would operate:• if fully funded by grants/subsidies• if partly funded ie, the recipient

pays something, or• acting as fully paid consultants

In our current economic climate, it may be that the middle option is a way forward.

I presume the lead-in time to induce mullet this season has passed. Therefore the earliest that this could happen would be the hormonal inducement equivalent of mullet fry arriving in our estuaries of say, March 2012.

My hope would be to collect enough names of farmers that could be seen by a fi sh lab as interested, and have the potential to commit themselves, if this was to be a fi sh lab-cum-grower joint venture.

I am happy to share my own business plan with others if interested.

I suggest that the timing for this is appropriate. Firstly, recent developments of the forthcoming aquacultural revolution in the news is that from this year China will become a net importer of seafood, and also that the rising middle classes in Asia will increase the demand for seafood. Secondly, the Minister for the Environment has commissioned a Land and Water Forum to examine what we do.

To me this is talk in tongues that says we are having an environmental revolution. What then could be more sensible than culturing in the right number, and reliably supplied, a reasonably fast-growing omega 3 commodity fi sh that can readily be made into a high-value, low-volume product that should be in demand, in a sustainable and non-polluting way?

Vince ScullyDirectorWaikoura Springs Ltd90 Mill Road, Kaikoura [email protected]

Mullet fry

LETTER TO THE EDITOR



Large numbers of larvae of the sea cucumber Australostichopus mollis have settled in the intensive settlement system at the Ahumoana a Toi Aquaculture

Centre. Currently, the ability of this pilot intensive commercial settlement system to produce large numbers of juveniles is being assessed. This system is also part of a production platform designed as a pilot for selective breeding.

The nutritional requirements of larvae and its impact on growth and development and how this relates to the rearing environment is used for successful intensive and sustainable pilot commercial-scale production. Larval competency and the ability of large numbers of larvae to complete the larval cycle, settle and become juveniles are very dependent on this.

Handling techniques during larval rearing have a signifi cant impact on the numbers of larvae completing the larval cycle and settling. A combination of handling techniques and system design is used for successful intensive pilot commercial-scale production.

The success of producing large numbers of juveniles intensively relies on optimising spawning, fertilisation and the larval cycle, and understanding all aspects of the interaction between biology and system design.

Although the design of the settlement system impacts on the fi nal number of juveniles, the ability to produce large

Vertical integration KEY TO SEA CUCUMBER SUCCESSBY ANDREW MORGAN

A mollis broodstock at Ahumoana a Toi Aquaculture Centre 2010

A mollis spawning, Leigh Marine Laboratory, University of Auckland 2001

H scabra spawning at the Bribie Island Aquaculture Research Centre 1997

H scabra broodstock collection in Moreton Bay, Australia 1997


numbers on a commercial scale depends on the complete control of breeding and larval rearing. This is the fi nal stage of a successful season, with work being based on periods of research over the last 15 years breeding and rearing large numbers of larvae of both Holothuria scabra in Australia and A mollis in New Zealand through to settlement.

Techniques developed from 1996 to 1998 at the Queensland Department of Primary Industries’ Bribie Island Aquaculture Research Centre1 and later from 1999 to 2002 at the University of Auckland’s Leigh Marine Laboratory2 have been combined successfully to run a pilot-scale commercially intensive production system using recirculation technology and batch culture.

A considerable amount of information continues to be collected, quantifying aspects of reproduction and the larval cycle and its exploitation in captivity for commercial-scale breeding. In addition, the more practical aspects of dealing and working with commercial numbers of eggs and larvae produced from quality conditioned broodstock are being developed further.

System design and use for intensive commercial-scale production and selective breeding requires vertical integration of the entire process, from how and when broodstock are collected, conditioned and spawned to the process of spawning, fertilisation and hatching, rearing and settlement, the early juvenile period and nursery phase culture. This intensive vertical integration of production is currently under development at Ahu Moana a Toi.

VIP.AC31

Larva of H scabra (1mm) 1996 H scabra juveniles produced at the Bribie Island Aquaculture Research Centre 1997/98

Premium larva of A mollis produced at Ahumoana a Toi (1mm) 2010

1 From 1996 to 1998, Andrew Morgan developed the breeding of Holothuria scabra in Australia and produced a number of juveniles (see photos). Published.

2 From 1999 to 2002, a technique for breeding and rearing large numbers of A mollis through to settlement was also developed and supported by a fully funded FRST Bright Futures Top Achiever Doctoral Scholarship. Published.

Wild harvesters HAVE FEW OPTIONSBY JOHN MOSIG


ACROSS THE DITCH

G’day there, Kiwi. How’s it all going over there? Hope you survived the festive season. We’re under the pump over here – literally. We have far too much of

the stuff.The various random deluges over the entire eastern half

of the Wide Brown Land have been devastating and early estimates are that one percent – around A$16 billion – has been knocked off the value of the national GDP. But like all government budget estimates, we won’t be too surprised if the eventual cost turns out to be far more than that. And with Christchurch still shaky, we get on with our respective restructuring in the stoic silence of our Anzac forebears.

I want to ask you if it’s the same on your side of the ditch when it comes to farming and fi shing. Over here, wherever the two sectors fi nd themselves selling the same species they seem to get themselves in a bit of a tizz.

Take the abalone divers and farmers, for instance. You’ve all heard about the herpes virus that cut a swathe through the abalone farms and natural stocks along the western coast of Victoria. It’s also known as the Shipwreck Coast, which will give you an idea of its nature. Well, as soon as it became known what was going on, the divers naturally wanted to close every abalone farm in Victoria.

This was a very natural reaction from a group whose quotas are worth several million dollars and who earn somewhere over $500,000 a year for three month’s work, for an outlay on a shark cat, some diving gear and a deckie.

Maybe they feel threatened by the farming sector. After all, for the price of a 20 tonne quota you can build an on-shore farm that can produce 120 tonnes of abalone, and at pre-determined delivery dates.

True, the production costs of farming are very high. It’s labour-intensive and the capital outlay is not insignifi cant. But the only constraint to production is the capacity of the site. And this is where the rub starts.

The price of abalone is determined by supply and

demand. The limiting factor is usually the amount of water that can be pumped ashore and returned to the ocean after treatment to settle out organic solids and nitrify the ammonia.

In fact, growers are looking at ways of bio-remediation to neutralise nutrient loads. Suggestions have included substrate-hoovering mullet and the detritus-munching beche-der-mer. In short, they have options; cost-saving options. This enables farmers to lower their production costs.

These options are not open to the wild harvest, where they depend on quotas and a well-managed fi shery policy to maintain the value of their product, as well as the superannuation value of their licenses.

The backside dropped out of the abalone market when the SARS outbreak occurred in China, and also when the Emperor died in Japan and the Land of the Rising Sun went into mourning.

It doesn’t seem to take much to wobble the beach price for this highly infl ated sea snail. Sure, the markets are huge, but they are far from unlimited. Oz and Kiwi aren’t the only ones in the game. The Japanese, the Chinese, the Yanks, the Chileans and our cousins from the Rainbow Republic are all hard at it.

I was told when I fi rst went into aquaculture that as important as the markets were, farmers had little or no control over the price they receive. But what attracted me to this industry is that we have just about absolute control over the cost of production.

The obvious cost drivers are nutrition and genetic selection for the best performers under farmed conditions, whatever the method employed. Husbandry techniques are an undervalued key performance driver, too. Environmental control is another major lever that can be weighted to maximise production and increase unit output.

Could this be the reason the wild sector feels threatened? There’ll always be some fi sh out there to be taken. And just as long as the price refl ects this extra cost and effort they’ll be able to command a viable price.

But while their costs escalate as fuel costs rise and the amount of water between their crop increases, famers have control, to a very large degree, over their inputs and production volumes.

Then there’s the risk to the natural resource from elements outside the control of the diving sector. Avoiding the accusation that the farms generated the herpes outbreak – the evidence is inconclusive – other environmental factors that impact on the oceans are way beyond short-term remedial action.

So it’s not hard to see in which sector the long-range viability lies, nor why there will always be a degree of tension between the last of the hunter-gatherers and fi sh farmers. But this refl ects on all farmed produce.

The future of the wild harvest is behind us. The future of aquaculture is before us. Let’s hope we don’t muck it up.

Email John Mosig on [email protected]

For the price of a 20 tonne abalone quota you can build a farm like this that will produce five times as much abalone – and a more uniform product


If I had to pick a season that best refl ected me, it would be summer! To steal the words of George Gershwin’s song Summertime, the days are long,

blue and warm, while food and clothes are light, quick to prepare and put on.

In summer we fi nd time to stroll leisurely through local markets or harvest our own food supplies for treats such as strawberries, stone fruit and fi sh. Fishing tackle and fi sh smokers are dragged out from under the house as we become hunters and gatherers again over the summer break while the sun continues to shine.

Fish is such a healthy food that here in New Zealand it is very unusual for it to cause any illness. There is one exception and that is smoked fi sh – especially smoked kawahai. Every year it causes anguish and illness for some consumers. So what is the problem?

The answer is scrombroid (or histamine) poisoning. Funnily enough, scrombroid poisoning usually only occurs in the Scrombidae and Scomberesocidae fi sh families, which include tuna, mackerel, bonito, kingfi sh and kahawai. These species swim really fast so their muscles possess a large amount of free histidine. Bacteria and enzymes can break this histidine into histamine when the fi sh is decomposing.

Fish containing excessive levels of histamine can quickly cause chemical poisoning in unwary consumers. A range of gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms can appear from within minutes to a few hours of eating the contaminated fi sh.

Symptoms may include feeling sick, stomach cramps, vomiting and diarrhoea, along with a headache, racing heart, skin tingling, itching and rashes, burning sensations and a peppery taste in the mouth. Even though you might feel like you are dying, most of the time these symptoms disappear within a few hours.

However, given most of us would prefer not to suffer such a malady, or even worse, cause summer guests to become ill from our proudly home-smoked kahawai, it is always a good idea to know how to avoid it.

The easiest and most practical way is cold temperature storage as soon as the fi sh is caught. Dead fi sh no longer have the defence mechanisms to inhibit bacterial growth, so bacterial histamine formation starts at temperatures above seven degrees Celsius and rapidly increases at around 20-30 degrees Celsius.

This is especially important to remember in the North Island, where the summer seawater temperatures are often in the mid 20s; something to think about if you are longline fi shing when your fi sh may have been dead awhile

What ARE YOU SMOKING this summer?

BY DOROTHY-JEAN MCCOUBREY

before you haul them back to shore.Once it is caught, it is really important to put the fi sh on

ice or into a cooling system to get the temperature down fast.If poor hygienic techniques are used to butcher or

fi llet the fi sh, this can mean even more enzymes and bacterial contamination, so histamine formation is further increased.

Histamine is highly resistant to heat and, once present in a fi sh, is not easily destroyed by smoking, cooking or canning. Hot smoking practically sterilises the fi sh and de-natures enzymes, thus imparting some degree of preservation. But it does not destroy histamine already formed.

The trick is to make sure any fi sh to be smoked is fresh and smoked quickly after being caught (preferably the same day). Make sure you get that smoker hot and furious, so the fi sh are cooked quickly and smoked right through.

Smoked fi sh is always a tempting buy from local markets and is sometimes a summer food we eat without further cooking. Be sure you have confi dence in your supplier. Ask them where they get the fi sh from and how and when they smoked it.

This is particularly important if you are receiving the fi sh from a local, amateur vendor who may be catching and smoking fi sh as a summer project for a bit of “beer and bait” money, rather than a professional artisan.

Summer is a stunning season. Enjoy every minute and taste of it, but to make sure you don’t suffer histamine poisoning:• put all fi sh on ice or into the cooler immediately after

catching or buying• ensure the conditions for gutting and smoking are

hygienic, and• use only fresh fi sh for smoking.

These simple steps will mean your fi sh will be safe to eat and taste divine.

On December 17, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture announced a proposal to establish a marine farming zone available for fi nfi sh farming in

the Hauraki Gulf and initiated a consultation process in respect of the proposal.

To my pleasure (and surprise!) I was appointed as one of three members of a ministerial panel to lead that consultation, hear community, iwi and stakeholder views and make a recommendation to the minister as to whether the proposal should proceed or not.

These consultations are continuing and I obviously have an open mind as to what they might reveal. This article does not, therefore, consider the merits of the proposal in any way, but looks at the current process, the steps that might follow it and how they illustrate some of the options that might be available, should the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment (No. 3) Bill pass into law in its current form.

The current consultation process is a non-statutory one, though written submissions have been sought from interested parties and the panel will have held hearings in relation to those submissions. The panel’s terms of reference require us to provide a report on the proposal to the minister, Doug Heatley, with that report to be framed in terms of section 32 of the Resource Management Act.

Section 32 requires an evaluation report to be prepared before notifying a proposed plan, policy statement or regulation, or a change or variation to any of those things under the RMA. There are essentially three elements to the evaluation to be carried out under s.32:• an evaluation as to the extent to which the objectives

contained in that proposed plan, policy statement or regulation are the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of this act, ie, promoting the sustainable management of natural and physical resources (with sustainable management being given an extended defi nition in the act)

• whether having regard to their effi ciency and effectiveness, the policies, rules, or other methods are the most appropriate for achieving the objectives

• the assessment of effi ciency and effectiveness must take into account the benefi ts and costs of policies, rules, or other methods, and

• the risk of acting, or not acting, if there is uncertain or insuffi cient information. Because the RMA’s defi nition of sustainable management

incorporates environmental, social, economic, and cultural elements, section 32 reports typically consider the effi ciency,

costs, benefi ts and risks of any proposal in terms of those four “well beings”.

If, after receiving the panel’s report, the minister decides to proceed with the proposal, changes may need to be made to the Waikato Regional Coastal Plan in order to give it effect. There are a few options for how those changes might be advanced.

The fi rst would be for the minister (or the new Aquaculture Unit) to apply to Environment Waikato for a private plan change, to be dealt with in accordance with standard RMA processes. Those processes could include the plan change being “called in” to be determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, rather than EW, if the Minister for the Environment considered it to be of national signifi cance.

The second option might be for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture to use the power proposed in the bill to recommend regulations to effect changes to any regional coastal plan, assuming that power becomes law and, given that it would limit public participation in such plan change process, opposition to it can be expected.

It should be noted that the bill also proposes to amend s.32 of the RMA to make a report under that section a necessary precursor to use of the regulation-making power. By adopting the s.32 framework, the current process could therefore be seen as a test run of the approach proposed in the bill.

The third option might be for further amendments to be made to the bill to effect the necessary plan changes. It is not clear whether the timing of parliamentary and other processes would allow for this to occur, but a precedent of sorts exists in the changes the bill will make to the EW and Tasman District Regional Coastal Plans – see schedules two and three of the bill.

In any event, even if a plan change were to be promulgated to create the proposed zone (bearing in mind that we are now several steps down the hypothetical path...) no actual development of the zone could occur until resource consents were granted and the Undue Adverse Effects test conducted in respect of fi shing. The current process might be a toe in the water towards fi n fi shing farming in New Zealand on a commercial scale (other than salmon), but there is a long way to go yet.

Finfish farming in THE HAURAKI GULF?BY JUSTINE INNES


14 New St, Nelson. PO Box 921, Nelson 7040. T +64 3 548 4136. F +64 3 548 4195. Freephone 0800 Oceanlaw. Email [email protected] www.oceanlaw.co.nz

OCEAN LAW

Justine Inns is a partner at Oceanlaw. She previously spent more than a decade as an advisor to

various iwi (tribes), including several years with Ngai Tahu.


Scientists at Queen’s University in Belfast, Ireland, have pioneered new technology to test if shellfi sh are safer to eat.

The new test, developed at the Queen’s Institute for Agri-Food and Land Use, is said to ensure shellfi sh are free of toxins before they reach the food chain and is likely to transform the global fi shing industry, says the project leader, Professor Chris Elliott, who is the director of the institute.

While the current process for monitoring potentially dangerous toxins in shellfi sh takes up to two days, the test uses new bio-sensor technology to show results in just 30 minutes and provides a far more reliable result, says Dr Elliott.

The test detects paralytic shellfi sh poisons, which paralyse anyone who consumes them and kills around 25 percent of people who are poisoned. It works by using unique “detector proteins” to seek out minute amounts of toxins present in mussels, oysters, cockles and scallops.

“Toxins secreted by algae and which concentrate in shellfi sh are a major hazard to consumers and can bring huge economic losses to the aquaculture industry,” says Dr Elliott.

“While the existence of these toxins has been known for some time, there have been major concerns about the effectiveness of tests used to detect them. There is also growing evidence that climate change is causing many more toxic episodes across the world, resulting in the closure of affected shellfi sh beds,” he says.

“The test will not only make shellfi sh safer to eat, but also it will have a signifi cant impact on global aquaculture industries as they struggle to deal with the rising problems of toxins caused by climate change.”

The test is part of a £10 million (NZ$17.795 million) BioCop research project led by the Queen’s School of

Test detects SHELLFISH TOXINS

Biological Sciences and involving 32 international research partners and the European Commission.

“We have also signed a substantial contract with the UK-based company Neogen Europe to commercialise the idea.”

Research at Queen’s will also be aided by a US$500,000 grant from the American Food and Drugs Administration to further develop the test in the United States so it can be conducted in laboratories and on boats as soon as the shellfi sh are caught. This will help drastically cut the time taken to get the catch from fi shing nets to supermarket shelves.

See www.qub.ac.uk/schools/InstituteofAgri-FoodLandUse

Professor Chris Elliott

Scientific instruments have replaced laboratory white mice in the Cawthron Institute’s test

for routine marine biotoxin detection of paralytic shellfi sh poisoning (PSP) in shellfi sh.

Cawthron’s biotoxin testing started in the early 1990s to help the shellfi sh industry, which was struggling to cope with a major naturally occurring toxic algal bloom. At the time the only way to conduct tests of this type was by mouse bioassay, or testing on mice. The intensive testing put a strain on the available stocks of mice, and the nature of the testing did not sit well with the industry in terms of the ethics and reliability surrounding the testing.

The Cawthron research team, lead by Paul McNabb, who is now a recognised international expert in identifying these biotoxins, along with industry members and regulators, set out to develop an alternative testing procedure that allowed them to move away from mouse bioassay.

After purchasing a high-performance liquid chromatograph mass spectrometer (LCMS), the team set about developing instrument-based testing methods to identify the presence of the natural toxins in shellfi sh. The successful commercialisation of the LCMS test in 2003 helped mussel farmers ensure their products were safe for consumption and transformed testing and biotoxin event management.

However the compounds responsible for paralytic shellfi sh poisoning still required routine testing by shellfi sh producers and were not covered by this new instrumental method.

The recent shift to instrumental testing for PSP biotoxins means the Cawthron Institute says it is now the fi rst laboratory in the world to perform all routine shellfi sh testing by analytical laboratory methods rather than live mouse testing.

As well as the obvious advantages of continuing its move away from animal testing, the instrumental methods also improved consistency with no false positives (positive results in mouse bioassay that were actually not present in the shellfi sh), that saw product incorrectly identifi ed as unsafe for human consumption. It also enhanced

Biotoxin testing is NOW RODENT-FREE!BY THE CAWTHRON INSTITUTE

sensitivity in testing, so the biotoxins can be detected at very low levels and precisely measured to ensure they are within safe-for-consumption limits.

The institute’s section head of natural toxins, Catherine Moisan, says the technology gives shellfi sh delivery centres another cost-effective tool to manage the naturally occurring biotoxin risk, allowing better aquaculture farm management, fewer product recalls and a more profi table industry.

Moisan says they have had overwhelming support from the industry as the Cawthron keeps striving to improve its

services and assist in the development and maintenance of New Zealand’s reputation as an international leader in this fi eld. She says the new test for PSP can be carried out at no extra cost to the industry.

Helen Smale, the executive offi cer of the Marlborough Shellfi sh Quality Programme, says the new methodology has transformed

management of marine biotoxin risk. “The previous mouse bioassay was unreliable, frequently producing false positives, and we had concerns about the ethics of testing on animals – even though that is the international required standard.

“Because the new method is so sensitive, we can recognise algal bloom at very early stages – long before they become a problem. This allows us to manage harvesting so that we do not have product recalls and provides absolute confi dence for our customers regarding product safety, said Ms Smale.

“Better aquaculture farm management, fewer product recalls and an enhanced reputation as an ethical producer of premium product results in a more sustainable and more profi table industry.”

BECAUSE THE NEW METHOD IS SO SENSITIVE, WE CAN RECOGNISE ALGAL

BLOOM AT VERY EARLY STAGES


Yay I’m free!


located for many years on the shore of Lake Rotorua.

After hearing of 15 years of failed breeding attempts, in 2004 the staff at the institute’s aquaculture hatchery at Warkworth, about an hour north of Auckland, came up with a long-term breeding plan.

As luck would have it, in 2005/6 the last two remaining fi sh (one male and

one female) known to exist within New Zealand produced a batch of eggs from which 36 fi sh made it through to adults capable of breeding. Adulthood is reached in fi ve years and the fi sh can live for up to 20 years.

”With all the care and attention bestowed onto these few surviving fi sh as if they were children they have become our family,” Decker says. “It’s now all paid off, with the very last pair successfully reproducing 20,000 babies. We are now absolutely confi dent it is now possible to reproduce these fi sh by the hundreds of thousands in a hatchery and at the same time be extremely cost effective. We have made it.”

After 50 years in New Zealand, the next step for these fi sh is to continue the work of the Crown in evaluating the use of the species as a biological water management tool. Given that silver carp are incapable of wild reproduction, it is defi nitely a better alternative than the chemicals being used in our waterways.

Christmas arrived a week late at the Mahurangi Technical Institute after 20,000 baby silver carp

hatched successfully on December 30. But Santa has been totally forgiven, said the institute’s director, Paul Decker.

Several of the institute’s aquaculture students gave up time with their families during the Christmas holidays to assist in the fi nal stages of a breeding programme which started fi ve years ago.

Silver carp were originally imported into New Zealand in the early 1960s by Auckland University and subsequently in the late 1960s by the Hawke’s Bay Acclimatisation Society.

These fi sh are freshwater fi lter feeders. They eat algae and can grow to more than 20 kilos. As their reproduction eluded the original importers, the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (as it was then known) became involved and achieved limited breeding success. By 1989 there were nine fi sh left in New Zealand and they were all given to a private freshwater environmental restoration company.

Silver carp have huge potential as a tool in water quality management. Being fi lter feeders, they consume suspended algae from the water column and are biologically incapable of breeding in the wild in New Zealand. One of the prime areas for their introduction was for their use in algae control in the Rotorua lakes. Indeed, the ministry’s hatchery was

Christmas had A SILVER LINING

German intern vet Tim Kretzschmer releases baby silver carp into their growout pond

Stripping eggs from a female silver carp

Dr Tagried Kurwie holding one of the breeding silver carp

Four-day-old silver carp released into growout pond


A new study by the University of California at Davis contradicts earlier reports that salmon farms were responsible for the 2002 population crash of wild pink

salmon in the Broughton Archipelago of western Canada.The Broughton crash has become a rallying event for

people concerned about the potential environmental effects of open-net salmon farming, which has become a US$10 billion industry worldwide, producing nearly 1.5 million tonnes of fi sh annually.

The new study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, does not determine what caused the crash, but acquits the prime suspect: small skin parasites called sea lice.

“This is good news for anybody concerned about the effect of farm salmon on wild salmon,” said the study’s lead author, Gary Marty, a veterinary pathologist and research associate at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine. An expert in fi sh diseases, Marty has been studying the health of pink salmon since the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. “Sea lice from fi sh farms have no signifi cant effect on wild salmon population productivity,” Marty said.

The new study is the fi rst to analyse 20 years of fi sh production data and 10 years of sea-lice counts from every salmon farm in the Broughton Archipelago and compare them against 60 years of population counts of adult pink salmon. The study concludes

that farm fi sh are indeed the main source of sea lice on the area’s juvenile wild pink salmon, but it found no statistical correlation between lice levels on the farms and the lifetime survival of wild pink salmon populations.

The researchers were able to see, year by year, how many lice were on the farms when the young pink salmon went to sea, and how many of those salmon returned to spawn. The results were surprising, he said.

“The salmon that returned in such low numbers in 2002 were exposed as juveniles to fewer sea lice than the salmon which returned in record high numbers in 2001. Sea lice from farmed fi sh could not have caused the 2002 wild salmon population crash.

“The major lesson of this study is that we cannot settle for simple explanations for wild animal population declines,” Marty said. “There are very complex interactions among disease, environment and animal population health.”

He said sustainability studies had to engage all the science specialties to pursue a better understanding of these relationships.

Marty GD, Saksida SM, Quinn II TJ (2010). Relationship of farm salmon, sea lice and wild salmon populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA (December 1010).

See www.tinyurl.com/2agu3qg and www.tinyurl.com/25nqugh

Sea lice did not cause WILD SALMON DECLINE

Pink salmon spawning upriver in the Hood Canal, Washington

SEA LICE FROM FARMED FISH COULD NOT HAVE CAUSED THE 2002 WILD SALMON POPULATION CRASH…


Aquarium clinic helps CHILD UNDERSTANDING

The US$5.5 million Molina Animal Care Centre, a 1300sq m hospital which opened at the Aquarium of the Pacifi c last year, includes new technology for

treating marine animals ranging from seahorses to sea lions.The aquarium, at Long Beach, about 25 miles south of

Los Angeles, is one of only a few in the United States where visitors can watch as marine animals are examined and treated.

Surgical operations at the aquarium can be broadcast to the local children’s hospital so patients and their parents can watch, says the head of the aquarium, veterinarian Lance Adams. The idea is to let children know they are not alone and give them a chance to ask questions, says Dr Adams.

“It is truly state-of-the-art in terms of the equipment and facilities, but just as importantly, it allows visitors and children to really learn something about how we care for these creatures.”

Because the animals were wild there was always a chance something could go wrong, he said. “Animals can get overstressed and die. We do what we can to prevent it, but if something happens we just have to explain it to the kids.”

If a sea lion broke a tooth, a sawfi sh lost its rostrum or a shark’s eye was gouged out, cosmetic surgery would return the animal to its exhibit at the aquarium, Adams said. “We try to maintain the normal appearance of the animals.”

Fish which put on weight might have a change of diet. “But there is a limit, because you feed to the weakest or most sensitive fi sh in a tank.” Ageing fi sh could have problems

like renal failure, respiratory problems, thickening tissue and decreased activity.

“Fish breath can tell us a lot. Some halitosis is normal in aquatic animals because they eat raw fi sh, so they have bacteria in their mouths.

“But if it’s caused by a tooth abscess or pneumonia, the smell turns bad or rotten and alerts the biologists that something is wrong.”

Adams says students often ask what happens when the animals die. He tells them dead fi sh are removed from the tank, refrigerated until a necropsy can be done, then frozen and turned over to a rendering service. “We don’t re-feed any of the animals.”

He is also sometimes asked about part of a fi nger missing on his left hand.

Was it bitten off by a shark?” they want to know.“No,” he says, but he’s never sure they believe him.

k l f l bl h k d

crc.co.nz

Easy food safety compliance.Just follow our simple recipe.

It’s easy to identify the compliance level of our Food Grade products with the CRC Green Light Programme. Our product manual and wall chart ensure proper product usage and regulatory compliance.The products are AsureQuality, NZFSA and NSF rated for the food, beverage, dairy, meat and fishing industries. Available from leading distributors of engineering supplies. Visit crc.co.nz or call 09 272 2700 for detailed product information.

CRC_2910_AC


Editorial overset

breakthroughs in testing for toxinsnzaquaculture.co.nz/old-archives/ac40.pdf · 8 across the ditch:...

Documents