House debates
Tuesday, 15 March 2016
Bills
Biological Control Amendment Bill 2016; Second Reading
4:16 pm
Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source
I rise today to speak on and totally support the Biological Control Amendment Bill 2016. Amongst a number of things, this bill amends the definition of an organism for the purpose of the Biological Control Act 1984 to specifically include viruses and sub-viral agents. It also omits the term 'live' from references to organisms.
One of the areas I am most passionate about in relation to this bill is the proposal to start the process for release of the cyprinid herpesvirus 3 for the control of common carp known as the European carp, Cyprinus carpio. I announced this initial program at the Australian Fishing Tackle Association gala dinner on the Gold Coast on 27 July last year. All of those assembled from the fishing industry were extremely excited, because it is an opportunity to get rid of the carp biomass which fills our inland waterways, particularly through the Murray-Darling Basin. At that time I was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and had responsibility for the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.
Everyone, from fishers to farmers to environmentalists—the community as a whole—supports this program. This virus is specific to carp—carp only. It does not transmit to our native species. The CSIRO and others have been doing exhaustive testing. It does not transmit to our native birds or mammals; it is carp specific. It gives us the opportunity to remove 80 to 90 per cent of the carp biomass from our rivers.
The carp introduced over 100 years ago have been detrimental to our inland rivers. As I travelled the Murray-Darling Basin, many people would say to me: 'I remember, as a boy, this river was clear. We used to go down there, and—whether it was catching the hardyhead or the Murray cod or the perch—there was no problem. Then the carp started to explode in their population.' The carp destroy the bottom; they create their own environment. Destroying the existing environment stops the breeding habitat of our native fish.
This program is critically important, but it probably still has two years to run before it can be fully implemented. A number of issues still need to be addressed in relation to the rollout. A benefit of this program is that we will we see a reduction in the turbidity of the water. Remember that most of this water is potable water, not only for our cattle but also for human consumption. If you have travelled these waterways, you will know that they are almost a soft lime green in colour as a result of the turbidity in the water. The carp destroy the bottom, they destroy the vegetation and they destroy the habitat and breeding grounds of our native fish. That is why we have seen a reduction in our native fish stocks, particularly throughout the Murray-Darling Basin.
Implementing this virus will reduce the number of carp. But that is perhaps where we will face the biggest issue. As we termed it at the time, it will need a 'Team Australia' approach. We have a selective rollout of this virus, and the effect on the carp will be such that it will take approximately two to four days to kill them. We need to get the carp out of the water. We cannot allow the carp to die and break down in the water in these volumes, because it will exacerbate the situation in relation to the potability of the water. It will not be good for the cattle. It might be good for farmers to put on their paddocks, with the increased protein, but it is not good for cattle and not particularly good for humans. If we do not get the carp out of the water, there will be an increased cost in treating the water so that it is fit for people to drink. So we need a 'Team Australia' approach. It does not matter whether you are the National Farmers' Federation, the National Irrigators' Council, the Australian Conservation Foundation, the recreational fishers or the tourists—we need the whole of the community to come together under a 'Team Australia' approach.
In the process and the plan put forward by the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, there is an education program to be embarked on. Whether it is using the whole of the community or indeed getting new people into a Green Army style project, we need to focus on individual areas, work backwards from the mouth of the river—because the virus will not travel as quickly upriver because of the flowing water—and get the carp out of the water.
It is estimated that there could be one, two or three million tonnes of carp. We also know that, roughly, the biomass of carp in our river system is about 80 to 90 per cent of the total, so it is a big problem. Once this virus is released there is no turning back. Once it is in the water, it is in the water. It has proven effective in other countries that have released it into their water systems for the removal of the carp. The issue that we have is getting the carp out of the water system. The process of evaluation has been ongoing. The process of education needs to begin and the process of building the teams to address the situation will become urgent.
Of course there is a cost associated to this, estimated to be at least $50 million. This $50 million is a lot of money, but I believe that it can be structured out of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan through the sale of Commonwealth environmental water. The excess water that they have could fund it. It could be addressed as part of a structural adjustment mechanism funding plan, because it improves the river and, as you improve the river, there will be a multitude of benefits downstream to all those who are involved. What we need to do, though, is not repeat the cane toad episode. That is why these measures and biological security controls are being put into place and it is why the exhaustive testing is being undertaken. We do not need to repeat the cane toad issue, but we do need to remove the carp from our water system.
A number of people that have come out particularly strongly, and one of the people who is very strong on this—who also happens to be one of my constituents—is a researcher with the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries. He is an amazing young man named Matt Barwick. Matt Barwick is an expert on this and he has been studying the upside and the possible downsides. He has been a part of building the plan. He is one of the key organisers and orchestrators of this virus release control program.
They say it will be two years before it can be introduced. I do not want it introduced until we are 100 per cent sure and we know it will be effective, but I also do not want it delayed unnecessarily and in particular I do not want it delayed because of financial constraints. As I said, there is a possible cost estimated at around $50 million to introduce this. It is estimated that the economic impact of the carp in our river system is around $500 million a year.
I want you to consider a future with clean, healthy rivers. There is less cost in treating the water for a potable water supply—you do not get all the sediments and the suspended matter in there creating the turbid green water, so you reduce costs there. Importantly, you will increase tourism. You will increase tourism into our inland river systems, which benefits regional and rural Australia because people will go there fishing. They will go there fishing to catch their dream fish, the Murray cod. They will go fishing to catch their perch, their hardyheads or their redfin. I must admit, the redfin is a species introduced into Australia, but it is not creating the environmental damage that the European carp is.
As we increase the tourism in regional towns, it will actually help to pick up some of the slack caused by the cyclic peaks that occur with the agricultural industry. It provides greater continuity. It provides greater cash flow for all those businesses in those towns—not just the fishing tackle shops, but the camping grounds, the hotels, the restaurants, the fuel shops and, in fact, everyone in these towns. I cannot stress how important it is to put this control agent, the CyHV-3 herpesvirus, into our water as soon as possible.
The CSIRO, through their Australian Animal Health Laboratory, have been doing extensive research. They advise me that the virus does not threaten any native species. I know they have said that before, but what is important is that they have also tested 14 fish species, as well as crustaceans, mammals and birds, to be confident there will be no transfer to native species. These species include our iconic Murray cod, the silver perch and the golden perch, and a few more fish, amphibians and reptiles are currently being tested. What is also critical to understand, before people get excited about introducing this virus into the water, is that the virus is not able to be transmitted to human beings, and that is important.
What are the downsides? After fairly forensic examination of this whole process, the only downside is if we do not come together as 'Team Australia' and work to get the carp out of the water. There needs to be management plans put into place once these carp are removed—we do not want a stinking biomass sitting on the bank of the river. We need to look at ways of utilising them for fertiliser and perhaps for animal feed. We need to do something with them, but we need to plan ahead. We need to fund that plan and fund it effectively and efficiently so that there are no hiccups on the way. As I said, once the virus is released into the water, it will spread, so we have to step up to the plate, manage the situation and deliver a real outcome for all Australians.
There are many other positive aspects to this bill, particularly in relation to rabbits. As a young fellow growing up, I remember the plagues of rabbits as I would travel. They introduced myxomatosis, and that knocked them over for a while, but they got used to that. Then they introduced calicivirus, and that knocked a large number of rabbits over, but again they are getting used to the virus and developing measures within their system which stop it being so effective. One of the other parts of this bill is allowing for the introduction of a new strain or additive to the calicivirus, which will have further impacts on rabbits.
Australia would be a wonderful place if our forefathers had not introduced European carp, foxes and rabbits—or, indeed, deer—to Australia. These have all been destructive to our environment. Unfortunately it is hard to eradicate all of them, but where we have an opportunity, and particularly with carp, we must seize that opportunity. Or, as I said at the speech, what we have to have is 'carp diem'. We have to seize the day and we have to remove the carp. I strongly commend this bill to the House.
No comments