I wholeheartedly support the united stance taken by the Tasmanian Rock Lobster Council, the Tasmanian Abalone Council and the Tasmanian Commercial Divers Association in opposing any application to reintroduce florfenicol into Tasmania’s marine waters.

For too long, Tasmania’s wild fisheries have been expected to shoulder the consequences of an industrial salmon farming sector that continues to place commercial convenience ahead of the protection of our marine environment. The burden of managing disease within salmon pens should never be transferred to those who rely upon healthy, uncontaminated public waters for their livelihoods.

Tasmania has earned an international reputation for producing some of the world’s finest wild-caught seafood. That reputation has been built over generations through responsible stewardship of our marine environment and the hard work of commercial fishers and divers. It must not be compromised by the use of antibiotics in open marine waters.

Irrespective of differing opinions regarding the environmental effects of florfenicol, the commercial reality cannot be ignored. Many export markets operate without approved maximum residue limits for florfenicol in wild-caught seafood, meaning that even trace detections may result in rejected consignments, the loss of valuable export markets and irreparable damage to consumer confidence. Such risks are entirely unacceptable for industries that have done nothing to create the problem.

The Tasmanian salmon industry argues that florfenicol is necessary for animal welfare. Whilst the welfare of farmed fish is important, it does not justify exposing Tasmania’s wild fisheries, marine ecosystems and seafood reputation to unnecessary risk. Disease outbreaks within intensive aquaculture are an inherent consequence of that production system and should not be used as justification for introducing antibiotics into public waterways.

I remain fundamentally opposed to the continued expansion of industrial salmon farming in Tasmania. Our sheltered coastal waters are a shared public resource, not a waste-disposal system for an industry that repeatedly seeks exemptions and special treatment to overcome problems arising from intensive production methods. The long-term health of our marine environment, together with the interests of Tasmania’s wild fisheries, tourism industry and coastal communities, must take precedence.

The precautionary principle should prevail. Unless it can be demonstrated beyond doubt that the use of florfenicol presents no environmental, commercial or reputational risk whatsoever to Tasmania’s wild fisheries, no permit should be granted.

I commend the Tasmanian Rock Lobster Council, the Tasmanian Abalone Council and the Tasmanian Commercial Divers Association for standing together in defence of Tasmania’s wild fisheries. Their position is not merely about one antibiotic; it is about safeguarding the integrity of our marine environment, protecting internationally respected industries and ensuring that one sector is not permitted to endanger the livelihoods of another.