An overview of the impacts of translocated native fish species in Australia

Final 11 August 2008

Sinclair Knight Merz ABN 590 Orrong Road, Armadale 3143 PO Box 2500 Malvern VIC 3144 Australia Tel: +Fax: +Web: www.skmconsulting.com
Commonwealth of Australia 2008 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. LIMITATION: The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth and the Authors do not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication.
The SKM logo is a trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd, 2006

Contents

1. Introduction
1.1 1.2 Background Objectives

Project approach

2.1 2.2
Project review panel Collation of information

Distributional data

2.3 2.4
Project workshop Quality assurance
Native fish translocations in Australia Environmental impacts (positive and negative)

4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3

Genetic issues
Direct effects Indirect effects Hatchery selection

4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Predation Competition and habitat alteration Disease Conservation Summary
Social and economic impacts (positive and negative)

5.1 5.2 5.3

Socio-economic assessment Commercial Fishing Industry and Aquaculture Recreational Fishing Sector

Fish stocking

5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8
Tourism Social and cultural values Impacts of management actions Multiplier effects Knowledge gaps
Management of translocated native fish species

6.1.1 6.1.2

Techniques for capture

Nets Traps

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

PAGE i

6.1.3 6.1.4 6.1.5
Electrofishing Poisons Water level reduction

6.2 6.3

Techniques for euthanizing Summary

Policies and regulations

7.1 7.2
7.2.1 7.2.2 7.2.3 7.2.4 7.2.5 7.2.6 7.2.7 7.2.8
National policies State policies
New South Wales Victoria Australian Capital Territory Tasmania South Australia Western Australia Queensland Northern Territory

7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6

Murray-Darling Basin Recovery plans Relationship with National policies International policies

Summary

8.1 Knowledge gaps

References

Appendix A Questionnaire Appendix B Consultation Appendix C Fish species distribution
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE ii
Document history and status
Revision Date issued 18/02/2008 22/02/2008 Reviewed by G Closs, S Treadwell A Arthington, M Lintermans, P Davies, J Harris Public comment S Treadwell G Closs S Treadwell S Treadwell 11/08/2008 S Treadwell 15/07/2008 Practice review Professional review Project Director Approval Approved by S Treadwell Date approved 20/02/2008 Revision type Practice review Professional review

5 Final

04/04/2008 14/07/2008 17/07/2008 11/08/2008

Distribution of copies

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 2
escapes of silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) have recently been recorded in Western Australia (Cross 2000). Galaxiid species have also been moved outside their natural range. Golden galaxias (Galaxias auratus) became established in Lake Crescent as a result of invasion from Lake Sorell, in Central Tasmania via a man-made channel (Allen et al. 2002). There have been anecdotal reports of translocated populations of spotted galaxias (Galaxias truttaceus) north of the Great Dividing Range in the Loddon and Campaspe River systems, central Victoria since at least the early to mid 1980s (G. Closs, University of Otago, pers. comm.). Climbing galaxias have also been translocated into the Murray River via transfers from the Snowy Mountain hydro electric scheme (Waters et al. 2002). The translocation of native species has had significant social and economic impacts. Translocation has created viable recreational fisheries in many areas where the indigenous native fish fauna are generally small bodied species. There are a number of successful fisheries in Australia which are based upon non-indigenous natives such as the translocated species of golden perch (Macquaria ambigua) in the Wimmera River, western Victoria. Native fish such as barramundi (Lates calcarifer) have also been successfully farmed in freshwater aquaculture schemes outside their natural distribution providing economic benefits. 1.2 Objectives The Threatened Species Scientific Committee, which advises the Environment Minister on matters relating to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC) Act, is considering a nomination to list the introduction of live native or non-native fish into Australian watercourses that are outside their natural geographic distribution as a key threatening process. Similar listings have occurred in NSW and Victoria. SKM has been engaged by Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) to undertake an assessment of the Impacts of translocating native fish species throughout Australia. The following document aims to put the Department in a proactive position of having up-to-date knowledge on introduced and/or translocated fish in Australia in the event that the nomination is successful and a Commonwealth threat abatement plan is required. DEWHA will use the information in this document to determine priority research projects for potential funding, including projects which may address similar gaps/recommendations across the various reports, and projects which may be specific to individual groups of fish or issues. This document outlines the distribution of native fish translocations throughout Australia, the impacts of translocations, the management of translocations and the policies governing translocations. This information is set out in the following sections:

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 5

Engagereviewpanel

P H A S E 1
Collectandcollateenvironmental information
Overviewoftheeconomicvalueof industries
Mapdistributionofselectedintroduced fishspecies
Assess thesocialandeconomicimpacts

P H A S E 2

Documentpreliminaryimpactsand workshopdiscussionpaper

Workshop

Reporting
DistributeDraftReportforpeerreview

P H A S E 3

DistributePeerReviewedReportfor stakeholdercomment

P H A S E 4

Finalisereport

P H A S E 5

Figure 2-1 Native fish translocation project approach by task indicating five project phases
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 6
2.2.1 Distributional data A preliminary list of 49 native translocated fish species was obtained from Lintermans (2004) with further distributional data obtained from various other sources. The primary source of distribution data was stocking data for each State and Territory. Stocking data from Queensland (DPIF 2007), Australian Capital Territory (M Jekabsons, Parks, Conservation & Lands, pers. comm.) and New South Wales (NSW Fisheries 2007) was obtained from the State/Territory run databases while Victorian stocking data was obtained from a combination of website downloads (DPI 2007) and Barnham (1991). The primary source of information for translocations within South Australia was Hammer and Walker (2004). The key sources of information for translocations in Western Australia, Northern Territory and Tasmania have been obtained from discussions with Greg Jenkins (Challenger TAFE, WA), David Morgan (Murdoch University, WA), Phil Hall (Northern Territory Fisheries, NT) and Scott Hardie (Department of Primary Industry and Water, TAS). The natural distribution of most species has been transcribed from Allen et al. (2002). The exception to this was the natural distribution of two-spined blackfish (Gadopsis bispinosus) and Rendahls tandan (Porochilus rendahlii) which were translated from Lintermans (2007). The distribution of the wet tropics tandan (Tandanus sp., a subspecies of freshwater catfish (Tandanus tandanus) (D. Burrows, James Cook University, pers. comm.) along with Cooper Creek catfish (Neosiluroides cooperensis), desert rainbowfish (Melanotaenia splendida tatei), Flinders Ranges mogurnda (Mogurnda clivicola), northwest glassfish (Ambassis sp.), silver tandan (Porochilus argenteus) and Welchs grunter (Bidyanus welchi) is yet to be described. The natural distribution of all species has been undertaken by highlighting the catchments from which these species have been known to occur using ArcGIS and then using the map presented in Allen et al. (2002) and Lintermans (2007) to more accurately represent the natural distribution for respective species. This latter stage was undertaken as it was clear from the map presented in the Allen et al. (2002) that many species had not been recorded from the whole of the catchment. The distribution of translocated native species has been plotted over the natural species distribution of each species. The location of translocations has been plotted to broadly represent the location of translocations, and given the inaccuracy of some data obtained, should not be taken as exact locations. The data has been divided into five year classes <1960, >1960 (no specific year available), 1960-1980, >1980 and undated (no year specified) to identify the distribution of translocations over time. 2.3 Project workshop A project workshop was held in Melbourne in late December 2007 to evoke discussion on the information collected to date and access and collate further information literature and distributional data. This workshop was attended by members of the SKM project team (Sam Hannon and Dr Simon Treadwell), DEHWA (Julie Quinn) and the project review panel (Prof.

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 9
Table 3-1: Native species which have been translocated within Australia (77 species) indicating source of translocation data.
Map Number 5 Common name Archerfish Australian bass Australian grayling Australian smelt Banded grunter Species name Toxotes chatareus Macquaria novemaculeata Prototroctes maraena Retropinna semoni Amniataba percoides QLD undated QLD SA, QLD VIC VIC VIC NSW NSW, VIC, QLD <> 1960 >1980 Data Source (Barlow et al. 1987; McKay 1989; Hogan 1995) (McKay 1989; Hogan 1995; Hammer and Walker 2004; DPI 2007; NSW DPI 2007) S Challen, DPIF, pers. comm., J Smith, DPI, pers. comm. G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm. G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm., (Lintermans 2007) (Barlow et al. 1987; Hogan 1995; DNR 1999; Rowland 2001) P Hall, NT Fisheries, pers. comm., G Ship, NT DPI, pers. comm., , S Challen, DPIF, pers. comm., D Morgan, Murdoch University, pers. comm., A Hogan pers. comm., B Bayn, pers. comm., G Werren, pers. comm., (MacKinnon and Cooper 1987; McKay 1989; White 1991; Hogan 1995; Pearce 2000; Russell et al. 2003; Hammer and Walker 2004; Pusey et al. 2006) GJenkins, Challenger TAFE, pers. comm. (Department of Fisheries 2004) (Hogan 1995; Russell et al. 2003) T Vallance, pers. comm. (Barlow et al. 1987; McKay 1989; Hogan 1995; Werren 1997; Russell et al. 2003; Lintermans 2007) TAS VIC TAS, VIC TAS, VIC VIC TAS ACT The Inland Fisheries Commission Ledger of samples lodged with the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (Waters et al. 2002; Lintermans 2007) G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm., Raadik unpublished data, P. Davies, University of Tasmania, pers. comm., G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm.,(Lintermans 2007) Actual translocated distribution not formally described Actual translocated distribution not formally described SA VIC QLD QLD VIC QLD VIC QLD VIC (Hammer and Walker 2004; Lintermans 2007) G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm. (McKay 1989) (DNR 1999) (Barnham 1991; DPI 2007) (McKay 1989; DNR 1999) (DNR 1999) G Paras, La Trobe University pers. comm. Actual translocated distribution not formally described (DNR 1999) M Jekabsons, ACT Government, pers. comm., S Challen, DPIF, pers. comm., S Wedderburn, University of Adelaide, pers. comm., P Clunie, DSE, pers. comm., (McKay 1989; Hogan 1995; Russell et al. 2003; Hammer and Walker 2004; DPI 2007; Lintermans 2007) (McKay 1989; DNR 1999) (DNR 1999) (Webb et al. 1996; Werren 1997; DNR 1999) (DNR 1999) (Russell et al. 2003)
Barramundi Black bream Black catfish Bony herring Clarence galaxias Climbing galaxias Common galaxias Cooper Creek catfish Desert rainbowfish Dwarf flathead gudgeon Dwarf galaxias Eastern rainbowfish Empire gudgeon Estuary perch Fire-tailed gudgeon Flathead goby Flathead gudgeon Flinders Ranges Mogurnda Fly-specked hardyhead
Lates calcarifer Acanthopagrus butcheri Neosilurus ater Nematalosa erebi Galaxias johnstoni Galaxias brevipinnis Galaxias maculatus Neosiluroides cooperensis Melanotaenia splendida tatei Philypnodon sp. Galaxiella pusilla Melanotaenia splendida splendida Hypseleotris compressa Macquaria colonorum Hypseleotris galii Glossogobius giurus Philypnodon grandiceps Mogurnda clivicola Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum stercusmuscarum

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 18
Other organisms may also experience the impact of fish translocation. For example, frogs and birds may compete for similar resources as fish species. Increased competition for resources may occur if a fish community is supplemented through translocations. However, translocations of small fish or fish at the fingerling stage can prove a possible positive for bird life where they can feed on these new arrivals (Burrows 2002), although such potential benefits are rarely planned. Impacts of translocation on habitat resources (space) also require consideration. Specific impacts are likely to depend on the abundance of stocked and wild fish, and extent of suitable habitat. The addition of stocked fish can result in competition for space and habitat. Competition will be extreme if habitat is a limited resource and stocked and wild fish have similar habitat requirements. Competition for habitats may be either aggressive (interference) or passive (exploitation); however, this largely depends on the territorial nature and behaviour of species. This unfortunately is difficult to assess because few studies have been conducted (Gillanders et al. 2006). Little work has been undertaken on the likely effects of fish stocking on habitat alteration and degradation. Of the work available there is little evidence that introduced fish have seriously altered aquatic habitats in Australia (Arthington 1991). Habitat alterations caused by stocking native fish may occur if individuals exceed the carrying capacity for a particular habitat. Habitat alterations may arise indirectly via additional grazing on macrophytes, which can alter habitat site conditions, such as sediment stability (Gillanders et al. 2006). A potential impact of stocked native species is the increased need for food resources, such as macrophytes, the additional grazing of which may alter biomass and, therefore, associated habitats (Gillanders et al. 2006). Impacts of habitat alteration may be restricted to a small scale where the introduction of fish has occurred. 4.4 Disease Fortunately Australia is generally free of many freshwater finfish diseases found around the world (Kailola 1990). There are few examples of disease transfers directly from one native to another without the introduction of the disease through a non-native fish(Langdon 1990; Cadwallader 1996). One example of a native disease transfer is associated with juvenile barramundi (Lates calcarifer) and a barramundi picornia-like virus, (BPLV). It has been recognised that Macquarie perch, Murray cod and silver perch are susceptible to BPLV and when moving barramundi all precautions must be taken so not to introduce BPLV into a new environment (Glazebrook et al. 1990). Murray cod have also shown to be susceptible to disease from imported aquarium species. The mass mortality of Murray cod in an aquaculture facility in 2003 is believed to be attributed to a virus that entered the country from the importation of ornamental fish, namely gourami. The outbreak of the gourami iridovirus caused up to 90% mortality of Murray cod fingerlings in farms. The lack of host specificity of this virus means that a number of other native species may also be vulnerable to this virus including Trout cod, Mary River cod and eastern freshwater cod

Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii peelii)
Carp have been identified in the gut conditions of Murray cod (Ebner 2006)
Lernaea cyprinacea, Chilodonella cyprini (Langdon 1990). Potential carrier of epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 23
(EHNV) (Cadwallader 1996). Susceptible to BPLV (barramundi picorna-like virus) (Glazebrook et al. 1990; Arthington and McKenzie 1997) Exotic disease may spread through cod species and lead to mass mortailities (Go et al. 2006; Whittington and Chong 2007)
Murray cod are translocated to the Mary River, Queensland there is potential that the hybridization with Mary River cod with threaten the survival of the latter species (Harris and Dixon 1986b; Douglas et al. 1994; Wager 1994; Phillips 2002)
Pedder galaxias (Galaxias pedderensis)
Competition with G. brevipinnis and brown trout (Salmo trutta) for food and space (Crook and Sanger 1997; Crook 2001; Jackson 2004; Threatened Species Section 2006)
Habitat loss due to alterations to Lake Pedder increased pressure from trout because of alterations(Jackson 2004; Threatened Species Section 2006) Lernaea cyprinacea, Chilodonella cyprini (Langdon 1990) Possible hybridisation between Northern g. marmoratus and Southern g. marmoratus (Ryan et al. 2004) Southern pygmy perch likely comprises two species, risk of hybridisation between the two (Phillips 2002; Gillanders et al. 2006)
River blackfish (Gadopsis marmoratus)
Silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus)
Susceptible to epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus (EHNV) (Cadwallader 1996) Susceptible to BPLV (barramundi picorna-like virus) (Glazebrook et al. 1990; Arthington and McKenzie 1997)
Sleepy cod (Oxyeleotris lineolatus)
Decline of Purple-spotted gudgeon (M. adspersa) from competition and predation from Sleepy cod (Pusey et al. 2006; Pusey 2007) See also (Pusey 2007) for predation by sleepy cod.
Southern pygmy perch Striped gudgeon (Gobiomorphus australis) Swan galaxias (Galaxias fontanus) Trout cod (Maccullochella macquariensis) Possible predation from brown trout and redfin. (Jackson 2004) Possible competition of brown trout (Jackson 2004)
Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996) Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996)
Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996) Exotic disease may spread through cod species and lead to mass mortailities (Go et al. 2006; Whittington and Chong 2007)
Detrimental effects of hybridisation of Maccullochella species and subspecies has been demonstrated (Rowland 1985; Wager 1994).
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 24
5.1 Socio-economic assessment This section sets out to provide an overview of the socio-economic value of the industries that are reliant on native translocated fish species within Australia. This has been undertaken through a review of the literature with consideration of the values associated with the following aspects of freshwater native species: Commercial fishing; The recreational and tourism fishing sector; and Aquatic species conservation. The focus of the literature review was the identification of papers that relate directly to translocations. In particular, the economic and social values identified with the translocated species where translocated species represent a significant proportion or influence upon the resource quality available for recreation, commercial and conservation activities. As part of the assessment, key value indicators were developed to describe the values of industries reliant on native translocated fish and these are used to assess impacts. 5.2 Commercial Fishing Industry and Aquaculture Aquaculture dominates the commercial industries based on translocated native species. This is because inland fisheries have largely closed with the cessation of commercial fisheries in the Murray-Darling Basin (ABARE 2007). Particular effort is put into culturing the following species in Australia for stocking and table fish: Barramundi; Eel species; Silver perch; Murray cod; Golden perch; and Barcoo grunter. The following information summary is based on the latest ABARE fisheries report, Australian Fisheries Statistics 2006 (2007). Overall, aquaculture remains a significant sector of the total Australian fishery production. Barramundi production has more than doubled from 2000-01 to 2005-06, while the diadromous and marine species of salmon, trout, tuna and pearl oysters remain the most valuable aquaculture production systems. Table 5-1 provides a production value for translocated native species for each state for 2004-05.

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 29
The National Recreational and Indigenous survey also looked at the importance of the motivation for fishing based a five point scale (very, quite, not very, not at all, unsure) for a number of factors. A key results is that to relax and unwind was identified as being important (ie very important or quite important) by 90% of respondents. Fishing for enjoyment of catching fish was important for 80% of respondents. As well, 73% of those surveyed considered it important to be with friends. These figures indicate that it is likely the community values fishing above what it actually spends on it. To calculate the actual consumer surplus from recreational fishing would require the estimation of a demand curve for the activity. This is not possible in this instance for a number of reasons, including that recreational fishing is not a fully competitive market, where the supply and demand for recreational fishing can be influenced significantly by price. Also, to obtain the total consumer surplus for native translocated species, separate demand curves would need to be constructed, probably on a state by state basis, to reflect differing demands for species. A number of economic methods are available to ascertain these curves (Campbell and Brown 2003). It is not the intention in this section to provide a detailed description of them, however they fall into two main groups revealed and stated preference methods. Revealed preference methods use actual behaviour data to construct values. Stated preference methods are based on questioning survey participants in a hypothetical market. This is usually undertaken to understand the willingness to pay or willingness to accept for a particular environmental or policy change. Rolfe and Prayaga (2007) estimated the value of recreational fishing at freshwater dams in Queensland. The impoundments studied were Boodooma and Bjelke-Petersen Dams in South-East Queensland and Fairbairn Dam close to Emerald. While Redclaw are the target species in Fairbairn, the other dams are stocked with native species. The study employed a travel cost methodology and found individual consumer surpluses ranged from $59 per angler at Bjelke-Petersen Dam to $904 per angler at Fairbairn Dam. The total consumer surplus over a one year period at all sites was estimated at around $8.8 million. The study also found that recreational values vary between groups and across sites making it difficult to extend the results to other non-regulated freshwater systems. Overall it is difficult to put an exact monetary figure on the value of recreational fishing based on translocated species. Catch data is generally only collected on a state basis, so it is unclear if the recreational fishing of the species occurs in their home range or in the areas to which fish have been translocated. Moreover, it is virtually impossible to distinguish angling effort between stocked and wild fish unless stocked fish are tagged and anglers report their catches. While the average spend per year provides some estimate of the value fishers place on fishing, there is difficulty in disentangling the value of catching fish from value of the total fishing experience (Wheeler and Damania 2001) to gain the total consumer surplus associated with recreational fishing. Thus it would be unwise to place an actual value on recreational fishing for translocated species, suffice to

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 38
level reduction can be applied on two levels: controlled reduction in water level to permit the use of a supplementary technique or complete drying of the target water body. The controlled reduction in water level will lead to the fish being concentrated in a smaller area and permit cost effective removal using a suitable fishing technique. The impact on the target fish species and by-catch will then be as per the respective technique to be applied. This approach may however impact on riparian and aquatic vegetation (habitat) if water level is reduced for extended periods. The complete drying of a waterbody will lead to the death of fish and must only be applied where the fish community of the waterbody is known and it is desirable to kill all individuals. It is therefore more appropriate to apply this technique once it can be confirmed that only the target species remain. This can be a very labour intensive and dangerous technique as movement through soft substrate can be difficult or may lead to staff getting stuck. The impact of this technique on target fish species and by-catch is therefore high with a high proportion of fish present likely to be collected. The community perception is likely to be negative as it will take significant time before all fish are removed leading to possible odours. Controlling the water level has been used unintentionally to remove fish from Upper Coliban Reservoir in Victoria in 2006. The Upper Coliban Reservoir was drawn down to a very low level to meet water supply commitments. As water supply was at critical levels in the area in late 2006, the decision was taken to minimise evaporative losses by transferring remaining water from Upper Coliban into the immediately adjoining Lauriston Reservoir. On transferring the water, a high abundance of carp was observed in the mud and subsequently physically removed (J. Sloan, Victorian DPI, pers. comm.). In addition, water level reduction has been used by La Trobe University to control the population of gambusia (Gambusia holbrooki). One pond within a closed system was dried to kill fish following on from previous effective applications of this same technique within the same facility (G. Paras, La Trobe University, pers. comm.). 6.2 Techniques for euthanizing An effective and humane method of killing fish species is essential in order to minimise pain to fish. Numerous euthanizing techniques are employed by fisheries researchers throughout Australia. They involve a combination of humane and potentially inhumane techniques. Recent documentation of wildlife handling and euthanasia techniques have been outlined by Rose (2007) who has collated information for various fauna species from the euthanasia codes of practice developed by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching (ANZCCART), and National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). The preferred method for the euthanasia of fish in Australia is an overdose of anaesthetic agent delivered in a bath with the fish kept in the bath for 10 minutes after respiration ceases. Fish may also be chemically restrained in a bath of anaesthetic agent and then barbiturates injected into the

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 41
diseases and possibilities of affecting biodiversity, in accordance with consistent risk assessment protocols aimed at minimising adverse impacts. 4) A decision to permit a translocation may include a protocol that may be used for similar translocations. 5) The risk assessment will include assessment of the likelihood and consequences of an introduction and the mechanism for risk management and minimisation. Where aquatic organisms are released into the wild, considerations of habitat preservation, threatened species status, and the genetic effects need to be evaluated. 6) Whenever disease and parasite considerations are adequately addressed, translocation of threatened species for the purpose of stock rehabilitation is supported with appropriate measures to ensure the genetic diversity and integrity of the species. 7) Monitoring programs will be used by implementing agencies to assess and improve the accuracy of predictions generated by risk assessments and the effectiveness of management strategies applied to translocations. This national policy is the basis upon which all States and Territory fisheries agencies have developed translocation policies and guidelines specific to their jurisdictions. It clarifies issues surrounding translocation, sets out agreed national policy principles and describes guidelines for the development of translocation policies. (Draft) ANZECC Policy for Translocations of Threatened Animals in Australia (Anon undated) This policy applies to the translocation within Australia of threatened animals for the purpose of nature conservation, usually for the purpose of decreasing the probability of a species becoming extinct. This policy applies to any animal species (not just aquatic species) listed as threatened according to Commonwealth or State legislation. This policy makes particular reference to The IUCN Position Statement on Translocation of Living Organisms (1987). National Code of Practice for Recreational and Sport Fishing (RecFish Australia 2001) This code is a voluntary agreement among RecFish Australias 11 national and state/territory fishing member associations. It addresses four levels of fishing responsibility, including protecting fisheries and the environment, treating fish humanely and respecting the rights of others. This code specifically states that exotic species should not be used as live bait and all captured live bait should be released only into the waters from which it was collected. Recfish Australia would like to impose a ban on the ad hoc stocking of exotic species on private property and states that fish stockers in private waters should be encouraged to utilise only native species within their range, sourced from genetically secure stock. Recfish Australia also propose that stocking on private property should only take place if sufficient preventative measures have been undertaken to ensure

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 42
that there is no possibility of accidental release of introduced species that can potentially colonise local waterways. 7.2 State policies
7.2.1 New South Wales Introduction and Translocation Policy (NSW Fisheries 2003) The NSW translocation policy provides for continued fish stockings, but limits what species can be stocked and where stocking can occur in an attempt to minimise any adverse effects of these stockings. It is supported by the following legislation: Section 216(1) of the Fisheries Management Act, 1994: A person must not release into any waters any live fish except under the authority of a permit issued by the Minister or an aquaculture permit. Hatchery Quality Assurance Program for Murray Cod, Golden Perch and Siler Perch (Rowland and Tully 2004) The Hatchery Quality Assurance Program (HQAP) provides a framework for best practice and accreditation within the industry, and will provide significant benefits for the conservation of native fishes, recreational fisheries and commercial aquaculture in NSW and other states. This HQAP could also be used as a guideline for the production and stocking of the endangered species trout cod (Maccullochella macquariensis) and eastern freshwater cod (Maccullochella ikei) in NSW, and the critically endangered Mary River cod (Maccullochella peelii mariensis) in Queensland. The HQAP provides a broad overview of the impacts of inappropriate stocking and the requirements under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 for a permit to be issued prior to legal stocking taking place. 7.2.2 Victoria Policy statement native fish stocking in public waters (State of Victoria 2003) This statement applies to the stocking of native fish in Victorias inland waters for the purposes of conservation and recreation. This stocking applies only to public waters, with the exception of special management or research needs. The priority waters for stocking will be based on habitat suitability criteria, existing or potential population levels of the species, capacity to monitor the stocking results, and the needs of the angling public or conservation status of the species. Guidelines for Assessing Translocations of Live Aquatic Organisms in Victoria (DPI 2003) These guidelines provide a risk assessment and administrative framework for proposals to deliberately translocate live aquatic organisms into and within Victorian waters, which require approval under the Victorian Fisheries Act 1995. Protocols for the Translocation of Fish in Victorian Inland Public Waters (DPI 2005b) These protocols apply to the translocation of fish, for recreational fishing and conservation purposes. In accordance with the Guidelines for Assessing Translocations of Live Aquatic

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 53
Hogan, A. E. (1995). A history of fish stocking in Queensland - where are we at? Fish stocking in Queensland: Getting it right!. P. Cadwallader and B. Kerby. Townsville, Queensland, Queensland Fisheries Management Authority: 8-24. Hollaway, M. and Hamlyn, A. (2001). Freshwater Fishing in Queensland A Guide to Stocked Waters (2nd ed.). QDPI Information Series QI01034. Brisbane, Queensland Department of Primary Industries: 154pp. Hortle, K. G. and Pearson, R. G. (1990). "Fauna of the Annan River system, far north Queensland, with reference to the impact of tin mining. I. fishes." Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 41: 677-694. Hurst, T., Ryan, P., Brown, M. and Kay, B. (2005). "Fishing for a mosquito control agent." Arbovirus Research In Australia 9: 143-147. IFC (2006). Policy for the translocation of freshwater fish in Tasmania: Background information, management issues and policy statements - Internal Draft, Inland Fisheries Commission. IUCN (1999). The IUCN position statement on translocation of living organisms: Introductions, reintroductions and re-stocking (www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/transe.htm). IUCN (2000) "IUCN Guidelines For The Prevention Of Biodiversity Loss Caused By Alien Invasive Species." Volume, DOI: Jackson, J. E. (2004). Tasmanian Galaxiidae Recovery Plan 2004-2008, Inland Fisheries Service, Hobart. Jackson, J. E., Raadik, T. A., Lintermans, M. and Hammer, M. (2004). "Alien Salmonids in Australia: impediments to effective impact management, and future directions." New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 38: 447-455. Jackson, P. D., Koehn, J. D., Lintermans, M. and Sanger, A. C. (1996). Family Gadopsidae. Freshwater blackfishes. Freshwater fishes of south-eastern Australia. R. M. McDowall, Reed Books, Chatswood.: 186-190. Kailola, P. J. (1990). Translocated and exotic fishes: towards a cooperative role for industry and government. Introduced and translocated fishes and their ecological effects, Proceedings of the Australian Society for Fish Biology Workshop No. 8. Magnetic Island, Townsville, Queensland 24-25 August 1989, Bureau of Rural Resources. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Kearney, R. E. and Kildea, M. A. (2001). The Status of Murray Cod in the Murray-Darling Basin, Applied Ecology Research Group University of Canberra. Keenan, C. and Salini, J. (1990). The genetic implications of mixing barramundi stocks in Australia. Introduced and translocated fishes and their ecological effects, Proceedings of the Australian Society for Fish Biology Workshop No. 8. Magnetic Island, Townsville, Queensland 24-25 August 1989, Bureau of Rural Resources. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Koehn, J. (2004a). "Carp (Cyprinus carpio) as a powerful invader in Australian waterways." Freshwater Biology 49: 882-894. Koehn, J. (2004b). "Priority management actions for alien freshwater fish species in Australia." New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 38: 457-472. Langdon, J. S. (1988). Prevention and control of fish diseases in the Murray-Darling Basin. Workshop on Native Fish Management, Canberra, Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Langdon, J. S. (1989). Disease risks of fish introductions and translocations. Introduced and translocated fishes and their ecological effects., Canberra, Bureau of Rural Resources. Australian Government Printing Office. Langdon, J. S. (1990). Disease risks of fish introductions and translocations. Introduced and translocated fishes and their ecological effects, Proceedings of the Australian Society for

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE 55
Navrud, S. (2001). "Economic Valuation of Inland Recreational Fisheries: Empirical Studies and their Policy use in Norway." Fisheries Management and Ecology 8(4-5): 369-382. NFA (2007a). Action Plan for South Australian Freshwater Fishes 2007-2012, Native Fish Australia (SA) Inc. NFA (2007b). Native Fish Australia - trout cod (http://www.nativefish.asn.au/troutcod.html) Date accessed 16 July 2008. Northern Territory Government (2004). Translocation policy for Aquaculture. Department of Business Industry and Resource Development, Fisheries Group. NSW DPI (2005). Oxleyan pygmy perch - Recovery Plan and Background paper. Nelsons Bay, NSW Department of Primary Industries. NSW DPI (2007). Fish Stocking Database: accessed July 2007. Cronulla, NSW Department of Primary Industries. NSW Fisheries (1997). Australian Code of Electrofishing Practice, NSW Fisheries. NSW Fisheries (2003). Environmental impact statement - freshwater fish stocking in NSW. Cronulla, NSW Fisheries. NSW Fisheries (2004). Eastern (Freshwater) Cod (Maccullochella ikei) Recovery Plan. Nelson Bay, NSW Fisheries. NSW Fisheries (2007). Fish Stocking Database. Cronulla, NSW Department of Primary Industries. Pearce, M. (2000). Post Stocking Survey Report Koombooloomba Dam Ravenshoe, Qld. Survey 1, 19 April 2000. QDPI Information Series QI00095. Brisbane, Queensland Fisheries Service, Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Phillips, B. (2002). " Managing fish translocation and stocking in the Murray-Darling Basin: statement, recommendations and supporting papers " Canberra, WWF-Australia. Pusey, B., Bird, J., Kennard, M. J. and Arthington, A. H. (1997). "Distribution of the Lake Eacham Rainbowfish in the Wet Tropics Region, North Queensland." Australian Journal of Zoology 45: 75-84. Pusey, B. J. (2002). Burdekin Catchment Water Resource Plan: Fishes, Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Pusey, B. J. (2007). Current Environmental Conditions and Impacts of Existing Water Resource Development. Fish. Pioneer Valley Water Resource Plan, Appendix I, Queensland Government (Department of Natural Resources and Mines). Pusey, B. J., Burrows, D., Arthington, A. H. and Kennard, M. J. (2006). "Translocation and spread of piscivorous fishes in the Burdekin River, north-eastern Australia." Biological Invasions 8: 965-977. QFMA (1996). Queensland Freshwater Fisheries: Discussion Paper No. 4. Brisbane, Queensland Fisheries Management Authority. QLD Government (2006a). Fisheries (Freshwater) Management Plan 1999, This reprint was prepared by the Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Counsel. QLD Government (2006b). Management arrangements for translocation of live aquatic organisms (transport between bioregions) for Aquaculture, Aquaculture Policy FAMOP015, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Rayner, T. and Creese, R. (2006). "A review of rotenone use for the control of non-indigenous fish in Australian fresh waters, and an attempted eradication of the noxious fish, Phalloceros caudimaculatus." New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 40: 477-486. RecFish Australia (2001). The National Code of Practice for Recreational and Sport Fishing 2001. Rolfe, J. and Prayaga, P. (2007). "Estimating values for recreational fishing at freshwater dams in Queensland." The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 51: 157174.

An overview of the impacts of translocated native fish species in Australia

Draft 04 April 2008

Sinclair Knight Merz ABN 590 Orrong Road, Armadale 3143 PO Box 2500 Malvern VIC 3144 Australia Tel: +Fax: +Web: www.skmconsulting.com
COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Sinclair Knight Merz constitutes an infringement of copyright. LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltds Client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party.
The SKM logo is a trade mark of Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Ltd, 2006

Contents

1. Introduction
1.1 1.2 Background Objectives
Native fish translocations in Australia
2.1 2.2 Data sources Distribution of species
Environmental impacts (positive and negative)

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3

Genetic issues
Direct effects Indirect effects Hatchery selection

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

Predation Competition Disease Summary
Social and economic impacts (positive and negative)

4.1 4.2 4.3

Socio-economic assessment aim Commercial Fishing Industry Recreational Fishing Sector

Fish stocking

4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8
Tourism Conservation Impacts of management actions Multiplier effects Knowledge gaps
Management of translocated native fish species
5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5

Techniques for capture

Nets Traps Electrofishing Poisons Water level reduction

5.2 5.3

Techniques for euthanizing Summary

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

PAGE i

Policies and regulations

6.1 6.2
6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 6.2.4 6.2.5 6.2.6 6.2.7 6.2.8
National policies State policies
New South Wales Victoria Australian Capital Territory Tasmania South Australia Western Australia Queensland Northern Territory

6.3 6.4 6.5

Murray-Darling Basin Relationship with National policies International policies

Summary

7.1 Knowledge gaps

References

Appendix A Questionnaire Appendix B Consultation Appendix C Fish species distribution
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ PAGE ii

Introduction

1.1 Background Translocation of native species has been occurring to various extents throughout Australia since the time of European settlement. The definition of translocations varies across the literature sources and has historically been considered to be the intentional movement of species to area outside their natural range. The definition of translocation which has been used in this report encompasses species which have been moved within and outside their natural range. The definition to be applied in this report is: Translocation is the movement of living organisms from one area with free release in another (IUCN 1999). This includes intentional and unintentional movement of individuals within and outside their natural range. This term includes introductions, re-introductions and re-stocking (IUCN 2000). The definitions of the above terms are as outlined in (IUCN 2000): Introduction means the movement, by human agency, of a species, subspecies, or lower taxon (including any part, gametes or propagule that might survive and subsequently reproduce) outside its natural range (past or present). This movement can be either within a country or between countries. Re-introduction means an attempt to establish a species in an area which was once part of its historical range, but from which it has been extirpated or become extinct. (From IUCN Guidelines for Re-Introductions) Re-stocking is the movement of numbers of plants or animals of a species with the intention of building up the number of individuals of that species in an original habitat (where the same species is already known to exist). The species covered in this report are limited to translocated native fish species which spend all, or part of their life-cycle in freshwater systems as well as saline inland lakes and waterways. This includes translocations into natural and artificial waterbodies however excludes the location of aquaculture facilities. The movement of fish species beyond their natural range is potentially one of the most ecologically damaging of human activities (Koehn 2004) and management of alien and translocated species may be one of the biggest challenges that conservation biologists face in coming decades (Harris and Battaglene 1990; Harris 2003; Lintermans 2004). The translocation of native species can have impacts upon indigenous populations of native fish, the general ecosystem into which translocations occur, as well as subsequent social and economic impacts over time (Morgan et al. 2004). The presence of fish outside their natural range can affect indigenous fish populations via predator-prey interactions as well as direct and indirect competition for food, habitat and resources.

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 1
The introduction of disease and parasites is also possible via translocated species from other regions and hybridisation potential exists if non-indigenous and indigenous species interbreed. This interbreeding can compromise the genetic integrity of native fish (Barlow et al. 1987; DPI 2005). The translocation of native species has been associated with the decline of some native fish species via predation. The abundance of Lake Eacham Rainbowfish, (Melanotaenia eachamensis) in Lake Eacham has been significantly affected by the translocation of native species such as the mouth almighty (Glossamia aprion) being introduced into the lake prior to 1983 (Barlow et al. 1987; Leggett and Merrick 1997). At the time of the abovementioned studies, the Lake Eacham rainbowfish was thought to be endemic to Lake Eacham suggesting that the species may have been pushed toward extinction as a result of this translocation. It has since been identified to persist in the associated streams (Pusey et al. 1997). Human-mediated movement of fish has a long history in Australia with both alien and native species moved since the mid 1800s (Clements 1988). The reasons and/or mechanisms for moving fish within and between drainages are many and varied. Prior to 1940, translocations in NSW have been performed for the purposes of stock enhancement for fisheries and by acclimatisation societies prior to 1940 (DPI 2005). Similar activities were conducted in other States, particularly in eastern and southern Australia. For example, common species, including the large-bodied native species Murray cod, (Maccullochella peelii peelii) and golden perch (Macquaria ambigua), have both been legally and illegally stocked for the purpose of enhancing fisheries (Lintermans 2004). Water diversions and transfers have led to translocations of native species in Australia. A drastic example of this in Tasmania was the flooding of Lake Pedder as a hydro electric storage. This inundation allowed the translocation through natural dispersal of climbing galaxias (Galaxias brevipinnis) into the home range of the endemic species, Pedder galaxias (Galaxias pedderensis). The competition for habitat from climbing galaxias combined with the introduction and predation from brown trout (Salmo trutta) has driven the Pedder galaxias to the point of extinction in the wild (Sanger 2001). In order to save the Pedder galaxias from extinction, a founder population was translocated into a small natural lake south of Lake Pedder (Sanger 2001). This example highlights the means by which, translocation of native species can also be employed as a tool for the conservation of threatened species. Further, the Midgley's carp gudgeon (Hypseleotris sp. 1), an established translocated species in the River Torrens, could have been introduced via a number of pathways including inter-basin transfer of Murray water into the catchment (also with fingerlings of angling species, aquarium escapees, etc) (M. Hammer, pers. comm.). Escape from professional and amateur freshwater aquaculture facilities has been suggested as a means for native species to be translocated outside their natural range. Freshwater aquaculture escapes of silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) have recently been recorded in Western Australia (Cross 2000).

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 2
Galaxiid species have also been moved outside their natural range. Golden galaxias (Galaxias auratus) became established in Lake Crescent as a result of invasion from Lake Sorell via a manmade channel (Allen et al. 2002). It appears that spotted galaxias (Galaxias truttaceus) were translocated north of the Great Dividing Range into the Loddon and Campaspe River systems in the early to mid 1980s (G Closs, University of Otago, pers. comm.). The translocation of native species has had significant social and economic impacts. Translocation has created viable recreational fisheries in many areas where the indigenous native fish fauna are generally small bodied species. There are a number of successful fisheries in Australia which are based upon non-indigenous natives such as the translocated species of golden perch (Macquaria ambigua) in the Wimmera River. Native fish have also been successfully farmed in freshwater aquaculture schemes outside their natural distribution providing economic benefits such as barramundi (Lates calcarifer). 1.2 Objectives The Threatened Species Scientific Committee is considering a nomination to list the introduction of live native or non-native fish into Australian watercourses that are outside their natural geographic distribution as a key threatening process. Similar listings have occurred in NSW and Victoria. SKM has been engaged by Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) to undertake an assessment of the Impacts of translocating native fish species throughout Australia. The following document aims to put the Department in a proactive position of having up-to-date knowledge on introduced and/or translocated fish in Australia in the event that the nomination is successful and a Commonwealth threat abatement plan is required. DEWHA will use the information in this document to determine priority research projects for potential funding, including projects which may address similar gaps/recommendations across the various reports, and projects which may be specific to individual groups of fish or issues. This document outlines the distribution of native fish translocations throughout Australia, the impacts of translocations, the management of translocations and the policies governing translocations. This information is set out in the following sections: Native fish translocations summary of the data collection methods employed through this study and subsequent species translocated throughout Australia; Environmental impacts of translocated native fish species review of the research findings on the environmental impacts (positive and negative) of translocating native fish species throughout Australia using Australian and international examples; Social and economic impacts of translocated native fish species review of the social and economic impacts of translocated native fish species in Australia;

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 5
The exception to this was the natural distribution of two-spined blackfish (Gadopsis bispinosus) and Rendahls tandan (Porochilus redahli) which were translated from Lintermans (2007) while the distribution of the wet tropics tandan, a subspecies of freshwater catfish (Tandanus tandanus) is yet to be described (Damien Burrows, James Cook University, pers. comm.). This has been undertaken by highlighting the catchments from which these species have been known to occur using ArcGIS and then using the map presented in Allen et al. (2002) and Lintermans (2007) to more accurately represent the natural distribution for respective species. This latter stage was undertaken as it was clear from the map presented in the original text that many species had not been recorded from the whole of the catchment. The distribution of translocated native species has been plotted over the natural species distribution of each species. The location of translocations has been plotted to broadly represent the location of translocations, and given the inaccuracy of some data obtained, should not be taken as exact locations. The data has been divided into five year classes <1960, >1960 (no specific year available), 1960-1980, >1980 and undated (no year specified) to identify the distribution of translocations over time. A project workshop was held in Melbourne in late December 2007 to evoke discussion on the information collected to date and access and collate further information literature and distributional data. This workshop was attended by members of the SKM project team (Sam Hannon and Dr Simon Treadwell), DEHWA (Julie Quinn) and the project review panel (Prof. Angela Arthington, Dr Gerry Closs, Dr John Harris and Assoc. Prof. Mark Lintermans). All information was checked and updated following the workshop. 2.2 Distribution of species The species covered in this report are limited to translocated native fish species which spend all, or part of their life-cycle in freshwater systems as well as saline inland lakes and waterways. This includes translocations into natural and artificial waterbodies however excludes the location of aquaculture facilities. A review of existing information has identified a total of 67 native fish species that have been translocated within Australia. This includes the 49 species originally listed by Lintermans (2004). The translocated distribution and data source for each species is summarised in Table 2-1. The native distribution and translocated distribution is represented in Appendix C. A large number of records of fish translocations (including stocking) have been identified as having occurred after 1980. The majority of these translocation locations have occurred in the Murray-Darling Basin primarily due to stocking programs. Fish have been translocated to a high number of locations along the eastern sea board compared with the remaining coastline of the country. Golden perch (Macquaria ambigua), Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii peelii) and silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) have been widely translocated (primarily after1980) inside and outside their natural range in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. Anecdotal information also suggests that

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 14
translocated species (Barlow et al. 1987). This disappearance maybe directly attributed to predation by translocated species. These translocated species are mouth almighty (Glossamia aprion), archerfish (Toxotes chatareus), bony herring (Nematolosa erebi) and banded grunter (Amniataba percoides). The disappearance of Lake Eacham rainbowfish from Lake Eacham is believed to be particularly related to predation by mouth almighty and banded grunter. Other impacts of the translocated species are believed to include predation on Lake Eacham rainbowfish larvae or fry by archerfish. Diseases and parasites may have also been introduced with these translocated species (Barlow et al. 1987). The Lake Eacham rainbowfish was thought to be extinct, caused by these introduction, until a population was found in surrounding waterways (Leggett and Merrick 1997). Similarly, the spread of sleepy cod (Oxyeleotris lineolatus) in the Burdekin River appears to correlate with a decline in abundance of purple-spotted gudgeon (Mogurnda aspersa), which may be due to direct predation (Pusey et al. 2006). Studies in controlled environments have shown that predation by translocated stock does occur. This is highlighted in an experiment conducted by Hogan (1995) to identify predation by barramundi on other fish species. Barramundi, a large predatory fish, were stocked into a pond following the stocking of rainbowfish, hardyheads, banded grunter, archer fish and bony herring. At the end of the trial the numbers of the smaller foraging type fish, rainbow fish and hardyheads were greatly reduced by predation from barramundi (Hogan 1995). Similarly, stocked species such as Murray cod and golden perch regularly prey on small native species such as Australian smelt and carp gudgeons in impoundments (Lintermans unpublished data). The introduction of large piscivorous species may provide benefits for controlling exotic fish species. Such introductions must however be conducted under controlled conditions. Murray cod have been shown to consume carp (Cyprinus carpio). A study by Ebner (2006) identified carp in the stomach contents of Murray cod, and other exotic species such as redfin perch and gambusia have been regularly recorded in the diet of golden perch (Lintermans unpublished data). Further, a reduction in the abundance of carp has been attributed to predation by Australian bass (Harris 1997). Native fish populations are not the only organisms at risk from fish translocation. Frogs, tadpoles and frog eggs come under direct predation from fish, as do a range of invertebrates. Predation by fish is considered to be the most important biotic factor influencing the composition of many frog communities (Burrows 2002). Some frog species will actively select spawning sites that have no predatory fish within them (Burrows 2002). Many frog species have been excluded from prime frog habitat due to an inability to co-exist with predatory fish species. An example of this is where two frog species, Litoria nannotis and L. rheocola, (both listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act 1999) have been restricted to small tributaries of the Tully River (Qld) that do not support predatory fish species. The primary species believed responsible for the contraction of frog distribution is the translocated sooty grunter (Hephaestus fuliginosus) (Burrows 2002).

Bony herring (Nematolosa erebi) SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 19
Susceptible toChilodonella
Climbing galaxias (Galaxias brevipinnis)

cyprini (Langdon 1990)

Competition with G. pedderensis for food and space (Jackson 2004; Threatened Species Section 2006). Invasion of the upper Murray River system and potential impacts on Galaxias spp. and previously fish free communities (Waters et al. 2002).
Hybridization risk between climbing galaxias and mountain galaxias G.brevipinnis and native G.olidus (Waters et al. 2002)
Freshwater catfish (Tandanus tandanus)
Catfish exhibited genetic variability that suggested a degree of population structuring. (Musyl and Keenan 1996; Gillanders et al. 2006) Many species are in serious conservation crisis flora diversity of reasons, including habitat deterioration which allows competitors to move in (McDowall 2006; Threatened Species Section 2006) Reduced habitat diversity and availability which increases competition with other fish species and the risk of predation (Hardie 2003; Threatened Species Section 2006) Reduced habitat diversity and availability which increases competition with other fish species and the risk of predation and predation (Hardie 2003; Threatened Species Section 2006) Reduced habitat diversity and availability which increases competition with other fish species and the risk of predation (Hardie 2003; Threatened Species Section 2006) Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996) (McDowall 2006; Threatened Species Section 2006)

Galaxias sp.

Golden galaxias (Galaxias auratus)
Hybridization risk between G.auratus and G.maculatus (Hardie 2003) (Threatened Species Section 2006)
Golden perch (Macquaria Ambigua)
Hybridisation between sub species (Musyl and Keenan 1992; Wager 1994; Gillanders et al. 2006) Extinction caused by predation by Mouth Almighty (Barlow et al. 1987) (Leggett and Merrick 1997) Diseases and parasites introduced with translocated species may have impacted on rainbowfish (Barlow et al. 1987) Susceptible to a large range of disease including, but by no means limited to epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus (EHNV) (Cadwallader 1996) Possible reduction in number from redfin and trout competition (Cadwallader 1981) Susceptible to Epizootic haematopoietic necrosis virus (EHNV) (Cadwallader 1996) Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996) Susceptible to BPLV (barramundi picorna-like virus) (Glazebrook et al. 1990; Arthington and McKenzie 1997)

Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996) Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996)
Susceptible to Chilodonella cyprini (Cadwallader 1996)
Detrimental effects of hybridisation of Maccullochella species and subspecies has been demonstrated (Rowland 1985; Wager 1994).
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 21

State/Territory Total

Attributable expenditure $000 1,854,000
Numbers of fishers 3,362,990
Fishing effort (fishing events millions) 23.2
Average Fisher expenditure $ 552
While the expenditure figures provide an initial estimate, in economic analysis the gross consumer benefit from an activity is generally valued at the maximum amount that consumers are willing to pay for it. The difference between what people are willing to pay and what they actually pay is known as the consumer surplus. There is evidence to suggest that the community would be willing to pay more than the average fisher expenditure outlined above. This relates to factors such as relaxation associated with fishing and the values associated with being in the natural surrounds. The National Recreational and Indigenous survey also looked at the importance of the motivation for fishing based a five point scale (very, quite, not very, not at all, unsure) for a number of factors. A key results is that to relax and unwind was identified as being important (ie very important or quite important) by 90% of respondents. Fishing for enjoyment of catching fish was important for 80% of respondents. As well, 73% of those surveyed considered it important to be with friends. These figures indicate that there is likely the community values fishing above what it actually spends on it. To calculate the actual consumer surplus from recreational fishing would require the estimation of a demand curve for the activity. This is not possible in this instance for a number of reasons including that recreational fishing is not a fully competitive market, where the supply and demand for recreational fishing can be influenced significantly by price. Also to obtain the total consumer surplus for native translocated species, separate demand curves would need to be constructed, probably on a state by state basis, to reflect differing demands for species. A number of economic methods are available to ascertain these curves (Campbell and Brown 2003). It is not the intention in this section to provide a detailed description of them however they fall into two main groups revealed and stated preference methods. Revealed preference methods use actual behaviour data to construct values. Stated preference methods are based on questioning survey participants in a hypothetical market. This is usually undertaken to understand the willingness to pay or willingness to accept for a particular environmental or policy change. Overall it is difficult to put an exact monetary figure on the value of recreational fishing based on translocated species. Catch data is generally only collected on a state basis so it is unclear if the recreational fishing of the species occurs in their home range or in the areas to which fish have been translocated. While the average spend per year provides some estimate of the value fishers place on fishing, there is difficulty in disentangling the value of catching fish from value of the total fishing experience (Wheeler and Damania 2001) to gain the total consumer surplus associated with recreational fishing. Thus it would be unwise to place an actual value on recreational fishing

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 27
conservation purposes can help protect these values. Conservation of species was a primary factor in a number of the fish translocations documented during our surveys. Again, there are significant difficulties in assessing these values as no actual market exists. Nonmarket valuation methods described above can be useful for valuing this aspect of fish resources. In particular choice experiments have gained popularity recently as they can overcome the issues with budget constraints that can be associated with willingness-to-pay surveys. Van Bueren and Bennett (2004) provide a significant study of value estimates for environmental goods. The research was undertaken through a choice model where respondents are asked to choose their preferred option from several alternatives. A total sample of over 10,000 people was drawn for the study with a response rate of 16%. The assessed value of a species protected was $0.67 cents per household. On this basis, the value of each species protected is approximately $4.8 million per year based on a household population of 7.2 million people. This value does not take into account inflation since the study was undertaken and should only be considered an order of magnitude assessment at best due to the difficulties in transferring estimates from one study to another. When transferring economic valuation assessments from one study to another (known as benefits transfer) care must be taken to ensure that the studies are comparable and, in this case, that the species involved in the transferred study are likely to be valued in a similar way to translocated species. Other considerations also include whether the species are of national or regional significance and the extent to which the translocation has in itself protected the species from becoming endangered or extinct. Overall it may be difficult to put a precise figure on the social value of any or all species translocated for conservation purposes. However, the study outlined above provides evidence at least that the community is willing to pay something to protect certain native species for conservation purposes. 4.6 Impacts of management actions From the above data, some information is available which would allow the quantification of impacts if restrictions were imposed to stop or prevent translocations of native species. Some of the benefits of translocated native species include: Aquaculture: there are significant aquaculture industries based on native species with barramundi the most significant species with production value of over $17 million in 2005-06 with an estimated total value relating to translocated species of $40 million. To the extent that management actions prevent or inhibit the aquaculture industries, this value would be reduced. Recreational fishing: recreational fishing has a high social value in Australia. While there are significant numbers of native translocated species caught by recreational fishers, it is unclear what

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 28
proportion of the catch derives from waterways receiving translocated species, making it difficult to estimate the impact that a ban on the translocation of native species would have. For there to be a significant impact on the value of recreational fishing, management actions would need to demonstrate a clear link between a particular species and the recreational fishing industry. In addition, there would need to be no adequate substitute for any species that is no longer available for fishing. That is, for there to be a cost, the inability to fish a particular species would need to significantly change the fishing experience in an area. 4.7 Multiplier effects The above information details only the direct impacts. The flow-on impacts to other areas of the economy have not been included. For example, when recreational fishers travel to a particular fishing spot they may consume a range of goods and services (e.g. accommodation, fishing equipment, fuel and food). This additional expenditure will then flow on through the economy as a multiplier effect which can impact the final demand for goods and services as well as total employment. These multipliers would be particularly important in assessing the consequences of the change in recreational fishing impacts due to management actions and the impacts associated with aquaculture industries. However, without the availability of specific regional data, particularly for recreational fishing, the use of multipliers to estimate total values may ultimately be misleading. This approach however does not compare these impacts to the benefits of reducing fish translocations. A cost-benefit analysis could be used to assess the overall impact to the community by comparing all the costs and benefits (including social and environmental) in a consistent unit of measurement (usually dollars). This approach could be used to explore the change to consumer and producer welfare (eg, reduced ability to fish or continue with the aquaculture enterprise) and compare it with benefits of translocations (eg, environmental or ecosystem improvements, biodiversity loss etc). This approach usually excludes the multiplier impacts. 4.8 Knowledge gaps The key knowledge gap is the ability to disaggregate available data to just translocated species.

The main gap is the extent to which existing information can be disaggregated to only translocated native species. The exception to this is the commercial value of aquaculture industries where ABARE in conjunction with the ABS and industry provide species by species information. However, the more intangible valuations, such as recreational fishing value or conservation value, are not generally available. In the case of recreational fishing, species data is available, however it is not sufficiently detailed to gain an understanding of the importance of the translocated species alone. Likewise, the conservation value of just the translocated species must be inferred from broader studies, taking into account the circumstances of the studies. This is not to say that the studies used in this assessment are of a poor quality or suffer from methodological constraints but
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 29
rather are not specific to the data requirements of this task. The lack of this information makes it difficult to undertake more detailed analysis such as cost-benefit or input-output analyses.
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 30
5.1 Techniques for capture The following section reviews and evaluates the current tools, techniques and practices used in relation to the humane capture, handling or destruction of translocated native fish species. A suite of sampling techniques are available if it is deemed necessary to reduce or eradicate the translocated native fish species. The impacts on the target and non-target species varies with technique used. The technique to be applied to collecting any fish species will vary depending on the ultimate use of the fish collected. Non-destructive techniques must be used if fish are to be collected for the purposes of conservation. Conversely, destructive techniques can be used to eradicate a population of fish which occur in an area. In selecting a technique, assessment must be made of the financial cost of employing the option compared with the benefit to be gained. Further, consideration must be made of the social impact of using each technique particularly where collection is to occur in a public area. Using either technique discussed, complete eradication requires a significantly greater effort than a targeted reduction in population size, and there are few situations where eradication is a realistically achievable. Removal of a small proportion of the population therefore is often a fraction of the cost of eradication. In many instances however it may be considered that eradication is not necessary and that a significant reduction in population size is adequate. Many methods of collecting fish species are not species specific but can be adapted to catch broad size classes in order to assist in collecting a targeted species. A summary of available techniques along with the potential impact of the technique is described in Table 5-1. The magnitude of these impacts has been identified through consultation with the project review panel. The impact of this technique has been ranked from low to high where low is unlikely to lead to any death of the fish; moderate impacts may lead to death of the fish collected 50% of the time; high impacts may lead to death of the fish the majority of the time.

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 32
removal of fish. The impacts to translocated native fish species and by-catch are likely to be moderate while the technique is likely to be perceived positively by the community. 5.1.2 Traps Bait traps and fyke nets work by trapping the live fish in a small enclosure. Both of these techniques are considered non-destructive to fish species as they generally do not immobilise the fish per se, rather the fish are contained and can be removed alive. Fyke nets generally target moderate to large sized fish (depending on the mesh size) while bait traps are targeted at catching small fish or small lindividuals of large species. The recommended method of setting fyke nets is to ensure that the end of the trap (cod end) is exposed out of the water so that air-breathing by-catch (platypus, water rats, turtles, birds) can use this air space as refuge until released. Typically, this leads to this technique having a low impact on by-catch. Bait traps however are fully immersed for their set period and therefore can be fatal to diving air breathing fauna. For example, water rats and diving birds may become trapped in the small entrance to the bait traps or move into the bait traps while immersed and not be able to escape. The likelihood of this is low even though the impact is great. Similarly, fish species can be predated upon by crustaceans or other small predatory species while enclosed in these traps leading to mass deaths and moderate impact on translocated fish species and by-catch. Similar to fyke nets, this is a passive technique which is not very cost effective for reducing a the size of a fish. Set correctly, this technique is often perceived well by members of the public. 5.1.3 Electrofishing Electrofishing is an effective technique which has been used within Australia for nearly 40 years. The operation of electrofishing is governed in Australia by the Australian Code of Electrofishing Practice (NSW Fisheries 1997). This Code of Practice outlines the safe operation and certification of equipment required to prevent injury to operators, observers and animals. Electrofishing can be divided into three recognised techniques that are commonly used in Australia backpack, boat mounted and bank mounted. Backpack electrofishing is a very portable application of electrofishing whereby all equipment is confined to a backpack unit and pole. Back pack electrofishing is limited to water bodies with low to moderate salinity. This technique is widely used in small wadeable streams and creeks. Boat electrofishing is limited by boat access, can be used in moderate to high salinities and is an effective technique for sampling fish in large rivers and lakes. Bank mounted electrofishing is used in wadeable habitat, similar to backpack electrofishing but can be applied in moderate to high salinities as it often uses the same power source as boat mounted units. Electrofishing is an active technique which can be used to catch large numbers of fish covering a wide size range. Applied effectively, electrofishing can have minimal impact on fauna however

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 45
sampling is to collect a large proportion of the fish population present or even eradicate the fish species then a combination of sampling techniques should be used. It is important to recognise that complete eradication of a population is far more time consuming than population reduction. All states and territories have adopted the National Policy for the Translocation of Live Aquatic Organisms and are either implementing consistent State-based policies or have adopted the national policy framework. There is a need to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the National Policy, ensuring that any Basin-wide stocking policies, procedures and guidelines are complementary. An international position statement is also set out by the IUCN on the translocation of living organisms. 7.1 Knowledge gaps Ecological impacts of translocations: these are very poorly understood and many may go unnoticed due to lack of monitoring or for want of sensitive monitoring methods. Biological controls: the applicability and potential impact of using translocated native fish species as a biological control against pest or weed species needs research. Identification of genetic markers: fish of the same species are generally considered to be suitable for stocking, however they may be genetically distinct and thus a risk to the resident population. Much more work is required to determine the degree of genetic differentiation within species to identify genetic markers so as to ensure that only like populations are to be stocked. Use of chemical markers: fish being translocated for stock enhancement can be marked with a chemical agent providing managers a way to separate natural and introduced stocks. However the most appropriate chemical marker for doing so is yet to be identified. Ability to disaggregate available data to translocated species: the main gap is the extent to which existing information can be disaggregated to only translocated native species. The exception to this is the commercial value of aquaculture industries where ABARE in conjunction with the ABS and industry provide species by species information. However the more intangible valuations, such as recreational fishing value or conservation value, are not generally available. In the case of recreational fishing, species data is available however is not sufficiently detailed to gain an understanding of just the translocated species. Likewise, conservation value of just the translocated species must be inferred from broader studies, taking into account the circumstances of the studies. This is not to say that the studies used in this assessment are of a poor quality or have methodological issues but rather are not specific to the data requirements of this task. The lack of this information makes it difficult to undertake more detailed analysis such a cost-benefit analysis or input-output analysis.

State ACT ACT NSW NSW NSW NSW NT NT NZ QLD QLD QLD QLD QLD SA SA SA SA SA SA SA SA SA SA TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS TAS VIC VIC VIC VIC VIC VIC VIC VIC WA Organisation MDBC CSIRO (Sustainable Ecosystems) NSW Fisheries NSW Fisheries NSW Fisheries NSW Fisheries DPI Fisheries DPI Fisheries Department of Conservation Department of Primary Industry FFSAQ (Freshwater Fishing and Stocking Association of Queensland) Griffith University James Cook University Griffith University Lloyd Environmental PIRSA Fisheries Rural Solutions SA SA Water SARDI University of Adelaide SARDI SARDI Department of Primary Industry and Water Freshwater Systems Hydro Tasmania Inland Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Service DPI DSE PIRVic DSE DPI DSE Latrobe University DPI Challenger TAFE Contact person Mark Lintermans Mark Jekabsons Craig Watson Kerry Gillfeather Lee Baumgartner NSW Fisheries Glenn Ship Phil Hall Natasha Grainger Peter Kind Les Kowitz Dr. Steve (Harry) Balcombe Damien Burrows Mark Kennard Bryan Pierce Mike Hammer Lance Lloyd Alice Fistr Jason Higham Paul McEvoy Brenton Zampatti Scotte Wedderburn Dale McNeil Qifeng Ye Jean Jackson Scott Hardie Peter Davies David Ikedife Stuart Chilcott Tim Farrell Ewen McLean Jason Lieschke Paul Brown Karen Weaver Pam Clunie Tarmo Raadik George Paras Fiona Gavine Greg Jenkins
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 57

State WA WA WA WA

Organisation Fisheries Murdoch University WA University of WA Murdoch University WA
Contact person Steve Nel David Morgan Paul Close Steve Beattie
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 58
Appendix C Fish species distribution

See PDF of maps

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ C:\Documents and Settings\a03719\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Translocated_Public_draft_ISS.doc PAGE 59