FAQ About Imported Seafood

Why Do We Need Imported Seafood?

Australians enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world. This includes ample, affordable and healthy food - which contributes not only to our enjoyment and lifestyle, but also to our daily well-being, and even our longevity. Seafood, as everyone knows, plays an important part in a healthy diet. In fact, the unique nutrients and oils (such as Omega 3) in seafood play a more significant role than most. Regular seafood consumption is now positively linked to a reduction in heart disease (the major cause of death in Australia); to improvements in many other diseases such as asthma and arthritis; and to improved neural development (even greater intelligence) in children.

With this knowledge, and a growing appreciation of its many culinary delights, our consumption of seafood has grown considerably - from about nine kilograms per person each year in the 1950s, to about 20 kilograms per person each year in 2010. During that time, Australia's population has risen from nine million to over 22 million people. That's a huge increase in the demand for seafood.

Not surprisingly, this has put a huge strain on our natural (wild) fisheries resources. In the 1970s, production of seafood from Australian waters peaked at about 250,000 tonnes per annum, but was simply not sustainable at that level. The depletion of some fish stocks, and the potential for long-term damage from over-fishing, has forced significant reductions in effort in the past thirty years, towards more sustainable catches. In 2007/08, Australia's fisheries production had fallen to 236,000 tonnes per annum, but some of our fish stocks are still rated as ‘over-fished’ (although not endangered). Our long-term sustainable production is probably about 180,000 to 200,000 tonnes per annum (source - CSIRO). Moreover, not all our fisheries production is for human consumption. In 2008, our biggest fishery was Australian Sardines (almost 34,000 tonnes) – most of which were used for fish feed or bait.

All these statistics refer to whole weight. On average, the yield is much less (about half) after processing to edible form.

Catch constraints are not the only problem facing Australian fishermen. High costs (eg. large modern boats, fuel, resource management fees,) means much of our seafood has to be sold to high-priced export markets such as Japan and China, to be economically viable. Australia currently exports about 44,000 tonnes of our best seafood, every year.

The future supply of fish for our diet - for Australians and for most of the world - relies on aquaculuture (fish farming). Australia's aquaculture industries, whilst showing great promise, currently produce about 54,000 tonnes per annum. However, the cost of production is also a major constraint. Investment in fish farms, and the cost of rearing and feeding fish (often for several years until they reach market size) means farmers must choose high value species – many of which are aimed at export markets (eg. tuna).

So with a natural shortfall in supply to start with, and a necessity to export what we catch and grow, there is a huge shortfall in meeting our own domestic market requirements.

Even back in the 1950s, Australia needed to import almost as much fish as it produced to keep up with demand. So Australians have been consuming imported fish for well over 50 years. In 2010, we will need to import at least 200,000 tonnes of seafood (mostly in edible weight form - worth almost a billion dollars) to maintain our current per capita consumption level and provide an affordable and healthy diet for everyone. The CSIRO predicts that within 20 years our demand for seafood will have risen so much that we will need to import half a million tonnes per year.

Is Imported Fish Just As Healthy As Local Fish?

Almost all edible fish, and most other seafood, is extremely good for you, regardless of its country of origin. (People with specific allergies, and pregnant women, should seek medical advice about the level of consumption of some species, including Australian fish.) In general, all fish is high in protein, and low in carbohydrates and 'bad' fats, making it ideal for a healthy diet. Some species of fish have slightly higher levels of 'good' fats/oils (such as Omega 3) but all fish have a beneficial level of nutrients. The regular consumption of fish is universally recommended by the medical profession and nutritionists.

Is Imported Fish Safe?

International trade regulations mean food products destined for the import/export trade are subject to much more rigorous standards than products traded in local markets - even in Australia. For instance, the standard of export food processing in Asia is similar too (and in some cases exceeds) the standard of export food processing in Australia and, in general, is much higher than the standard of domestic food processing in Australia. Food processing and packaging factories exporting seafood to Australia must operate to independently audited, international standards of hygiene and quality control. Before being released in Australia, imported seafood (and other food) is also subject to testing by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS).

Australia's main supplier of fish is New Zealand which operates under the same food standards authority as Australia, (FSANZ - Food Standards Australia New Zealand) although imports from there are still subject to AQIS inspections and testing.

What About Antibiotics?

All of us at some time will benefit from short-term treatment with antibiotics, administered at full strength (ie. not trace amounts) by medical professionals. However, concern about the growing resistance of germs to antibiotics has led authorities to constrain their use. For instance, antibiotics are not permitted in food products, where they would be consumed regularly.

In the early days of aquaculture around the world, antibiotics were widely also used to keep fish healthy. Improved husbandry and production methods means their use in aquaculture is now minimal, and they not used at all in some countries for some species (eg. farmed prawns from Thailand).  In any case, antibiotic residues are not permitted in products imported to Australia. AQIS supervises independent laboratory tests for antibiotics when shipments of food arrive at our borders, to ensure compliance with this.

Antibiotics are not relevant to imported wild-caught fish such as Hake, Hoki or Nile Perch, as they do not come into contact with them.

Is Australian Caught and Farmed Seafood Also Tested?

Australian health authorities do not test locally caught or grown seafood for antibiotics, or any other chemical or heavy metal residues, on a regular basis.

Are We Depleting The World's Oceans By Importing Fish?

In terms of volume, the four most popular species of frozen fish imported to Australia are Hoki, Hake, Nile Perch and Basa. South Africa's hake fishery and New Zealand's hoki fishery - two main sources of these species - have both been certified as sustainable by the London-based Marine Stewardship Council. (MSC endorsement is probably the highest accreditation of its type in the world.)

Nile Perch come from Lake Victoria in Africa, where they are hand-caught from small vessels. Large-scale 'industrial' fishing is simply not possible on the lake. In any case, Nile perch is not native to the region so, from the perspective of environmental sustainability (as opposed to economic sustainability), fishing for the species is a positive action.

Basa is a farmed fish (grown mainly in Vietnam) and its rapid expansion in recent years is contributing significantly to the world's food supply. Rather than threaten the world's ocean resources, Basa production (like most aquaculture) lessens economic pressure on our remaining wild fish stocks.

(The USA also has a major fish farming industry, utilising a similar species to Basa that is providing affordable seafood to its population. Sadly, Australia has no such species in the pipeline.)

Is Fish Farming Exploiting Third World Countries?

Fish and prawn farming has been a traditional local industry in Asia (the source of most of our aquaculture imports) for well over a hundred years. Its rapid expansion in the past twenty years has been a major economic boost for many of these countries - providing solid employment for millions of people, significant export income, technology advancement, and, of course, healthy food. Many fish farmers are independent operators, or work 'lease-holdings' as their own business. Seafood processing staff enjoy some of the best working conditions in Asia - and some of the highest levels of payment.

As in all countries, there are some environment issues relating to the modification of land for fish farming. Developing countries are increasingly under pressure from their markets to improve this aspect of production. A greater understanding of the environmental impact of fish/prawn farms, and more stringent development laws in the current generation of expansion, will result in more sustainable fish farming development in future.

Do Imports Threaten Australian Producers

In most cases, the answer is a clear NO!

In recent years the Australian capture (wild) seafood industry has been hard-hit by rising costs such as fuel prices and resource management fees. The industry has been forced to expend vast resources defending its access to remaining fish stocks and adjusting to lower (sustainable) levels of production. At the same time, currency fluctuations have significantly reduced export income. These events are unrelated to imports. For instance, parts of Australia's wealthiest fishery, rock lobster, are struggling to survive - yet this fishery has almost no import competition.

The Australian producers' focus on exports (especially prior to the 2002 currency turn-around) has resulted in minimal investment in domestic marketing and promotion. Australia still has no effective national marketing or promotion organisation. Much of our domestic production is still sold at auction in the major cities (resulting in daily price fluctuations) and many important local species remain a mystery to most consumers - especially the younger generation. There is very little processing of Australian seafood to add value or convenience and, in many instances, the distribution channels and handling methods have remained relatively unchanged for decades. There are issues of inconsistent price and quality, and in many cases the catches available are little more than 'cottage industry' volumes and ought to be easily absorbed by an efficient marketing system. These situations are unrelated to import competition and need to be addressed independently by the local fishing industry.

The biggest elements of Australia's fledgling aquaculture industry are also unaffected by imports. Southern bluefin tuna ranching is exclusively export focused, and Tasmania's salmon industry has little import competition. However, much of the remaining industry is under 20 years old, and is still in the development phase. In most cases, production levels are still well below those required for maximum efficiency or to sustain markets. Together with development costs, their costs of production are well above optimum, and often above their wild catch competitors - both in Australia and overseas.

In some cases, Australian aquaculture is at a natural disadvantage due to the species available. For instance, most Australian prawn farmers grow Black Tiger Prawns - a species native to Australia. However, in much of the world, the faster growing vannamai species is preferred for aquaculture. This species is capable of three harvests a year (as opposed to one for Black Tigers in Australia) and thus has vastly reduced production costs. It is also a sweeter-tasting prawn and has a large consumer following world-wide. Vannamei is so popular in the US that prawns are now the main seafood product consumed there - surpassing even canned tuna or salmon. Australian producers are not permitted to grow vannamei here. In this case, imports of vannamei do threaten the viability of the higher cost local product.

However, to restrict imports in this situation would be to deprive the majority of Australian consumers of the opportunity to purchase a popular food product at globally competitive prices, whilst giving protection to a small industry sector that is locked into producing a naturally more expensive product.

Do Imports Offer Opportunities For Local Producers

Clearly they do. Without imported seafood, Australia's domestic market would remain largely undeveloped (with low per capita consumption). The number of outlets would be vastly reduced with few shops being able to survive on local seafood alone. This weakened distribution infra-structure would be unable to cope with even minor fluctuations in supply - as was the case 20 years ago and before, when 'glut' markets and price collapses were common.

Prices would remain chronically high for consumers, subsidising on-going (but unsustainable) inefficiencies in the production sector. Economic pressure on our wild catch fisheries would be unrelenting (and unsustainable) and management costs would further increase.

On the other hand, imported seafood has created new marketing opportunities in the domestic market, through which local producers will be able to channel increasing volumes of product (hopefully from improved aquaculture production, or as yet undiscovered wild catch resources) when their marketing systems and skills are further developed or upgraded.  

It should be noted that many seafood importing companies are also local producers (ie. they catch/grow and import) and that they will be happy to procure and sell more seafood from local producers (if local volumes increase) as overseas products become increasingly difficult to source due to global competition.