Tarnished Tassal brand targets WA barramundi

Sydney Morning Herald

19 hours ago

Embattled global fish farmer Tassal's proposal for a mega barramundi sea cage operation north of Broome comes promising jobs and fulfilment of market demand.
It would also bring up to 50 tonnes of dead fish in landfill a week, the 'smothering' of coral and potential spread of disease and pollution through a marine park.
Canadian-owned Tassal Group, Australia's largest seafood producer, recently bailed out the previously loss-making enterprise, acquiring from administration a relatively small, 32-cage operation in the Kimberley's Cone Bay, a zone previously sanctioned for aquaculture as less sensitive than the rest of the region.
Now the company proposes to expand across 50 kilometres of more sensitive areas in the Malaya Marine Park, part of the National Heritage-listed Buccaneer Archipelago, with 84 cages across seven sites, ultimately holding up to 17,500 tonnes of fish.
Broome-based conservation group Environs Kimberley's submission to the WA environment watchdog regarding the proposal has now emerged, highlighting details of the proposal from Tassal, just as the company faces escalating controversy over the $1.8 billion salmon sea cage industry in Tasmania, where it operates alongside Huon and Petuna.
Salmon farming in Tasmania has been blamed for antibiotics leaking into the food chain, algal blooms, endangered species impacts, mass fish escapes and finally an unprecedented kill of one million fish in April, resulting in erosion of consumer trust and revocation of RSPCA animal welfare certification.
Escalating 'salmon wars' played a key role in the 2025 federal election and the GoodFish guide has told shoppers to reject Tasmanian farmed salmon.
The WA sea cages proposed would be within the proposed general use zone of the marine park, which allows for aquaculture, but some would be close to sanctuary and cultural use zones.
Tassal, promising 140 jobs from the operation, aims to achieve no more than 15 per cent fish mortality, equalling up to 2625 tonnes of dead fish per annum, or 50 tonnes a week.
Tassal says it is exploring a number of 'mortality programs' for WA.
One involves mincing the fish and stabilising it with formic acid for livestock feed, a common global practice, with processing done in Derby.
The other option is landfill in Derby.
Also, in the event of a 'mass mortality' all stock would be transferred to a licensed Derby landfill.
The risks
Tassal's documents identify the major risks as:
Fish waste and uneaten feed settling on the sea-floor causing algal blooms and water deoxygenation around the sites.
'Smothering and/or shading' of the sea floor and the coral reefs fringing the archipelago's islands, models predicting losses of 1-16 per cent of coral reefs around some islands.
Potential algal growth around the reefs, affecting coral and reducing marine life, possibly affecting the Malaya people's hunting practices
Net damage from predators or weather events causing fish escapes, with possible 'significant impact on native barramundi' from swiftly spreading, generally fatal pests and diseases, or changes in their genetics.
The greatest risks were 'generally from bacteria' (the cause of the Tasmanian fish kill) usually associated with hot temperatures or the rapid salinity changes common to the wet season.
Vessel strike, noise and vibrations in a globally significant hotspot and refuge for sawfish, rays and sharks, critically endangered sea snakes and sea turtles
The pens causing an artificial reef effect that could attract other fauna, and therefore predators, leading to the predators' entanglement.
Tassal was unable to comprehensively survey the Buccaneer Archipelago area and so while it was unsure about whether the area's marine turtles nested near its sites, there was a possibility light pollution would disorient turtle hatchlings en route to the ocean.
Tassal wrote of its rigorous testing and vaccination program in which imported hatchlings had to be disease free to a '95 per cent degree of confidence', and said it avoided 'where possible' managing outbreaks with chemicals, except in 'extreme cases'.
It acknowledged a dugong hotspot was near the proposal area with little known about important feeding, breeding or movement areas.
It noted the three of the proposed sea cage sites fell within a biologically important area for nursing, calving and resting for the largest population of humpback whales in the world.
The whole area was also important habitat for Australian snubfin, Australian humpback and spotted bottlenose dolphins.
Tassal also said in a statement to this masthead that the project was an exciting opportunity for the Kimberley and with it came a commitment to grow local jobs and invest in local suppliers and communities, while sustainably managing the environment.
The elephant in the room
Environs Kimberley is concerned Tassal's proposal fails to list climate change as a risk in a region recently hit by coral-bleaching marine heatwaves.
They say warming oceans, severe weather and reduced ecosystem resilience will make it hard to avoid significant 'unplanned' impacts including fish kills, infrastructure damage, escapes and diseases.
Executive director Martin Pritchard said Tassal's document glossed over the 220,000 barramundi killed at the existing Cone Bay operation in 2019, only noting the cause: an algal bloom caused by a combination of warm seas, warm air and pollution flushed by rain from rivers to the sea. In naming this cause it cited a report into the incident commissioned by and for the previous operator, which was not publicly released.
Environs Kimberley voiced a 'strong concern' that the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, as primary regulator, was 'an active promoter of sea cage fish farming' and did not investigate the 2019 fish kill, perceiving a conflict of interest, especially as WA Premier Roger Cook last year called the Tassal plan 'great news' and awarded the company a $5 million incentive.
The department's Fisheries and Aquaculture executive director Nathan Harrison said after the 2019 Cone Bay fish kill, its testing confirmed the cause of death to be the algal bloom, so further investigation was not required.
'DPIRD continues to closely monitor and respond to environmental changes that affect fisheries and aquaculture, including marine heatwaves,' he said.
WA Environmental Protection Authority chair Darren Walsh visited the region last month as part of the public environmental review.
He said the proponent would be required to address all relevant issues raised during the public review. The EPA expected to publish those responses by the end of the year.
Pritchard said the landfilling aspect was also concerning.
'Which facilities in Derby have the capacity and appropriate licencing to safely dispose of this quantity of dead and rotting fish, let alone huge quantities arising from a mass death event?' he said.
He said the impacts and risks of intensive industry should not be spread across wide areas of a globally significant and unique marine park.
He said Tassal downplayed the potential impacts but it was evident some level of pollution was expected and the risks were unacceptable, especially when heightened by climate change, and in the context of Tassal's track record in Tasmania.
'Because of its remoteness, high tides, fast currents, narrow channels and cyclones, if there is a major event like mass fish escape or mass disease and death event, it will be logistically very difficult to address,' he said.
He said this proposal was one of several industrial projects under way or proposed in the Buccaneer Archipelago, representing the potential for significant, cumulative, long-term impacts.
Environs Kimberley submitted to the watchdog that such industries should be on land, close to population centres, as with barramundi farming in the Northern Territory, so impacts could be contained and rapid support provided during incidents.
A Tassal spokesperson said the company removed around 400 hectares from the proposal previously submitted by the past operators, recognising concerns of traditional owners and recreational fishers.
'If approved, we will grow the operations cautiously and sustainably, in line with market demands,' they said.
'We are proud and humbled to have secured the consent for the project via a voluntary Indigenous Land Use Agreement … we welcome the passion for the local environment from groups like Environs Kimberley, something we share, and hope they'll take up our offer to engage with us directly on this project.'
They supplied a document outlining why barramundi was considered a climate-resilient aquaculture species.
The Shire of Derby/West Kimberley acknowledged the public interest in the proposal and said it had confidence in the EPA process and was engaging with the regulator to better understand the project.
Loading
'The shire would work with Tassal to assess and potentially accommodate waste disposal; however, if the volumes were beyond the capacity of local infrastructure, alternative arrangements would need to be found,' it stated.
In December, before the Tasmanian fish kill, in giving consent to enter into the Indigenous Land Use Agreement, Mayala traditional owners said they felt Tassal would be able to manage any environmental issues. Mayala Inninalang Aboriginal Corporation was contacted for updated comment.
The federal environment department is running its own public environment review parallel to the state process, with a public comment period yet to open.