Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 2:33:14 to 2:43:12
The APVMA addresses the cancellation of chemical permits in salmon farming due to environmental risks to wild fisheries. Discussion focuses on the detection of residues in rock lobster and the review of new permit applications.
Topics: Fisheries, Biosecurity, EPBC Act
Speakers: Scott Hansen, Speaker 17, Speaker 18, Unknown Speaker, Interjection
>> Thank you very much. And we'll now call the APVMA. Now, colleagues, I believe Senator Blair, you've got something to do with your staff. You've requested you just want to kick off. Is that correct? Let
an indulgence, but I'm I'm grateful um if I could have it on this occasion. Thank you, Chair.
>> Sure. And that's the committee has happy
>> Well, I believe in seniority. So
>> we'll work on that theory. Yes.
>> The top two green.
>> Get you out the building quicker out the Okay. Look, I'll welcome officers from the AP or the Australian Pesticides and Veterary Medicines Authority. Um now, so I do this all official. Mr. Hansen, we welcome you. Do you want to make an opening statement?
>> No, Mr. Chard, I think we're all ready to go.
>> No, look, we appreciate that. We got a few people to get through. So, um, questions. Senator Bayer, Senator Blair,
>> Uh, in October 25, the APVMA issued a trade notice relating to a permit for the use of Florenol in Tasmania for farmed Atlantic salmon. Of course, you're aware of that. And you relied on rainbow trout data from a 2014 study. You had no data on how residues in Atlant and in Atlantic salmon fall away. And you recommended conservative volumes of florenol regarding risk of residues noting the limited data set and absence of residues decline data in the target species. That's Atlantic salmon. And then in March 2026, you suspended the permit for unacceptable risk of residue exposure to non-target species. So obviously you accept all of that.
>> Yes.
>> Speak up if you don't. So why was the risk to wild seafood such as rock lobster and abalone not assessed before the permit was issued?
>> Uh thanks Senator. Um so all the international data that we had looked at had indicated that there wasn't a risk of uh accumulation in uh wild fishery species. Um looking around the globe in terms of where this had been used there was no like the calculations about what would be present in the water streams outside of the pens outside of feeding times. Uh we're comfortable with the presence that was going to be there. were comfortable with the fact that it was not going to have an acute toxicity on any of the or an impact on any of the native species. In fact, we we chose an algae which is the most sensitive to flenol as our sort of lower limit. All of the work that's been done around the globe has sort of not demonstrated any accumulation in um other wildcourt fisheries that occur around these pens. The detections in um abalone, the detections in rock lobsters uh were unable to be explained in terms of either the method and the me mechanism for transfer from the feeding sites to the distances up up to over 11 kilometers away in the end. Um, and so that was why in the presence of that information being provided to us by Tasmanian NRE off the back of their monitoring for those species, uh, we suspended the permit and went back to the applicant to say something is occurring here which doesn't appear in any of the data that has been provided. You need to explain to us why and how.
>> You said that to NA.
>> No, that the applicant who is Abby couldn't explain the how and why and therefore unable to mitigate that and so the permit was cancelled.
And did you initially put any reliance on the EPA's results which were much more kind to the impact of this chemical than um like you relied on it then? And I mean you won't rely on the EPA's results in future given they only detected floren florenol 35 m outside of the fish farming zone if I can call it that whereas then the NRA did some subsequent testing and discovered it up to 14 km away as you said.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Well, that was a really complexing part for us, right? Like it it didn't appear in the water more than 35 m away from the pens and yet it was appearing kilometers away. And so that mechanism for transfer has been one of the bits that's been um that obviously either requires an answer to be given about how to mitigate that risk for wildcourt species um before there'd be or other plans for how you mitigate that risk need to be developed >> because whilst we're comfortable with that emergency use permit with the impact and the residues in the fish that were being treated with the one treatment of up to 10 days of treatment. While we're comfortable with the environmental dispersion of that one treatment in those pens over that period of time and environmental impact, we obviously um even though those levels that were being detected in the abalone, in the um rock lobsters and other species were at such minuscule levels that they were just above the quantum of detection. Mhm. >> Quantum of detection, especially for a product that is not registered in other products, means a zero tolerance by trading partners. Um, which creates an obvious trade risk for us and that's one of the key criteria that we assess against.
>> Mhm. So, the permit that the trade notice related to has been cancelled, but Abby Laboratories has made another permit application, hasn't it?
>> Uh, we have a couple of applications in front of us at the moment. We have >> from Abby. We have um one from Abby Laboratories and one from Salmon Tasmania. Salmon Tasmania has an application in front of us at the moment for an emergency use permit along the similar path of their previous one of the previous permit. So that's a southeastern biocurity zone for the treatment dose rates and frequency of the previous permit. Um what they have submitted to try to address the trade question which is obviously still outstanding for us >> is the therapeutic um aquaculture therapeutic wild fisheries market management plan that the Tasmanian um department has developed not just for fle and coal but for any theraputic uses in the salmon industry about how to minimize or mitigate the risk to trade. aid with regards to wildcourt species. We're currently assessing that.
>> And so you mentioned the general location of Salmon Tasmania's application. And where does Abby Laboratory's new permit application relate to?
>> Uh so there's a a second application which is a minus permit. It's looking to move the location to not just the southeastern biocurity zone, but the eastern biocurity zone as well. um and to increase the dose rates and the treatment regime. >> Um that's proposed and that obviously has a significant amount of work that needs to be that is being done on that to look at environmental impacts to look at um any microbial resistance impact um as well as residues and depletion. So
much bigger area m much much higher dose so much higher likelihood for unacceptable risk of res residue exposure including to non-target species. That's right isn't it?
>> That that's right and that's what we need to calculate before we can consider whether it gets approved or not.
>> And when are you intending to decide on those permit applications? uh once we
arrive at a conclusion out of the science as to whether well in fact for both of them once we arrive at the science in terms of meeting the safety criteria the efficacy criteria um we will go back out for a trade advisory notice consultation with stakeholders and communities um for both of those uh to get the industries the all of the industries and the community's views with regards to what's being proposed and what the potential impact on trade
>> That's very thorough review. Um, now about 9,000 tons of farmed fish died between January and March 2026. You're aware of that. And that was despite the antibiotic. That's right, isn't it?
>> Just believe so.
>> And did the permit require data on whether treatment worked?
>> Uh, yes. And that information needs to be provided to us to support their their follow-up application.
>> What does it show?
>> Um I'd have to take that on notice. I don't have that in front of me.
>> Okay. But it's been provided. Um well I call on the two permit applications to be produced and I call on the um data that Salmon Tasmania has given you on uh whether the treatment worked and there's a date by which that material can be provided. Um thank you very much. Those are my questions Mr. Hansen.
>> Thanks. >> Thank you. I'll go to Senator Pocott, then I'll go to cross to Senator Thorpe if there's any other questions and then to the to the um deputy chair. >> Thank you.