The Australian government biosecurity committee structure has recently undergone a major change with the development of AusBioSec (http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/biosecurity/ausbiosec). As part of this restructure, as of July 2009 Aquatic Animal Health Committee (AAHC) will cease to exist and it’s roles and responsibilities will be subsumed into Animal Health Committee (AHC). AAH technical expertise to AHC will continue to be provided by the National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group (NAAHTWG). However, while AAHC included industry representation, AHC does not. For terrestrial animals, and plants, industry representation comes with membership to Animal Health Australia (AHA) and Plant Health Australia (PHA), respectively. However, there is no such entity for aquatic animal industries. This lack of industry input into AAH policy development has not been lost on AHC and it has advised that it would consider advice from an industry reference group (IRG). AHC has provided some advice on the terms of reference and priority issues for the IRG.

In order to be able to provide this advice industry must first decide whether or not there is sufficient resolve in each sector to commit to self-funding participation in an “National Aquatic Animal Health Industry Reference Group” (NAAHIRG).

It is this last point for which this application is based. The four sectors (wild-capture, aquaculture, ornamental and recreational) are seeking seed funding from FRDC to support a face-to-face meeting for industry representatives to discuss formation of an AAHIRG.

The need and urgency that has prompted this TRF application revolves around the threat of policy development without industry input. This point gains more significance upon release of the Beale report on Australia’s biosecurity arrangements and the Government’s response agreeing ‘in-principle’ to all the recommendations. Industry has to decide sooner rather than later whether it wishes to be a part of future AAH policy development.

About 150 persons die from non–intentional injury each year on Australian farms. Between 300 and 350 male farmers and farm workers die a traumatic death from all causes each year. The mortality rate in Australian farming is approximately four times that of the all-industries rated (19.5 per 100,000 employees compared to 5.5 per 100,000 employees) (Durey and Lower, 2004).
The rate of workers compensation claims from agriculture, forestry and fishing in 2001-2002 was 27 per thousand employees. There are about 4,500 claims each year made by workers in the agricultural and horticultural industries. Also self employed farmers are not obliged to report injuries so that the incidence reported may be an underestimate.
In the four years 1989-1992 a total of 55 people were fatally injured while involved in work related fishing industries (NOHSC, 1999). Between 1991 and 2001 a total of 16 professional fishermen drowned as a result of falling or being washed from commercial fishing vessels in Victorian waters.
Available statistics indicate that there is a higher rate of suicide among rural populations generally, and farmers in particular. For example, in the period 1988 to 1997, 921 suicides were identified for farm managers and agricultural labourers (Page & Fragar, 2002). The ABS reports that between 1988 and 1998, the suicide rate was up to 17 per 100,000 persons per year in rural areas, compared to 12-13 per 100,000 in the capital cities.
The health status and determinants of health (e.g. death rates, income etc) are generally worse in rural and remote areas than in metropolitan areas. There is a need to identify factors that contribute to this discrepancy, particularly as it is likely to apply to farmers and fishers.
There is a prevailing opinion that many farm and fishing injuries and deaths are preventable.

Lack of awareness of occupational health and safety, and a culture of safety, still fails to be effectively dealt with across all States of Australia. The OHS data identifies that the commercial fishing industry has rates of claims that are average for the overall Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry sector, but that claims for fatal injuries in aquaculture and non fatal in marine (or wild capture) fisheries are both increasing relative to employment. The most ‘at risk’ group in the industry are those between the age of 20 to 24 years, with those aged 45 – 54 years being the next most at risk
group, and will receive injuries from non powered hand tools, to their upper bodies

Diagnostic laboratories across the country vary in their diagnostic capability for aquatic animal pathogens. Due to their individual needs, many diagnostic laboratories have developed their own reagents and procedures for the identification of bacterial pathogens. This lack of standardisation can be problematical, for example, when reporting on aquatic animal health status. Using Vibrio identification as an example, it is likely that diagnostic laboratories would be capable of identification to the genus level (i.e. Vibrio sp.). However, due to differences in the various laboratories, identification to the species level would be difficult, and different laboratories are likely to use different procedures for identification.

There is a clear need for diagnostic scientists working in this area to compare and standardise protocols between States. A series of workshops aimed at providing training in the diagnosis of bacterial disease in aquatic animals for those new to the area, and at the same time providing an opportunity to evaluate the various diagnostic protocols used in Australia for their ability to identify both enzootic and exotic pathogens is overdue.

Development of Standard Diagnostic Techniques will require three logical steps:

1. Comparison and evaluation of the tests currently used by diagnostic laboratories;
2. Development of, and agreement on, the most sensitive, accurate and reproducible methods;
3. Adoption and publication of the agreed method for each pathogen as the Standard Diagnostic Technique.

Thus development of SDTs in aquatic animal bacteriology may include an SDT on general methods for aquatic animal bacteriology followed by SDTs for specific diseases such as Vibriosis. Vibriosis, due to its widespread occurence in vertebrate and invertebrate aquatic animal species in tropical and temperate regions of Australia, was identified as a disease of particular importance with respect to standardisation of diagnostic methods [1].

In order to ensure that the SDTs incorporate the latest technologies and information on exotic, as well as enzootic, bacterial pathogens, and that the SDTs will be recognised internationally as state-of-the-art, an international expert on the specific disease will be invited to participate in each of the respective workshops.

References

1. Fish Health Management Committee (1998). Report of the Fish Health Management Committee and the Fish Health Coordinating Group: Workshop on Aquatic Animal Health: Technical Issues, 7-9 December 1998, Melbourne, Victoria.

By developing an evidence-based health and safety training program for Australian fishing communities, this project meets the needs of the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture industry identified in FRDC’s RD&E Program 3, ‘Communities’ and particularly theme 10, which promotes resilient and supportive communities who are able to adapt to the social impacts of change in industry business environments.

The project will address a national need, identified by VicFRAB, to better understand the social and economic contribution of commercial fisheries, by identifying and addressing potential losses incurred through the poor health and wellbeing of the industry’s human capital.

Fishers tend to work in rural and remote communities, which means they have higher rates of mortality, disease and health risk factors than urban dwellers, further impacted by reduced access to primary health care services. Fishers are at particular risk of certain kinds of illnesses (eg. skin and diet-related), as well as injury (fatality rates are more than double those in the agricultural sector). Mental health concerns are higher than average in the fishing industry, exacerbated by uncertainties within the industry including often high debt and insecurity of tenure and licencing. While both women and men are at risk, 86.9% of fishers are male, a factor placing them at greater risk of suicide.

Fisher ‘attitudes’ also impact health, such as the culture of self-reliance, particularly among males. This may make fishers resilient, but also makes them less likely to adopt preventative health practices or to use health services, and they will usually wait longer before seeking medical assistance, particularly for issues of chronic poor mental health.

The Sustainable Fishing Families project will benefit fishing families’ health, safety and resilience by promoting a self-awareness of the value of the industry’s human capital, and building their health capacity.