FINAL REPORT - FRDC · FINAL REPORT Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: ... TAFE Technical and Further Education UTAS University of Tasmania FRDC Project No. 2005/641 Page 2 of 132

anme

Ma

FINAL REPORT

Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: Current and future needs for aquatic imal health training and for systems for rit-based accreditation and competency

assessments

tt Landos, Navneet Dhand, Brian Jones and Richard Whittington

March 2007

FRDC Project No. 2005/641

Authors: Matt Landos, Navneet Dhand, Brian Jones and Richard Whittington. Title: Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: Current and future needs for aquatic

animal health training and for systems for merit-based accreditation and competency assessments.

© Department of Fisheries, Government of Western Australia This work is copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of this publication may be reproduced by any process, electronic or otherwise, without the specific written permission of the copyright owners. Neither may information be stored electronically in any form whatsoever without such permission. The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation plans, invests in and manages fisheries research and development throughout Australia. It is a federal statutory authority jointly funded by the Australian Government and the fishing industry. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Department of Fisheries. In addition, much of the report involved the use of a survey which, by its nature, gathers perceptions and opinions which may not totally reflect reality. The authors have drawn their conclusions based on these survey results and their own experience. Printed by Department of Fisheries, P.O. Box 20 North Beach WA 6920. March 2007. Fisheries Research Contract Report No. 18 ISBN: 1 921258 02 0

Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: Current and future needs for aquatic animal health training and for systems for merit-based

accreditation and competency assessments

Matt Landos, Navneet Dhand, Brian Jones and Richard Whittington

March 2007

FRDC Project No. 2005/641

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. 2

OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................... 3

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 3

OUTCOMES ACHIEVED...................................................................................................... 8

KEYWORDS ............................................................................................................................ 9

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................... 9

BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................... 9

NEED......................................................................................................................................... 9

OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................... 9

METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 10

RESULTS................................................................................................................................ 11

DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................... 60

BENEFITS AND ADOPTION.............................................................................................. 68

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT.............................................................................................. 68

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 69

COMMENT ADDED IN PROOF ........................................................................................ 70

CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................... 70

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 71

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................................................................... 71

STAFF ..................................................................................................................................... 71

APPENDIX 1:......................................................................................................................... 72

Survey Questions to Aquaculture Industry stakeholders to assess current and future Aquatic Animal Health (AAH) education and training needs. .......................................................... 72

APPENDIX 2:....................................................................................................................... 129

Additional NAAH-TWG survey of State and Commonwealth Government full time equivalent staff requirements to cover various legislative responsibilities for Aquatic Animal Health..................................................................................................................... 129

FRDC Project No. 2005/641 Page 1 of 132

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS AAH Aquatic Animal Health

AAH professionals Includes laboratory and field diagnosticians, veterinary and non-veterinary and Government Aquatic Animal Health managers

AAHC Aquatic Animal Health Committee

AAHL Australian Animal Health Laboratory

ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research

AFS Asian Fisheries Society

AHA Animal Health Australia

BSc Bachelor of Science

BVSc Bachelor of Veterinary Science

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DAFF Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

FRDC Fisheries Research and Development Corporation

NAAHTWG National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group

NACA Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific

OIE World Organisation for Animal Health

PG Post graduate

PIHC Primary Industries Health Committee

PIMC Primary Industries Ministerial Committee

PISC Primary Industries Standing Committee

SCAHLS Sub-committee of Animal Health Laboratory Standards

SITP Seafood Industry Training Package

TAFE Technical and Further Education

UTAS University of Tasmania


2005/641 Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: Current and future needs for aquatic animal health training and for systems for merit-based accreditation and competency assessments

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr B. Jones ADDRESS: Principal Fish Pathologist Department of Fisheries, Western Australia P.O.Box 20 North Beach WA 6151 Telephone: 08 9368 3649 Fax: 08 9474 1881

OBJECTIVES To scope and clearly define current and future needs for aquatic animal health training and for systems for merit-based accreditation and competency assessments.

NON TECHNICAL SUMMARY Provision of high quality aquatic animal health (AAH) services is a complex multi-disciplinary activity. Hence, training programs must address all discipline areas to achieve the desired outcome of robust service delivery to meet all stakeholder group needs. The current and future needs for AAH training have been identified across many sectors through survey work and direct interviews with key stakeholders. There is a shortfall in both total capacity and more prominently, in the availability of high skill level individuals within both laboratory and field service provision areas. It was widely recognised that many of the traditional pathways for training groups of such skilled individuals was through mentorship and self-education within State and Commonwealth Governments. These are now severely restricted due to a changing role of Government and ongoing tightening of resources. A significant proportion of all stakeholders felt that current Australian training opportunities were either completely absent or of insufficient depth. Therefore, to meet the identified needs of the stakeholder groups for AAH service delivery, significant changes to current AAH training practices in Australia are required. 73% of survey respondents felt that the demands for AAH services were likely to increase over the next 5-10 years, which will only exacerbate the currently recognised shortages. Through discussions with an array of industry stakeholders across Australia there appeared to be sufficient training available for farmer level individuals but not for specialised AAH diagnostic professionals. It was apparent that not all aquaculture industry sectors, particularly the smaller emerging industries, were aware of the training opportunities available, suggesting an improved extension effort was required by providers at the Technical and Further (TAFE) Education institutions and universities. The experience that fisheries and aquaculture industries have had with animal health service provision is remarkably different to that experienced by the established terrestrial animal production industries. Health services to fisheries and aquaculture, in many jurisdictions and industries, have been viewed as a separate service area discipline to that of all other animal health services. This is an historical anomaly given the overlapping functions. Aquatic animal


health services are in reality, a subset of Australia’s animal health services. The reintegration into this larger area needs to begin with aquatic animal health training integrating with other animal health training, rather than being viewed as an entirely separate entity. The overlap of the skill sets is simply too great to justify entirely separate training programs for the range of disciplines involved. Surveys were designed to clarify stakeholder expectations of various providers of aquatic animal health services. Some of the major findings are listed below and supported with data in the main body of the report. The categories of service providers are outlined in Table 1 with their wide ranging specialities. Table 1. Service providers that deliver AAH services in Australia

Laboratory Based Personnel Academic Based Personnel Veterinary pathologists Veterinary pathologists Aquatic animal pathologists (non-veterinary) Aquatic animal pathologists (non-veterinary) Bacteriologists Bacteriologists Virologists Virologists Parasitologists Parasitologists Molecular biologists Molecular biologists Immunologists Immunologists Nutritionists Nutritionists Toxicologists Toxicologists Field Based Personnel Administration Based Personnel Private veterinary consultants State and Commonwealth policy staff Clinicians Epidemiologists Aquaculture technicians Biosecurity and policy Farm managers

Laboratory based personnel issues 1. Perceptions of sub-optimal performance

72% of laboratory respondents expressed a view that their abilities in at least one of the major disciplines was lacking. 81% stated that the quality of service delivered to aquatic animal cases was below that provided for terrestrial animals in their laboratory. However, while individuals may lack certain skills, the service to the client is provided by the laboratory as a whole. Industry and Government expectations are for very high levels of competency across all areas. The establishment of a “network” among laboratories further enhances Australia’s capability.

2. Minimal training options to up-skill personnel 48% of laboratory respondents expressed a need for post-graduate training to attain the required competency across all discipline areas surveyed. Research stakeholders expressed similar views about the inadequacies of current training. Such in-depth training opportunities do not exist in Australia at this time. The reality is that new graduates are not able to provide the high level AAH services demanded by clients.- it is simply beyond the scope of undergraduate courses. The solution lies in greater interaction between the veterinary and non-veterinary aquatic animal health training institutions, creation of mentorship/traineeship opportunities in operating diagnostic laboratories, and access to common curriculum and educational resource materials for undergraduate and post-graduate AAH training. Current expectations of laboratory staff exceed their capacity to deliver due to lack of


field (primarily veterinary) services The survey results indicated that both industry and Government expect aquatic animal diagnostic laboratories to provide the bulk of the high level AAH services that are perceived to be required. Both groups of stakeholders frequently sought the services of AAH diagnostic laboratories. When examining the operation of animal health services in other production animal industries in Australia, the intermediate step of involvement of field veterinarians is an obvious omission in the operation of many aquaculture/fisheries sectors. Field experience is a critical precursor to sample submission with sample selection clearly affecting the ability of a laboratory to select appropriate tests and provide meaningful results.

3. An aging population of high level AAH Professionals Governments and industry recognise that many of the high level aquatic animal health professionals are employed by State and Commonwealth Government Laboratories. This is evidenced by their participation in the NAAH-TWG and the heavy use of these individuals to provide technical advice for State Government policy development. A recent survey as part of the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) project 2005/621 to establish a national network of AAH diagnostic laboratories, found that >70% of AAH laboratory diagnosticians are approaching retirement within a 10 year time frame (70% are >50 years of age). Similar findings about the demography of highly skilled terrestrial animal laboratory diagnosticians have been recently noted in the Frawley Review into Rural Veterinary Services 2003 and in relation to field veterinary services by Heath and Niethe (2001). The lack of training pathways and projections for increased service demand are likely to leave AAH stakeholders in a parlous situation, unless steps are taken in succession planning for the loss of these skilled professionals. Significant new resources are required to avoid this demographic failure for AAH service provision in Australia.

Field-based personnel issues 1. Low level of understanding of the complexity of delivering high level skills and

services in Aquatic Animal Health by many industry sectors. Surprisingly respondents from the majority of aquaculture industry sectors and researchers demonstrated a very limited understanding of the complexity of skills and disciplines that are required to reach a diagnosis, select and apply a treatment and control/plan for diseases in aquatic animals. A list of the professional disciplines that combine to provide a diagnosis, treatment and control plan are encompassed in table 1 above; there may be further disciplines utilised in some circumstances. It is apparent that not all of these skills are likely to be possessed by one person, necessitating a multi-disciplinary approach. The lack of understanding of this complexity is intrinsic to the perception of the industries’ needs for service. Many aquaculturalists (49% of respondents) were of the opinion that through less than one week of training they could acquire very high competency levels across a range of AAH skills needed for optimal farm operations, thereby, undervaluing AAH management compared to other farm activities. From farm managers, through to service providers, there was support for improved and increased training opportunities. There was also a need highlighted for improved extension information on the courses that are currently offered- as general awareness amongst industries varied considerably. Not surprisingly, industries such as salmonids in Tasmania, which have benefited from engagement in the most rigorous AAH programs, were the most aware of training opportunities.


In contrast, aquaculturalists and Government expect very high skill and competency levels from AAH professionals engaged to deliver AAH services. However, there is little recognition of the required integration of such professionals into regular engagement with industry so they can develop and maintain the high skill levels demanded. Industry utilises private suppliers of AAH on average just over once a year. Few opportunities exist in Australia currently for AAH professionals to obtain the required exposure to develop high level diagnostic skills. One mechanism proposed to overcome this lack of engagement is to foster greater integration of AAH research programs with Veterinary schools and established AAH laboratories, and link them directly with industry, to demonstrate to industry the intrinsic value of high quality AAH service.

2. Field AAH under-servicing As described above a lack of input from AAH professionals at the field level impacts on the ability of AAH laboratories to deliver meaningful results. Further, for farms to derive the greatest benefit from laboratory tests, they require the creation and implementation of prevention and control strategies back at the farm, by field AAH professionals. This activity requires a deep understanding of disease processes and the culture system which is beyond the scope of most aquaculturalists’ training. One key component cause for the failure of development of these field AAH services has been the apparent reluctance of Veterinary schools to integrate specific aquatic animal material into their undergraduate degrees.

3. Impediments to improved AAH service provision. Several other factors have hindered the development of AAH services including: the vast geographic spread of industry and associated high travel costs to provide service; the relatively small size of the industry overall; the low level uptake/recognition by industry of AAH professionals; the diversity of culture systems; the diversity of species under culture; and the small number of people engaged full-time in AAH service provision, both private and government, barely sustains the critical mass required to successfully institute mentorship programs and training positions. Animal health provision to all other production animal sectors in Australia does not operate in this fashion, and neither should it for Aquatic Animals. Survey results indicated that where Government extension veterinarians were resourced and available they were heavily utilised and personal communications with the few non-government veterinarians active in Australia, indicated when interviewed that they were continuing to slowly expand their services.

Academic personnel issues 1. Insufficient specific aquatic animal content in veterinary science undergraduate

education. Through discussions with deans or senior staff from the following Australian veterinary faculties: University of Sydney; Melbourne University; Murdoch University; university of Queensland; Charles Sturt University and James Cook University, it is clear that both historically and currently, the veterinary profession has been very slow to respond to the emergence of this new production animal sector, and as a result aquatic animal health has developed without specific Veterinary undergraduate training in either aquatic animal diseases and physiology, or in aquatic animal production systems. However, the breadth and depth of animal health skills taught within a veterinary degree are not only highly relevant, but are the essential background, to which the specific aquatic skills need to be added, to provide the veterinary element of a comprehensive health service. As the undergraduate curriculum is already overflowing, only minor improvements in specific


aquatic animal health content are likely. The inclusion of aquatic animal case material across all areas of the degree courses is encouraged and in many cases, notably the University of Sydney and Queensland University, is currently underway. Such inclusions as aquatic pathogens in microbiology (bacteria, viruses and fungi), diagnostic aquatic case material in pathology, aquatic disease examples in epidemiology, important differences in aquatic animal physiology, inclusion of basic fish nutrition within broader nutritional training and the inclusion of some common aquatic parasites in parasitology. However, it is both appropriate and necessary that many of the key skills are taught through the creation of post-graduate training opportunities in conjunction with veterinary and non-veterinary schools and established diagnostic laboratories with aquatic animal health expertise.

2. Lack of succession planning within diagnostic laboratories to act as an educational resource A significant proportion of the national AAH knowledge resides within highly experienced fish pathologists in State Government laboratories. The average age of these individuals exceeds 50. At present none of these laboratories have sufficient resources to implement a trainee program to assist with succession planning. Mentorship from experienced pathologists is widely recognised as one of the best techniques to transfer the high level skills.

Administrative personnel issues 1. State Government’s unable to fill their own needs

Surveying across all State Governments revealed a current shortage of staff attempting to cover AAH issues and predicted ongoing shortages into the future, compounded by the predicted increase in demand. The impacts on the quality of policy and surveillance capacity can only be deleterious. In the last 3 years State Governments in Victoria, South Australia, NSW and Northern Territory have been forced to undertake protracted advertising nationally and in some cases internationally to find experienced AAH professionals to fulfil vital administrative and laboratory functions. It has been common for these positions to be vacant for greater than 12 months whilst suitable candidates are sought.

2. Adequate skill levels but still demand for more training across a range of AAH areas In general, surveyed Government AAH managers felt they possessed sufficient levels of AAH skills to perform adequately in their positions. However it was noted that >60% of respondents felt that more training would be supported and attended.

Competency standards Veterinarians are registered and regulated through legislation to provide competent animal health services. However, they are currently a minority in all areas of AAH service provision, except pathology, in Australia. Veterinarians have not distinguished themselves with all industry groups as having particular competencies, perhaps due to their lack of engagement. The Australian College of Veterinary Scientists, Chapter of Aquatic Animal Health is undergoing rapid expansion in membership which will assist in providing demonstrable proof of a competency standard. Formal links are being established by the Chapter with specialist veterinary groups in the USA and the United Kingdom. However other AAH professionals with specialist level skills currently go officially unrecognised and still others with potentially


less experience and qualifications are operating in the market. There was recognition of a need for a competency standard by 60% of all respondents across all stakeholder groups.

RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Australian universities be encouraged to incorporate a greater component of

aquatic animal health into undergraduate training courses, through the development of a National Aquatic Animal Health Curriculum and educational resource material.

2. That Australian universities be encouraged to develop post-graduate training opportunities with formal international linkages e.g. Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific (NACA), Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Asian Fisheries Society (AFS) to encourage overseas students to participate and support the running of such courses. Such training opportunities should include some direct field experience with industry.

3. That funding be sourced to support traineeships in aquatic animal pathology at Government and University Aquatic Animal Health Laboratories around Australia.

4. That Australian college of veterinary science approach providers to assess potential for endorsed graduates of tertiary undergraduate degree programs to undertake a program of mentoring, training and examination and continuing professional development in AAH which could then be recognised as the competency standard across Australia.

5. That State Governments be asked to subsidise the cost of investigations of novel aquatic animal disease outbreaks, to underpin development of improved understanding of key pathogens and processes whilst the aquaculture industries are developing to maturity.

6. That nationally funded research projects with AAH components should include links to a Veterinary school, a State Government AAH diagnostic laboratory and with industry.

7. That a nationally coordinated extension program be funded to ensure key stakeholders are aware of all the training opportunities that currently exist.

OUTCOMES ACHIEVED An initial scoping workshop was conducted with the National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group (NAAH-TWG) in Melbourne 2005. A survey of aquatic animal health stakeholders including members of RecFish Australia, State and Territory Agencies and the veterinary universities and other eeducational facilities that currently supply training in aquatic animal health was undertaken. The supply and demand for AAH services has been analysed based on current usage and projected growth in service needs. The recommendations flowing from this analysis have been prepared and will be submitted to Aquatic Animal Health Committee in the form of an issues paper that identifies the problems(s) but also solutions, with respect to current and future needs for aquatic animal health training and for systems for merit-based accreditation and competency assessments.for further consideration.


KEYWORDS Aquaculture, Laboratory, Survey, Teaching, Training, University, Veterinary

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank all those who participated in telephone, email and in-person surveys, interviews and workshops around Australia. We are grateful for the input into the draft from the National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group.

BACKGROUND The National Aquatic Animal Technical Working Group identified the need for succession planning and training and this was strongly supported by stakeholder input into the AQUAPLAN 2005-2010 initiative. The funding is seed money for the AQUAPLAN 2005-2010 strategy 4 vision of “Enhanced education and training in aquatic animal health at all levels of teaching to support continuing growth, profitability and sustainability of Australia’s aquaculture industries. The objective of this project is consistent with the objectives of the “Securing the Future…” federal budget initiative.

NEED Aquatic animal health service providers have expressed concern that there is a shortfall of aquatic animal health professionals servicing Australia’s aquaculture industries. Despite this need, most current Australian education systems/institutions do not adequately cover aquatic animal health. In addition to the need for inclusion of aquatic animal health content in formal education courses, there is also a need for continuing education. Identifying accreditation mechanisms to ensure competency in professionals providing aquatic animal health services to the aquaculture sector is another component of this strategy. This need must go beyond the provision of veterinary services (which also provide limited training in aquatic animal health). For example, there is a need for research and training in subjects such as invertebrate immunology, identification of nutritional disorders, water quality issues, taxonomy of pathogens, development and implementation of modern diagnostic methods and development of vaccines. As an example of this wider educational approach, the University of Tasmania currently provides a training course in histopathology of aquatic animals that is targeted at, and in part run by, non-veterinarians and this type of training should also be captured.

OBJECTIVES To scope and clearly define current and future needs for aquatic animal health training and for systems for merit-based accreditation and competency assessments.


METHODS In order to determine the training needs for aquatic animal health service delivery and competency standards, a consultant was employed to create and conduct surveys of stakeholders (listed in Table 2). The surveys were conducted through face-to-face and telephone interviews, and by email/post. Many of the post/email respondents were also contacted by phone for general interview as noted in Table 2. Copies of the survey applicable to each stakeholder group are provided as Appendix 3. For those participants whose email addresses were obtained by the consultant, they received a follow-up email reminder to complete the surveys. For industry groups who forwarded email surveys to members, the group received the reminder emails and was asked to pass it onto members. 236 individual stakeholders were contacted directly by the consultant by email. Major industry peak bodies (both members and non-members of the National Aquaculture Council) were also contacted including Recfish Australia, Tuna Boat Owners Association, Australian Prawn Farmers Association, Australian Barramundi Farmers Association, Silver Perch Growers Association, NSW Aquaculture Association, Seafood Industry Councils in all States, Oyster farmers Associations in several states and Pearl industry representatives. Many of these groups enhanced the penetration of the survey by distributing it to their relevant memberships. Stakeholders in Government and private laboratories were personally briefed on the project to explain the survey’s intent and to answer any enquiries about individual questions by the consultant. Key academic staff from all of the Veterinary Faculties around Australia were interviewed, as were key staff from Universities offering aquaculture degrees which incorporate aquatic animal health material. (UTAS and Flinders University). Deakin University was unable to be contacted. An interview was also held with staff from Challenger TAFE to review the input by this institution to delivery of the Seafood Industry Training Package. A database was created to facilitate analysis of survey responses, and graphical outputs were developed to simplify presentation of data. A draft report was presented to the NAAH-TWG in May 2006, and feedback from this meeting was used to refine data analysis and interpretation.


Table 2. Stakeholders consulted by group and number.

Stakeholder group No. of survey post/email responses

No. interviews

Aquaculture industry (typically farm managers) 29 40 Government Aquaculture and Fisheries Management staff

14 18

Aquatic animal health diagnostic laboratory staff 31 120 Aquatic animal researchers 13 12 Recreational fishing industry 3 12 Commercial fishing industry 2 8 Aquaculture feed manufacturing industry 3 4 Ornamental fish industry 1 1 Educational institutions 6 14

RESULTS Within each of the AAH service provider areas there is a variety of disciplines which combine to provide services to industry and Government. These multi-disciplinary groups represented in Table 2 are ultimately where current and future AAH education and training need to be directed. Table 1. Service providers that deliver AAH services in Australia.

Laboratory Based Personnel Academic Based Personnel Veterinary pathologists Veterinary pathologists Fish pathologists (non-veterinary) Fish pathologists (non-veterinary) Bacteriologists Bacteriologists Virologists Virologists Parasitologists Parasitologists Molecular biologists Molecular biologists Immunologists Immunologists Nutritionists Nutritionists Toxicologists Toxicologists Field Based Personnel Administration Based Personnel Private veterinary consultants State and Commonwealth fish health staff Non-veterinary AAH Professionals Epidemiologists Aquaculture technicians (farm hands) Biosecurity and policy Farm managers Of 236 stakeholders who directly received the surveys, from the nine stakeholder groups, completed responses were received from 43% using email, face-to-face, telephone and postal communication. (Table 2). Interview discussions were held with 229 stakeholders over the course of the project. Results of aquaculture industry stakeholder survey (see Appendix 1 for copies of the survey questions) Responses (see Figures 1 and 3) show that over 90% of respondents (mostly farm managers) see a need for at least a basic understanding of aquatic animal health themselves and for their farm hands across all areas surveyed. This training need was emphasised with 30-40% of respondents believing that more aquatic health training is required across all areas for both farm hand staff and managers (see Figures 2 and 4). The only area where less than 30% of


respondents saw more training for managers was required was in the application of vaccination programs (See Figure 4). The aquaculture stakeholders’ perceptions of the level of skill required by laboratories recognised their need for advanced skills was strong (see Figure 5). This result was common also to Government managers and private veterinarians and non-veterinary AAH professionals (see Figure 7 and 9). In specific areas, where it was perceived that more training was required at the laboratory level, disease diagnosis and parasite identification rated highest (see Figure 6). Aquaculture respondents were more uniform in their belief that more training, in all identified areas, was required by government licencing/policy authorities compared with laboratories (see Figure 8). This desire to see more training also applied to AAH veterinarians and non-veterinary AAH professionals (see Figure 10). In assessing the current use of AAH training it was recognised by more than 50% of respondents that AAH training at a TAFE or university level had been utilised by their farm hand staff. This percentage was increased to 80% for aquaculture managers and 90% for AAH veterinarians (see Figure 11). Aquaculture stakeholders felt that this current off-farm AAH education was relevant, but lacked detail and required modification to be of practical value on the farm in the majority of cases. This was true of TAFE, Seafood Industry Training Package (SITP) and University degree graduate courses in particular (see Figure 12). Another insight into the current AAH training was the perception of 50% of respondents that TAFE, SITP, BSc (Marine biology), BSc (Aquaculture) course graduates had expectations which were too high. This compared to only 20% of respondents feeling veterinary graduate job expectations were too high (see Figures 13 and 14). Respondents were asked to score the frequency of use, and the level of skills required by: farm hands; farm managers; and AAH veterinarians or non-veterinary AAH professionals (see Figure 15). Aquaculture stakeholders generally noted that farm hands were expected to have only basic skills which they expected would be used infrequently, managers required basic skills which were likely to be used regularly, and AAH professionals required advanced skills to be used frequently. To attain the required level of skills respondents noted farm hands required two-day to one-week training courses, farm managers required up to one semester courses for skills such as undertaking a rigorous investigation of a health problem, and AAH professionals generally were perceived to require more than a one-year diploma to be proficient in the range of required skills (see Figure 16). The ranking of service providers in order of frequency of use highlighted most frequent use of Government veterinary officers and private veterinarians (see Figure 17). Around two thirds of respondents rated Government laboratories and veterinary officers as excellent in provision of adequate diagnostic technical advice (see Figure 18). This compared to 45% for private AAH veterinarians, 20% for non-vet AAH professionals and only 15% for other farmers. This was in contrast to the ability of service providers to deliver treatment advice (see Figure 19). In this category 29% of respondents found government laboratories to be of a poor standard and private labs even worse (33%). The Government Veterinary Officers again performed favourably with 58% of respondents describing their treatment advice as excellent and only 11% finding it to be poor. A similar positive picture was provided for private AAH professionals who were found to adequate or excellent by 14/14 respondents. The issue of timeliness of service identified some differences between the private and public sector service providers (see Figure 20). 90% of respondents found the service from private AAH veterinarians to be timely, with 80% finding the same of private labs. This is in contrast


to only 42% for Government laboratories, 40% for Government managers, and 63% for Government veterinary officers. The use of service providers was unsurprisingly weighted towards those who offer work for free. In terms of the cost of services, less than 20% of all respondents felt any of the providers were too expensive (see Figure 21). That said, this figure could rise as high as 47% should free services become fully cost recovered in Government laboratories. A surprisingly high proportion (13/29) of respondents felt there was currently no training available for them to acquire AAH skills (see Figure 22). All but 6% of respondents believed that their business would benefit from improved AAH input (see Figure 23). 90% of aquaculture respondents felt this could best be achieved through training existing staff (see Figure 25). As a stakeholder group there was a clear indication (87% agreement) that their use of AAH services would likely increase over the next 5-10 years (see Figure 26). The broad outcomes sought by respondents from AAH activities were strongly supported in all cases across all industries within the aquaculture stakeholder group (see Figure 24). This strong support may well reflect the finding that 73% of respondents had suffered significant losses due to disease (see Figure 26). For AAH service providers, 73% of respondents would like to see minimum competency standards introduced (see Figure 26), although through interviews with the consultant many of the respondents commented that this would not be the primary criteria for selecting individuals to be used. Proximity to the farm and recommendations from other farmers were viewed as more likely to influence the decision of who to engage for field and laboratory health services. Accreditation was perceived by some aquaculturalists to be only necessary for market access requirement certification issues.


Graphical representation of results from Aquaculture stakeholder survey

4

1

32

13

16

19 19

17

22

15

10 10

8

13

6

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Fish health monitoring General: feeding,handling, applying

treatments

Keeping records of fishhealth

Recognition of signs ofdisease/poor health

Sampling for diseaseinvestigation

Sampling for food safety

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Not Required Basic Understanding Advanced Understanding

Figure 1. Aquaculture stakeholders expectations of the level of aquatic animal health knowledge their farm hand staff require to perform optimally in the respective activities.

36.7%

33.3%

30.0%

40.0%

36.7%

20.0%

32.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Fish healthmonitoring(including

routinemicroscopic

examinations)

General:feeding,handling,applying

treatments

Keeping recordsof fish health

Recognition ofsigns of

disease/poorhealth

Sampling fordisease

investigation

Sampling forfood safety

Overall

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 2. Proportion of aquaculture respondents believing that more training is required for their farm hand staff in the respective activity area.


11

5

1

4

2

4

1

10 10

7

12

9

13

1011

88

14

23

16

21

11

20

12

18

0

5

10

15

20

25

Application ofvaccination

program

Designsampling

strategy forfarm

surveillancestatus

Detect sub-clinical health

problems

Developmentand

implementationof biosecurity

plans

Investigation oflosses including

samplecollection

Manageimpacts of

treatments onenvironment

and food safety

Manageprevention

measures andchemical

treatments

Parasiteidentification

Water qualitymeasurement

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Not required Basic Understanding Advanced Understanding

Figure 3. Aquaculture stakeholder expectations of the level of aquatic animal health knowledge they (farm managers) require to perform optimally in the respective activities.

26.7%

40.0%

43.3%

40.0% 40.0%

35.7%

40.6%

43.3%

29.0%

37.6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Application ofvaccination

program

Design samplingstrategy for farm

surveillancestatus

Detect sub-clinical health

problems

Development andimplementationof biosecurity

plans

Investigation oflosses including

sample collection

Manage impactsof treatments onenvironment and

food safety

Manageprevention

measures andchemical

treatments


Water qualitymeasurement

Overall

Prop

ortio

n of

resp

onde

nts

Figure 4. Proportion of respondents believing that more training is required for farm managers in the respective activity area.


1 1

3 3

6

1

45

4

12 2

12

3 3 34

18

23

1920

15

22

1918

1920

0

5

10

15

20

25

Advise ontreatment and

control

Diagnosis ofdisease

Histopathology Microbiology Molecularbiology


Testing fordiseasefreedom

certification

Toxic algaeidentification

Virology Water qualitytesting

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 5. Aquaculture stakeholder expectations of the level of aquatic animal health knowledge required by diagnostic laboratory employees to perform optimally in the respective activities.

23.1%22.2%

25.9%

29.6%

25.9%

29.6% 29.6%

33.3%

35.7%

23.1%

27.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Advise ontreatment and

control

Diagnosis ofdisease

Histopathology Microbiology Molecularbiology


Testing fordiseasefreedom

certification

Toxic algaeidentification

Virology Water qualitytesting

Overall

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 6. Proportion of aquaculture respondents believing that more training is required for laboratory employees in the respective activity area.


23

1

32

1

3

21 2122 22

0

5

10

15

20

25

Disease control programs Licence conditions to meetenvironmental guidelines

State disease surveillance Surveillance for exotic diseases

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Not required Basic Understanding Advanced Understanding

Figure 7. Aquaculture stakeholder expectations of the level of aquatic animal health knowledge required by Government licensing/policy authorities to perform optimally in the respective activities.

33.3%

29.6%

33.3% 33.3%

32.4%

27%

28%

29%

30%

31%

32%

33%

34%

Disease control programs Licence conditions tomeet environmental

guidelines

State disease surveillance Surveillance for exoticdiseases

Overall

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 8. Proportion of aquaculture respondents believing that more training is required for Government licensing/policy authorities in the respective activity area.


1 1 12

1 12 2

1

5

23

2221

23

17

22 22

0

5

10

15

20

25

Diagnosticinvestigations

Farm managementadvice

Field services Impacts of treatmentson the environment

Parasite identification Legal therapeutants

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 9. Aquaculture stakeholder expectations of the level of aquatic animal health knowledge required by AAH veterinarian or non-veterinary AAH professional to perform optimally in the respective activities.

33.3%

42.3%

33.3% 33.3%

40.7%

32.1%

35.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Diagnosticinvestigations

Farm managementadvice

Field services Impacts oftreatments on the

environment


Legal therapeutants Overall

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 10. Proportion of aquaculture respondents believing that more training is required for AAH veterinarian or non-veterinary AAH professional in the respective activity area.


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Farm Hand Farm Manager Fish health Vet

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

On the job training TAFE University On the job training and University On the job training and TAFE TAFE and University All

Figure 11. Source of education for farm hand staff, farm manager and fish health veterinarian.

1 Irrelevant 2 Relevant but of insufficient depth to be of value 3 Relevant but required modification to be of practical value on the farm 4 Relevant, quickly applicable to work on farm to maintain current AAH standards5 Highly Relevant and increased the AAH standards on the farm

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Seafood industry trainingpackage

TAFE

University aquaculture degree

Unviersity veterinary degree

Average Relevance

Figure 12. Relevance of off-farm AAH education and training for practical application on the farm as measured from 1 to 5 scale.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f par

ticip

ants

About right Too high Too low

Figure 1job posit

Abili

Figure 1consulta1- not reused occ

FRDC Pr

Student’s level of expectations

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

TAFE (NatfishAquaculture)

TAFE sea foodIndustry

University (Science) University(aquaculture)

University (marinebiology)

University(Veterinary degree)

3. Aquaculture manager’s perception of the level of expectations brought by recent graduates to a new ion.

0 1 2 3 4 5

ty to comprehend the interaction between the environment, the pathogenand the host

Ability to design and implement a farm biosecurity plan

Ability to design and implement a farm health management program

Awareness of government regulations

Awareness of signs of sickness

Awareness of the National list of diseases

Choose and administer appropriate treatment

Collect appropriate samples to facilitate an investigation

Reach a definitive diagnosis

Undertake rigorous investigation of a health problem

Average skill score

Farm Hand Farm Manager AAH Vet or consultant

4. Scoring the level and frequency of skills required by farm hands, managers and AAH vets or

nts on a 1-5 scale. quired at all; 2- Basic skill -used rarely (once a year); 3- Basic skill used regularly; 4-Advanced skill asionally; Score 5-Advanced skill used regularly

oject No. 2005/641 Page 20 of 132

0 1 2 3 4 5

Ability to comprehend the interaction between the environment, the pathogenand the host

Ability to design and implement a farm biosecurity plan

Ability to design and implement a farm health management program

Awareness of government regulations

Awareness of signs of sickness

Awareness of the National list of diseases

Choose and administer appropriate treatment

Collect appropriate samples to facilitate an investigation

Reach a definitive diagnosis

Undertake rigorous investigation of a health problem

Average training score

Farm Hand Farm Manager AAH Vet or consultant

Figure 15. Scoring amount of training required for proficiency in the key AAH skill areas on 1-5 scale. 1 - Two day course; 2 - One week course; 3 - One semester course; Score 4 - One year diploma; Score 5 - Five year degree.

2

3

6

4

6

2

1 1

2

1

5

9

8

6 6 6

4

5

9

6

3

8

7

4

7

3 3

2 2

3 3

2

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory(includingCSIRO)

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer

Other farmers Privatelaboratory

Private non-Vet AAH

consultant

Private FishVet

Researcher University

Service Providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Monthly Once a year Three monthly Weekly

Figure 16. Ranking of service providers by the frequency of their use by aquaculture stakeholders.


4

1 1

6

1 1

4

6

7

13

11

5

4

6

8

7

2

13

15

2

3

4

1

5

2

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Govtaquaculture

manager


Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer


Private non-veterinary

AAHconsultant

Private fishveterinarian


Service Providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

1

Poor Adequate Excellent

Figure 17. Diagnostic technical adequacy of service providers.

3

4

2

3

2 2

1

4

5

6

8

11

2

4

5

6

5

2

5

11

2

3

2

1

3

1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Govtaquaculture

manager


Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer


Private non-vet AAH

consultant

Private fishvet


Service Providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 18. Treatment technical adequacy of service providers.


2

6

3

4

3

1

2

1

4

5 5 5

6

1

4

5

4

8

14

7

10

9

8

4

5

3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Govtaquaculture

manager


Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer

Other farmers Private fishvet

Privatelaboratory

Private non-vet AAH

consultant


Service Providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Too slow Sometimes adequate Adequate

Figure 19. Timeliness of the service provided.

1

2

6

1

7

1 1

7

5 5

7

6

1 1

5

4

3

5

2 2

4 4

1 1 1

2

4

3 3

2

5

3 3

2 2

3

1 1

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Govtaquaculture

manager


Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer

Other farmers Private fishvet

Privatelaboratory

Private non-vet AAH

consultant


Service Providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Free, would pay if required Free- would not use if had to pay Cost beneficia Cost neutral Too expensive

Figure 20. Cost-effectiveness of the service provided.


1 2

6

1

7

1 1

7

5

5

7

6

1 1

5 4

3

5 2

2

44

1

11

2

4

3 3

2

53

3

2 23

1 12 1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Govtaquaculture

manager


Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer

Otherfarmers

Private fishvet

Privatelaboratory

Private non-vet AAH

consultant


Service Providers

Per

cent

age

of re

spon

dent

sFree, would pay if required Free- would not use if had to pay Cost beneficia Cost neutral Too expensive

Figure 21. Cost-effectiveness of the service provided.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

No training available Yes, but insufficient depth Yes, sufficient

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 22. Perceptions of availability of training and its adequacy.


Definitely47%

Likely20%

Possibly27%

Unlikely3%

Very unlikely3%

Figure 23. Proportion of participants believing that their business would benefit from improved AAH input.

90%

80%

83%

93%

93%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Cost-effective measures for thereduction of losses from disease(s)

already present on the farm

Protection from incursion of newenzootic/exotic diseases

Disease free status on livestock facilitytranslocation of stock

Improved productivity from existingstock, through control of sub clinical

health problems

Disease free status on product tofacilitate market access and protect

domestic market position

Percentage of participants

Figure 24. AAH outcomes being sought.


90%

60%

63%

3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Training existing staff

Hire new trained staff

Use contractors on an as needsbasis

Service not required

Percentage of respondents

Figure 25. Preference for incorporation of more AAH services into the operations, if required.

87%

73%

73%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Use of AAH services is likely toincrease in the next 5-10 years?

Suffered losses due to disease?

Like to see a minimum competencystandard?


Figure 26. Experiences of past and insights for future.

Government Fisheries and Aquaculture Managers Government managers recorded activity of varying frequency across a broad range of AAH service areas (see Figure 27). This group saw little gap between their current skill set and required skill set (see Figure 28), which is an interesting perception given the strong view of the aquaculture industry stakeholders of the need for more training in this group. Even with this perception that current skills were adequate, around 60% of respondents supported, and would attend, further training across a broad range of AAH areas (see Figure 29). When


respondents were asked to nominate the length of training required to perform optimally in each skill area, the response was diverse (see Figure 30): as 30-50% of respondents felt a degree course was the minimum training prerequisite. At the other end of the spectrum some managers see training requirements as being minimal, as little as a two-day course being perceived as sufficient. When Government and Aquaculture Managers were asked what level of background education was required to perform adequately in their position, the responses were a fairly even mix between veterinary skills, business and administration skills and other science degrees (see Figure 31). As with the aquaculture respondents, the majority of government respondents saw a clear need for increasing AAH services in the near future across all areas of laboratory, field and policy (see Figure 32). This stakeholder group sought AAH services from Government laboratory resources, research facilities and universities extensively (see Figure 33) and were generally happy with the adequacy and timeliness of the advice (see Figure 34, 35), though again, government services were seen as expensive by a few respondents (see Figure 36). In contrast to the earlier response about the adequacy of current skill levels, where respondents uniformly felt they had sufficient skills, only 8% of respondents thought that their ability to manage would not improve with increased AAH input (see Figure 39). The preferred method for incorporation of greater AAH service was through training existing staff and enhancing training for government extension staff (see Figure 37). Again, in contrast to the responses on the adequacy of current skill levels, only 8% of respondents saw current training as sufficient, with 42% unaware of any training available to assist in up-skilling in AAH disciplines (see Figure 38). 86% of respondents had dealt with a significant scale disease problem demonstrating the ubiquitous nature of disease problems in farmed and wild animal populations (see Figure 40). Half of the respondents would like to see accreditation standard for AAH professionals, with a further 21% uncertain of its value and 29% of respondents thought it was not required (see Figure 41). In a separate survey undertaken by National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group, representatives from each State Government were requested to populate a table indicating the current and future anticipated needs in terms of full-time equivalent staff. The aggregate results are presented in Figure 42 and 43 below, demonstrate that even currently there is an unmet need for skilled staff, which is anticipated to grow into the future.


Graphical representation of Results from Government Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Survey

5

5

4

5

3

5

4

4

4

5

4

7

5

2

2

2

1

3

1

1

4

1

1

2

1

2

1

4

5

1

4

5

3

4

3

3

3

3

2

5

2

3

3

4

2

2

2

3

4

5

3

1

4

2

1

1

4

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Aquatic animal welfare

Contribute to and review AAHC and AQUAPLAN documents

Domestic surveillance for incursion of exotic disease or spread of endemicdisease

Drafting policy for control of AAH in aquaculture, wild commercial andrecreational fisheries

Field Investigation and diagnosis of sickness or mortality event

Food safety and OH&S

Industry development, education and extension

Laboratory diagnostic services

Managing fisheries and aquaculture research

Provide guidance for chemical use

Provision of disease control, prevention and treatment advice

Setting regulations for domestic certification for fish translocation

AA

H S

ervi

ces

Number of respondents

Never Once a year Four times a year Monthly Weekly

Figure 27. Frequency of service provided.

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

3

3

3

3

4

3

3

4

3

4

3

3

3

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Combination of all of the above skills

Current knowledge of diseases of aquaticanimals

Design and implement prevention/controland treatment strategies

Design and operate surveillance andreporting systems

Interpret laboratory testing results

Interpret State and National legislativerequirements

Interpret technical scientific information

Investigate disease outbreak

Regulatory knowledge of risk assessmentprocess

Technical understanding of aquaculturefarming systems

Skill

s

Average skill score

Average of Current Skill Level Average of Required Skill Level

Figure 28. Current and required skills for providing requisite services.


46.2%

84.6%

46.2%

53.8%

53.8%

57.1%

61.5%

61.5%

61.5%

61.5%

58.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%


Current knowledge of diseases of aquatic animals

Design and implement prevention/control and treatment strategies

Design and operate surveillance and reporting systems


Interpret State and National legislative requirements



Regulatory knowledge of risk assessment process

Technical understanding of aquaculture farming systems

OverallSk

ills

Percent respondents

Figure 29. Percent of respondents supporting and willing to attend training in the respective skill area.

1

1

2

2

2

3

1

2

1

2

1

5

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

1

3

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

3

2

2

3

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

3

2

2

2

3

1

1

0 2 4 6 8 10











Skill

s

Number of respondents12

Two day course One week course One semester courseOne year diploma University degree with AAH units Post graduaate AAH qualification

Figure 30. Length of training required to perform optimally in each skill area.


2

3

1

3

1

1

1

3

2

1

1

1

2

1

3

1

2

3

2

2

3

3

4

2

5

2

3

3

2

3

2

4

1

5

3

4

2

4

3

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14











Skill

s


Diploma of aquaculture Bachelor of Science aquacultureBachelor of science (Zoology or fisheries management) Bachlor of Vet ScienceBachelor of economics / commerce / business administration

Figure 31. Background education required for various skills.

66.7%

73.3%

60.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Laboratory Policy Management Field

Government areas

Perc

enta

ge o

f res

pond

ents

Figure 32. Proportion of respondents believing (agreeing or strongly agreeing) that the use of AAH services is likely to increase in the next 5-10 years.


75%78%

100%

40%

33%

40%

64%

83%

67%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fisheries andAquaculturemanagers

Governmentextension/veterinary

officer

Govt laboratorystaff (inc.CSIRO)

Private AquaticAnimal Health

consultant

Privatelaboratory staff

Privateveterinaryconsultant

Researchfacility staff

Self-taught /publishedliterature /internet

University-based AAH

experts

Service Providers

Perc

ent r

espo

nden

ts

Figure 33. Percent of respondents using various services currently.

12

1

4 2

3

1 1 1

23 3

14

5

1 1 1

3

1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12



officer



consultant






experts

Service providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 34. Technical knowledge adequacy of the service provided.


1 1

5 3

5

12

1

3

1

3

3

4

1 1

3

3

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12



officer



consultant






experts

Service providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Too Slow Sometimes adequate Always adequate


3

1

3 3

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10



officer



consultant






experts

Service providers

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

3

Free- would pay if required Free- would not use if had to payCost beneficial Cost neutralToo expensive- minimise use due to cost concerns

Figure 36. Cost effectiveness of the service provided.


60%

20%

40%

7%

13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%


Hiring new trained staff

Enhance training for govt/extensionstaff

Use contractors on as need basis

Increased service not required


Figure 37. Preference for incorporation of more AAH services into the management, if required.

No training available42%

Yes, but insufficient depth50%

Yes, sufficient8%



.

Definitely8%

Likely61%

Possibly23%

Very unlikely8%

Figure 39. Proportion of participants believing that their management would benefit from improved AAH input.

No14%

Yes86%

Figure 40. Proportion of participants agreeing that their management had to deal with a significant scale health/disease problem.


No29%

Uncertain21%

Yes50%

Figure 41. Proportion of participants wanting to see a minimum competency/accreditation standard to be brought into the areas of AAH service provision.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Pol

iciy

dev

elop

men

t

Pol

icy

com

plia

nce

Dis

ease

pre

vent

ion

and

cont

rol

Tran

sloc

atio

n co

ntro

l

Lega

l har

vest

adm

inis

tratio

n

Con

trol o

f exo

tic fi

shs

sps

aqua

tic d

evel

opm

ent a

ndm

anag

emen

t

Exte

nsio

n se

rvic

es

Nat

iona

l ini

tiativ

es

Fish

erie

s co

nser

vatio

n

Lab

AAH

dia

gnos

tic s

ervi

ces

Gen

eral

com

plia

nce

and

enfo

rcem

ent

Ave

rage

num

ber o

f ful

l tim

e eq

uiva

lent

sta

ff

Current Required Future

Figure 42. State Government AAH staff requirements across areas of responsibility.


0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1aq

uatic

deve

lopm

ent a

ndm

anag

emen

t

Con

trol o

f exo

ticfis

hs s

ps

Dis

ease

prev

entio

n an

dco

ntro

l

Ext

ensi

onse

rvic

es

Fish

erie

sco

nser

vatio

n

Gen

eral

com

plia

nce

and

enfo

rcem

ent

Lab

AA

Hdi

agno

stic

serv

ices

Lega

l har

vest

adm

inis

tratio

n

Nat

iona

lin

itiat

ives

Pol

iciy

deve

lopm

ent

Pol

icy

com

plia

nce

Tran

sloc

atio

nco

ntro

l

Ave

rage

def

icie

ncy

of F

TE n

umbe

rsCurrent deficiency Future deficiency

Figure 43. Aggregate State Government areas of deficiency currently and predicted staff deficiencies in 5-10 years.

Laboratory survey results Laboratory staff possess a wide range of skills that are utilised frequently in the provision of AAH services to all of the stakeholder groups surveyed (see Figures 44, 45 and 46). Survey responses were received from a total of 31 laboratory staff from all States/Territories? The consultant also undertook informal telephone or in-person interviews with 120 laboratory staff from around Australia to collect broad views on areas of perceived need for education and training. Across many of the skill areas respondents highlighted perceived deficiencies in their own abilities (see Figure 47). 53% believed that the technical knowledge of their discipline was not of the same standard as for terrestrial animals (see Figure 48).This flowed into the laboratory respondents’ much higher perception of the level of training required for them to perform adequately, with university or post-graduate training being predominant in all the skill areas surveyed (see Figure 49). Given the earlier indications by aquaculture industry respondents that laboratory services are one of their primary sources of AAH assistance, it is clearly sub-optimal that the providers feel their capacity to deliver, is currently sub-standard. 70% of samples arriving at the laboratories come directly from farmers, with only 20% coming through referral from veterinary or non-veterinary AAH professionals (government and private) (see Figure 50). This is in striking contrast to the situation observed by the consultant for terrestrial animal samples which routinely come via a field veterinarian. 23 of 28 respondents reported that they were able to obtain field information on submissions “more often than not”, however a critical finding was that half of the respondents were only “rarely” able to send results to a qualified third party for interpretation (see Figure 51).


Consistent with previous stakeholder groups, the majority of the respondents predicted that service demand would increase in the next 5-10 years (see Figure 52). The adequacy of technical knowledge, timeliness of service and cost-effectiveness mirrored other survey results (see Figure 53, 54, 55) and was generally adequate. Only 10% of laboratory respondents felt that current training available was adequate, with 31% stating there was no training available (see Figure 57). Unsurprisingly 84% of respondents felt that laboratory services would benefit from increased AAH input (see Figure 58). The majority of laboratory stakeholders felt increased AAH input would be best achieved through training existing staff (see Figure 56). 47% of respondents would like to see competency standards, 43% were uncertain of the need for such a standard and 10% suggested there was no need at all (see Figure 59). Magnifying the predicted increasing demand will be a declining resource of highly skilled laboratory diagnosticians. The aging profile of the current demographic of ‘high level’ laboratory diagnosticians was highlighted through FRDC project 2005/621, where the average age of diagnosticians was greater than 50 years (see Figure 60). Many laboratory staff highlighted this issue through interviews with the consultant, and reinforced the survey results, that not only was more training was required, but that succession planning was needed urgently to maintain laboratory capacity into the future.


Graphical representations of results of Survey Questions for Aquatic Animal Health Laboratory Stakeholders

22

11

27

26

19

5

15

28

16

20

13

4

17

1

3

10

19

9

2

9

10

12

4

2

2

1

1

3

5

5

5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Aquatic Animal Health Research

Aquatic animal welfare advice

Commercial and research laboratory diagnostic services

Domestic surveillance for incursion of exotic disease or spread of endemicdisease at State by State level

Field Investigation of sickness or mortality event



Provide disease diagnosis

Providing technical input into designing regulations for domestic certificationfor translocation of aquatic animals within Australia

Provision of advice for control, prevention and treatment of disease

Technical input to drafting policy for control of AAH in aquaculture, wildcommercial and recreational fisheries

AA

H S

ervi

ces


Yes No, service not provided No, but would like to provide

Figure 44. Provision of AAH services by lab to aquaculture and fisheries industries.

2

2

1

2

2

1

5

5

1

3

3

4

2

1

8

4

5

3

4

5

5

3

3

6

7

3

1

6

3

5

2

6

1

5

1

4

5

3

6

1

7

1

13

14

2

2

14

1

3

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Aquatic Animal Health Research

Aquatic animal welfare advice

Commercial and research laboratory diagnostic services

Domestic surveillance for incursion of exotic disease or spread of endemicdisease at State by State level

Field Investigation of sickness or mortality event



Provide disease diagnosis

Providing technical input into designing regulations for domestic certificationfor translocation of aquatic animals within Australia

Provision of advice for control, prevention and treatment of disease

Technical input to drafting policy for control of AAH in aquaculture, wildcommercial and recreational fisheries

AA

H S

ervi

ces


Once a year Four times a year Monthly Weekly All the time

Figure 45. Frequency of AAH services provided to aquaculture and fisheries industries.


4

6

5

4

2

3

1

3

6

5

1

6

4

6

12

8

4

8

2

4

2

8

5

7

5

10

4

5

5

1

8

6

1

7

9

5

7

11

6

10

8

5

8

4

8

3

7

10

2

7

3

8

4

2

4

4

5

7

6

2

4

12

7

17

9

16

3

7

7

6

6

7

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Ability to certify stock free of disease

Ability to design and implement prevention/control and treatment strategies

Ability to design epidemiological sound surveillance and reporting systems

Ability to interpret water quality laboratory testing results

Ability to provide a disease diagnosis

Ability to undertake a thorough disease outbreak investigation

Ability to undertake rapid, reliable accredited laboratory tests

Current knowledge diseases of aquatic animals

Histopathology

Knowledge of risk assessment process

Microbiology

Molecular biology

Parasitology

Technical understanding of aquaculture systems

Virology

Skill

s

Number of participants

Not required Basic skill used rarely Basic skill used regularly Advanced skill used occasionally Advanced skills used regularly

Figure 46. Current skills levels and their frequency of use.

3.2

2.8

2.7

2.8

3.9

3.3

4.3

3.8

3.9

3.1

3.2

2.8

3.0

3.1

3.0

4.3

3.6

3.9

3.7

4.6

4.4

4.6

4.3

4.5

4.0

4.4

4.4

4.2

4.3

4.2

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5









Histopathology


Microbiology

Molecular biology

Parasitology


Virology

Skill

s

Average Score

Average of CurrentSkillLevel Average of RequiredSkillLevel

Figure 47. Scoring the level and frequency of current and required skills on a 1-5 scale. 1- not required at all; 2-Basic skill -used rarely (once a year); 3- Basic skill used regularly; 4-Advanced skill used occasionally; Score 5-Advanced skill used regularly.


Yes25%

No57%

In some areas only18%

Figure 48. Proportion of respondents believing that the technical knowledge of their discipline is of the same standard as for terrestrial animal submissions.

2

1

1

3

3

1

1

1

9

2

3

6

2

3

1

1

2

3

2

2

3

1

2

1

1

2

2

2

4

1

5

3

2

3

2

2

1

2

1

4

3

1

2

6

2

3

7

4

3

9

7

6

4

6

8

7

10

7

5

10

16

12

17

6

13

12

14

11

15

9

13

13

14

10

13

0 5 10 15 20 25 30









Histopathology


Microbiology

Molecular biology

Parasitology


Virology

Skill

s

Number of participants

Two day course One week course One month course One year diploma University degree Post graduate qualification

Figure 49. Amount of training required to achieve the required skill level.


AAH consultants3%

Aquaculture farmers70%

Government veterinarians17%

Private Veterinarians3%

Research Scientists or biologists

7%

Figure 50. Most common submitters of aquatic animal diagnostic samples according to participants.

3

23

3

4

10

13

1

0 5 10 15 20 25

Always

More often than not

Rarely

Never


Field information Results interpretation

Figure 51. Proportion of respondents believing that the lab is able to obtain field information on aquatic animal submissions and lab is able to send results to a qualified third party for interpretations.


2

5

2 2

4

3

9

14

11

12

5

10

5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Lab Policy/ management Field

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly agree

Figure 52. Views of respondents on whether the use of AAH services is likely to increase in the next 5-10 years.

1 1

6

2 1

8

33

3

14

4

4

12

22

8

6

3

0

5

10

15

20

25



officer

No AAHservices sought

Other interstateGovt or privateLaboratory staff

(inc. CSIRO)


consultant





experts

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 53. Technical knowledge adequacy of the service provided.


3 31

3

6

14

3 4

9

11

53

3

22

2

6

1

0

5

10

15

20

25


Governmentextension/

veterinary officer


(inc. CSIRO)


consultant

Private veterinaryconsultant

Research facilitystaff

Self-taught /published

literature / internet

University-basedAAH experts

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Too slow Sometimes adequate Always adequate


2

5

12

31

3

8

2

4

4

1

1

6

2

2

1

2

2

1

3

1 2

2

8

3

1

0

5

10

15

20

25


Governmentextension/

veterinary officer


(inc. CSIRO)


consultant

Private veterinaryconsultant

Research facilitystaff

Self-taught /published

literature / internet

University-basedAAH experts

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Free-would pay if required Free- would not use if had to payCost beneficial Cost neutralToo Expensive- minimize use due to cost concerns



80%

63%

37%

27%

7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%


Hire new staff who have been trained

Enhance training for govt field/extension officers

Use contractors on an as needs basis

Increased service not required


Figure 56. Preference for incorporation of more AAH services into the management, if required.



Yes, sufficient10%



Definitely33%

Likely51%

Possibly13%

Very unlikely3%

Figure 58. Proportion of participants believing that the laboratory service would benefit from improved AAH input.

No10%

Uncertain43%

Yes47%

Figure 59. Proportion of participants wanting to see a minimum competency/accreditation standard to be brought into the areas of AAH service provision.


Figure 60. Age distribution of laboratory diagnosticians in Australia.

Research industry respondents The research industry utilise a broad range of AAH services with moderate frequency (see Figures 61 and 62). These services are predominantly sourced from government service providers or research facility staff (see Figures 63, 73 and 74). The diagnostic and treatment advice was generally adequate, timely and cost effective (see Figures 75, 76, 77, 78). Researcher respondents held the expectation that skills from all service providers will be at an advanced level (see Figures 64, 65, 66, 67). As with the laboratory staff, this group rate diplomas, university and post-graduate qualifications as “required” across all sectors from which they draw services (see Figures 68, 69, 70, 71). Again, there is agreement that use of AAH services will increase in the next 5-10 years (see Figure 72). A majority of respondent has experienced the negative impacts of a significant disease event in their research programs, highlighting the importance of AAH within this sector (see Figure 82). Their perceptions on training are that there is none (36%) or that it is insufficient (57%) (see Figure 79). Respondents broadly agreed that research efforts would be improved with a greater incorporation of AAH skills (see Figure 81) and felt this would be best achieved through training of existing researchers (see Figure 80). 57% would like to see AAH competency standards introduced (see Figure 83).


Graphical representation of results from survey of Aquatic Animal Research stakeholders

8

14

11

13

14

12

7

13

6

2

1

7

1

1

1

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Aquatic animal welfare

Domestic certification for translocation of fish within Australia

Domestic surveillance for incursion of exotic disease

Field Investigation and diagnosis of sickness of mortality event

Laboratory diagnostic services

Provision of disease control, prevention and treatment in research stock

Regulatory restriction of species allowed to be researched due todisease concerns

Research programs to control diseases affecting aquaculture and wildfisheries


Yes No, service unavailable or not required No, but would like to access, if service was available

Figure 61. Utilisation of AAH services.

2

6 6

32

1

3 3

2

3

16

5

52

31

3

1

4

12

2

1

2

3

23

5

2

7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Aquatic animalwelfare

Domesticcertification fortranslocation of

fish withinAustralia

Domesticsurveillance for

incursion ofexotic disease

FieldInvestigation

and diagnosis ofsickness of

mortality event

Laboratorydiagnosticservices

Provision ofdisease control,prevention and

treatment inresearch stock

Regulatoryrestriction of

species allowedto be

researched dueto diseaseconcerns

Researchprograms to

control diseasesaffecting

aquaculture andwild fisheries

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Once a year Four times a year Monthly Weekly All the time

Figure 62. Frequency of AAH services utilisation.


86%

64%

57%

21%

7%

71%

57%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Commonwealthgovernment

Government Labsincluding CSIRO

State Govt Fisheriesmanagement

Private Vet or AAHconsultant

University State Govt Vet orextension staff

Research Faciltystaff

Service Providers

Perc

ent r

espo

nden

ts

Figure 63. Proportion of research industry respondents who seek AAH services from various providers.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Ability ofGovernment to

maintain anational

surveillance andreportingsystem

Ability tochoose andadministerappropriate

treatment andcontrol

measures

Ability toprovide adisease

diagnosis

Ability torecognise signsof sickness and

disease inresearch stock

Ability tothoroughly

investigate adiseaseoutbreak

Currentknowledge of

disease threatsthat may affect

researchprogram

outcomes

Licensing andsurveillance of

researchfacilities

Rapid, reliableaccuratelaboratory

testing capacity

Regulatoryknowledge of

riskassessment

process

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Not required Basic skill used rarely Basic skill used regularlyAdvanced skill used occasionally Advanced skill used regularly

Figure 64. Skills levels expected from State Govt / private / CSIRO / University Laboratory.


0 2 4 6 8 10 1

Ability of Government to maintain a national surveillance and reporting system

Ability to choose and administer appropriate treatment and control measures


Ability to recognise signs of sickness and disease in research stock

Ability to thoroughly investigate a disease outbreak

Current knowledge of disease threats that may affect research programoutcomes

Licensing and surveillance of research facilities

Rapid, reliable accurate laboratory testing capacity




Figure 65. Skills levels expected from State/Commonwealth Govt fisheries management.

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

3

1

1

2

1

2

3

3

3

2

2

1

3

4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6












Figure 66. Skill levels expected from private veterinarian or AAH consultant.


2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

2

1

1

3

1

1

1

2

3

3

2

2

3

2

5

6

6

3

5

2

2

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 1












Figure 67. Skill levels expected from research staff.

1

1

1 12 2

56

5

4

3

76

3

5

3

36 4

7

3

1

54

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


maintain anational

surveillanceand reporting

system



measures


diagnosis





Currentknowledge of

disease threats


researchfacilities

Rapid, reliableaccurate

laboratorytesting capacity


riskassessment

process

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Two days course One semester course One year diploma University degree Postgraduate qualifications

Figure 68. Amount of training for State Govt / private / CSIRO / University Laboratory required to perform optimally for the research team.


1 1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

21 1

7

7

2

4

2

56

45

1

1

3

1

3

1

2

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10


maintain anational


system



measures


diagnosis





Currentknowledge of

disease threats


researchfacilities




riskassessment

process

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Two days course One semester course One year diploma University degree Postgraduate qualification

Figure 69. Amount of training for State/Commonwealth Govt fisheries management to perform optimally for the research team.

1 1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1

1

2 4

1

2

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

2

1 3

3

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


maintain anational


system



measures


diagnosis





Currentknowledge of

disease threats


researchfacilities




riskassessment

process

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

1

Two days course One week course One semester course One year diploma University degree Post graduate qualification

Figure 70. Amount of training for private veterinarian or AAH consultant to perform optimally for the research team.


1

1

1

1 11

3

32

12

1

4

5

4

4

36

4

4

4

1

1

3

1

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


maintain anational


system



measures


diagnosis





Currentknowledge of

disease threats


researchfacilities




riskassessment

process

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Two days course One week course One semester course One year diploma University degree Postgraduate qualification

Figure 71. Amount of training for research staff to perform optimally for the research team.

Disagree7%

Uncertain14%

Agree36%

Strongly agree43%

Figure 72. Views of respondents on whether the use of AAH services is likely to increase in the next 5-10 years.


8

3

2

9

3

12

11 11

9

6

9

5

8

10

3

9

1 1

2

7

3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory inc

CSIRO

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers

Privatelaboratory


aquaticanimal health

consultant

Privateveterinarianwith special

interest in fish

Researchersin other

institutes

Self-taught(internet

resources,textbooks)

University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Never used Services used

Figure 73. Use of the service providers.

2

1

3

1 1

2

1

2

4

2

3

1 1

2

1

2

5

2

1 1 1

2

1

4

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govt laboratoryinc CSIRO

Govt veterinaryofficer

Govt. extensionofficer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers


aquatic animalhealth

consultant


interest in fish

Researchers inother institutes



University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Once a year Three monthly Monthly Weekly

Figure 74. Frequency of service use when service providers are used.


1 1

3

1 1

2

3

4

2 2

4

1 1 1

3

2

4 4

1 1 1

2

1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory inc

CSIRO

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers

Privatelaboratory



consultant


interest in fish

Researchersin other

institutes



University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 75. Technical knowledge adequacy of the service provided for diagnosis.

1

2

1 1 11

4

2 2

5

1 1

3

1

2

4

3

1 1 1

3

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory inc

CSIRO

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers

Privatelaboratory



consultant


interest in fish

Researchersin other

institutes



University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents


Figure 76. Technical knowledge adequacy of the service provided for treatment.


1 1 1

2

3 3

1

2

1 11

3

5

1

7

1 1 1

2

5

2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory inc

CSIRO

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers

Privatelaboratory



consultant


interest in fish

Researchersin other

institutes



University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Too slow Sometimes adequate Adequate


1 1

3

1 12

1

2

2

3

1

1

4

4

1

1 1

2

1

1

2

4

1

1

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Govtaquaculture

manager

Govtlaboratory inc

CSIRO

Govtveterinary

officer

Govt.extension

officer (non-vet)

In houseResearchers

Privatelaboratory



consultant


interest in fish

Researchersin other

institutes



University

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Free-would pay if required Free-would not use if had to payCost beneficial Cost neutralToo expensive-minimise use due to cost concerns





Yes, sufficient7%


79%

50%

57%

21%

0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Training existing research staff

Hiring new trained research staff

Enhance training for govt field orextension officers

Use contractors on an as needsbasis

Service not required

Percent respondents

Figure 80. Preference for incorporation of more AAH services into the research team, if required.


Definitely29%

Likely64%

Possibly7%

Figure 81. Proportion of participants believing that the research operations would benefit from improved AAH input.

No36%

Yes64%

Figure 82. Proportion of participants agreeing that their research programme experienced significant losses or project interruptions due to health or disease problems.


No7%

Uncertain36%

Yes57%

Figure 83. Proportion of participants that would like to see a minimum competency/accreditation standard to be brought into the areas of AAH service provision.

Educational institution survey In light of the findings from the aquaculture industry survey, which highlighted a demand for training for farm hands and managers, interviews were conducted with TAFE staff and the Seafood Industry Training Package (SITP) AAH components were reviewed. Through these enquiries the consultant concluded that there was sufficient AAH training material available to the farm level, however not all farms were made aware of its existence. A similar process was undertaken with universities to determine if adequate training material existed. Six university institutions responded to the survey which assessed the breadth and depth of training provided in AAH subjects. The University of Tasmania, Bachelor of Aquaculture (BSc (Aquaculture)) degree contained significantly larger amounts of specific material on AAH subjects (see Figure 84) compared to the University of Sydney Bachelor of Veterinary Science (BVSc) degree. However, the BVSc course was considerably more thorough in providing training on general disease principles compared with the BSc (Aquaculture) degree (see Figure 85). It was apparent however that neither undergraduate course was able to provide the depth of training required for many of the essential AAH laboratory positions. As one mechanism for improving AAH training, the consultant surveyed university stakeholders on their willingness to contribute to and utilise some common AAH curricular material which would be available as a national resource to all institutions. The response was very positive (figure 86) including a willingness to utilise the skills of academics from other institutions.


Graphical representation of Educational institution survey results

19

452

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Aquatic animal health training (USYD) Aquatic animal health tragining (UTAS)

Hou

rs o

f tra

inin

g

Figure 84. Comparison of amount of specific aquatic animal health training provided by BVSc and BSc (Aquaculture) degrees.

5265

188

255

188

156

91

60 65

30

65

91

182

65

2

65

3518

65

10 101

30

8 8 4 1

65 65 65

00

50

100

150

200

250

300

Epidem

iolog

y

Biolog

y

Anatom

y

Medici

ne

Physio

logy

Pharm

acolo

gy

Patholo

gy

Virolog

y

Molecu

lar bi

ology

Immun

ology

Parasit

ology

Field o

bserv

ation

and r

ecord

ing

Certific

ation

/compe

tent a

uthori

ty

Wate

r qua

lity/ch

emist

ry as

sess

ment

Algal id

entifi

catio

n

Nutritio

nOthe

r

Subject areas

Num

ber o

f hou

rs

General Animal health training (USYD) Aquatic animal health tragining (UTAS)

Figure 85. Comparison of the depth of general animal health training provided by BVSc and BSC (Aquaculture) degrees.


5

6 6

5

1 1

0 00

1

2

3

4

5

6

Benefit in development of acomprehensive NVC for AAH

Utilise curriculum materialdeveloped by another

institution

Contribute to curriculumdevelopment

Utilise academic servicesprovided by another veterinary

school

Num

ber o

f res

pond

ents

Yes No

Figure 86. Responses of Veterinary and Aquaculture schools to prospect of development, contribution and use of a common curriculum.

Recreational and commercial fisheries, ornamental fish industry, aquaculture feed production industry These stakeholder groups were contacted and several phone and in-person interviews were conducted. Their response rate to the distribution of the formal survey was poor, with insufficient returns to warrant detailed analysis. Nevertheless, their requirements and expectations broadly mirrored those of other industry groups. The recreational and commercial sectors recognised that they were heavily dependent on government services and had the expectation that advanced skills would be maintained by Government. Due to their infrequent need for direct aquatic animal health service supply most had little direct experience with AAH services to draw upon.

DISCUSSION Historical background to current status of AAH Education The survey results from the aquaculture sector, government management, and research stakeholders demonstrate that disease and disease management are common and significant issues for the aquaculture sector. (Figures 26, 40, 82) Through six years close involvement with various emerging aquaculture sectors the consultant is aware of numerous business failures due in part to major disease problems. This has included QX outbreaks in Sydney rock oysters, bacterial diseases in snapper and mulloway in sea cages, saprolegniosis in pond reared silver perch, streptococcosis in barramundi in freshwater cage culture, ichthyophthiriosis in rainbow trout in raceways, monodon neuropathy and retinopathy in prawns and vibriosis and herpes-like virus in abalone to name but a few of the major disease related disasters that have punctuated the emergence of aquaculture in Australia. When diseases such as those mentioned affect the majority of stock on a farm the results can be terminal for the venture. Disease has thus played a significant role, through reducing


marketable volumes of product, in the underperformance of this production industry sector in Australia. To date, aquaculture industries across Australia have not met the expectations for growth anticipated by Government. This was noted in the May 2006 FRDC Fisheries R&D News magazine, where Simon Bennison of the National Aquaculture Council, recognised “the former Australian Government-industry goal of national aquaculture production being worth $2.5 billion a year by 2010 appears to have been quietly abandoned” (Anon. 2006). All survey results indicate that appropriate co-ordinated AAH education and training are both demanded and required to improve on this performance and deliver the outcomes which are so keenly desired by aquaculture stakeholders (Figure 24). All stakeholder groups surveyed highlighted the deficiencies of the current training availability, and signalled a clear need for improvement (see Figures 22, 38, 57, 79). Informal discussions, as part of the briefing for the educational institution survey, with Deans from the majority of Australian veterinary schools highlighted that, pre-1990, there was insignificant specific aquatic animal content provided within veterinary undergraduate degrees. There is now a very small component present specifically on aquatic animals in most of the veterinary degrees, although this is slowly increasing (see Figure 84). BSc (Aquaculture) courses have gone some way to fill this AAH educational vacuum although the lack of training depth in the principles of disease in these courses was highlighted by the survey (see Figure 85). Universities were uniformly supportive of the development of common curricular material to improve this situation, and broadly agreed that such material would be utilised (see Figure 86). The National and State Governments’ focus on developing the aquaculture industry intensified from around 1990 until the present. The lack of direct AAH training of veterinarians unsurprisingly meant they have been virtually unengaged from delivery of AAH services (with the exception of pathology) to this developing industry. A review of Melbourne University veterinary graduates between 1995-2005 revealed that none of them had gone on to work full-time on aquatic animals. (Ivan Caple pers. comm. Dec 2005) Given the key roles veterinarians play in animal health within all other production animal industries, it is the consultant’s view, that greater engagement during this critical start-up phase of the aquaculture industry, when most diseases and optimal husbandry are poorly described or unknown, would be very beneficial. The bulk of the veterinary effort has been limited to services from State Government and CSIRO laboratories in response to disease events. In all States, veterinarians are written into State animal health legislation to diagnose disease and prescribe treatments and controls. The lack of regular field engagement of veterinarians has left the developing sectors in a “fend for yourself” environment, with few other skilled AAH professionals to turn to. There is one notable exception to this situation: The Tasmanian salmonid industry. From its inception, through significant Government support, the industry has had a coordinated approach to AAH, engaging veterinary and non-veterinary AAH professionals at all levels including: field veterinary services, laboratory services, active surveillance programs and government policy and administration. It is the view of the consultant that the continued growth of this industry has in part been due to this prominent focus on AAH services. However other smaller emerging industries around Australia have not been afforded such generous government support to implement an intensive AAH management program. For these industries many of the key field AAH roles have either been filled by biologists, or not filled at all. This situation has been further compounded by the majority of aquaculture business managers not having a background in another commercial intensive production animal industry, where the understanding of the importance of animal health is thoroughly embedded in the culture of the business.


The survey highlighted several critical areas outlined below, which the final recommendations seek to rectify and thereby meet the needs for AAH training and education identified by stakeholder groups. 1. Low level of understanding of the training depth required to instil high level skills to

deliver competent AAH services The surveys were able to identify that there was widespread misunderstanding of the skill level required to undertake certain AAH activities competently, although the salmonid and pearling industries were generally more aware. Only 49% of aquaculture stakeholder respondents recognised that farm managers need high level skills in the area of disease diagnosis, selecting and administering treatment, and creating and implementing a biosecurity farm health management program to control and prevent diseases from entering the farm and control those already present. 52% of aquaculture respondents believed that a farm manager could learn these high level skills in a course of less than one week duration. It is the consultant’s view that the minimal understanding of many of the farm managers of the principles of AAH, and a concomitant lack of exposure/ access to individuals possessing this high level of understanding, has contributed to this industry misunderstanding.

2. Limited use of AAH professional services Aquaculture respondents had higher expectations of AAH professionals (vet and non-vet) with 96% expecting high level skills across all of the skill areas; 68% of respondents expected AAH professionals to have a five-year university degree to acquire some of these skills. This suggests that aquaculturalists are aware of the high level of technical expertise required, but do not see it as their role to acquire this knowledge. However, this awareness is in contrast to the profile of low service utilisation, made of these AAH professionals by the industry (see Figure 16). The expertise of these AAH professionals is of limited value until it is deployed into the routine farm operations. It is the consultant’s view that here lies the catch 22 - farms are unlikely to value such a service until they experience a positive benefit from using it. One element that has limited the use of these services has been an issue of local availability. Barramundi farms in NT, NSW Queensland; silver perch farms in NSW and Victoria, oyster farmers in Tasmania and NSW; and a kingfish farm in SA all mentioned their desire to use AAH professionals was precluded due to a lack of local experienced personnel to engage.

3. Depth and breadth of training within individual under-graduate qualifications is sub-optimal to meet industry and Government needs It was clear that industry expectations are that AAH professionals would be highly skilled. However, upon analysing the output from educational institutions a clear need was identified to increase the depth and breadth of training in aquatic animal health, both for veterinarians and non-veterinarians if the current and future demands are to be met. It must be stressed that a multitude of disciplines are required to provide a complete service. These disciplines are detailed in Table 1 and all necessary and training must commence with under-graduates and continue into a formal post-graduate training program as described in point 4 below. The historical lack of engagement of the veterinary faculties in the area of AAH has been covered in a limited way under the various BSc and Aquaculture courses offered in Australia. These courses tended to be developed in isolation from veterinary faculties.


Through in-person and telephone discussions the consultant found that there was a lack of awareness of the depth of general animal health training provided within undergraduate BVSc courses by graduates of BSc courses (see Figure 85). The survey of educational institutions undergraduate curricula identified veterinary graduates are offered a deep understanding of the general principles of disease, however their specific knowledge with respect to aquatic animals would be significantly lower than that of the graduates of biology/aquaculture degrees (see Figure 84). Conversely, BSc Aquaculture graduates, although exposed to a significant quantity of specific AAH training, do not obtain an equivalent deep understanding of disease principles. (See Figures 84, 85). In recent times the veterinary faculties have begun to respond to the demand for training in aquatic animal health expanding undergraduate training. Some key deficiencies in the BVSc degree relate to specific material on invertebrates, crustaceans, and aquaculture systems and their management. The key deficiency in the BSc and Aquaculture courses is the lack of content in general disease principles, pathophysiology and epidemiology. These stated “deficiencies” only relate to the aquatic animal health components of these courses. There is clearly a need for the veterinary and BSc Aquaculture institutions to work more closely as proposed in the recommendations of this report. A process for this to take place was suggested through the development of national aquatic animal health curricular material. Five of the six institutions said there would be benefit in creating such curricular material. Further, all six indicated they would be willing to use curricular material developed by another institution. Again, all six said they would be willing to assist in the development of such material and five out of six suggested they would be willing to share the services of a veterinary academic (see Figure 86).

4. No post-graduate opportunities in Australia to provide specific high level education and training in aquatic animal health To provide AAH services on par with those provided for terrestrial animals, very high skill levels across a range of disciplines (see Table 1) are required and this was reflected in the survey results from all sectors. It is neither practicable, nor efficient to attempt to incorporate all of the required detail into current under-graduate courses. Hence, the authors recommend the creation of post-graduate opportunities in Australia, for Australian and international students. The current and predicted demand for AAH services, although significant, is unlikely to be large enough to warrant the setting up of AAH centres at all veterinary and aquaculture schools. It is likely that universities will be able to offer better post-graduate training if the educational institution is internationally linked to regional AAH, fisheries and aquaculture agencies such as NACA, ACIAR and AFS. The training of people for the massive aquaculture industry in Asia was recognised by several education institutions as one potential mechanism to sustain the post-graduate training programs in the medium to long-term within Australian universities. It is sensible to ensure these training courses are linked to veterinary institutions, for the reasons outlined above, to foster interaction between academic institutions and the aquaculture and fisheries industries. Laboratory respondents provided a clear indication of the current deficiency in AAH training with only 19% feeling that they were able to provide the same level of technical knowledge for aquatic animals as that which is provided for terrestrial animals (see Figure 48). In many cases the acquisition of such high level knowledge necessitates some formal or informal post-graduate training. 21 of 29 (72%) laboratory respondents recognised that post-graduate training was necessary for at least one of the key skills to be performed satisfactorily. Further, 13 of these believed that a post-graduate qualification is required


for more than half of the skills listed (see Figure 49). Only 11% of laboratory respondents felt there was sufficient training, of a sufficient standard, available to facilitate them up-skilling (see Figure 57).

5. Greater hands-on training for undergraduates and post-graduates needed Aquaculture stakeholders made comment to the consultant of the need for AAH professionals to have more hands-on experience and an improved knowledge of routine farming practices. The authors recommend that both undergraduate and post-graduate training be linked, wherever possible, to field experience with industry. The benefit from such exposure will be two-fold, firstly, industry will gain an insight into the assistance that AAH professionals can provide in their operations and secondly, students will acquire a robust practical knowledge of the workings of industry. This applies also to trainee AAH laboratory diagnosticians who need to acquire experience through participating, with experienced staff, in active AAH cases within established AAH laboratories. For this to happen it requires the creation of trainee positions and/or the linking of AAH research projects to the AAH laboratories around Australia. Historically, disease investigation costs have been covered by State Governments to encourage submission of samples for surveillance purposes and to assist in industry development. Some State Governments have commenced charging for these investigations now. There has been a sharp decline recorded in sample submission wherever cost recovery charges have been implemented. It is arguable that aquaculture submissions should represent a special case for subsidisation, as unlike other major production industries, there are many new diseases emerging, due to the culture of new species under new culture conditions. Hence investigations tend to be more costly (as suggested by the survey results for Government laboratories), and may require significant follow-up to determine if the novel treatments have proved efficacious. Through recommendation 4, it is proposed that laboratory services be supported to subsidise aquatic animal disease investigations until the common diseases of the species under culture are better defined. This will promote improved hands-on opportunities for education and training for diagnosticians in addition to improving surveillance, investigation and understanding of disease agents and processes that are significant impediments to aquaculture development.

6. Current expectations of laboratories exceed their capacity to deliver due to lack AAH professionals in field In Australia, the bulk of high level aquatic animal health knowledge has historically been acquired and maintained by individuals within State Government Laboratories and CSIRO. In most States there has been minimal involvement of practicing veterinarians or non-veterinary AAH professionals in the on-farm investigation of health problems, as evidenced by a majority of samples (68%) coming direct to the laboratory from farmers (see Figure 50). Most laboratory respondents did manage to get some field information “more often than not” to support these accessions (see Figure 51). Only a minority of States have had a full time Government field veterinary service, which, where present, was heavily utilised along with the Government laboratory (see Figure 16). Hence most farmers have tended to go direct to laboratories for help. It is the view of the consultant that this direct submission approach, overlooks an essential part of the diagnostic investigation format used in all other production animal industries. The critical areas missing are: the collection of a history; observation of clinical signs; recording of


epidemiological parameters on site, and appropriate sampling by a trained animal health professional. As a result of this anomaly in service provision, many farmers now have an expectation of laboratories (see Figure 5) that they will be able to diagnose disease based solely on sending samples in (74%) and provide treatment and control advice (74%). These expectations are beyond the scope of a routine veterinary diagnostic laboratory and are not consistent with all other animal health provision in Australia. Veterinary diagnostic laboratories should provide accurate validated test results, which are interpreted in light of the field situation, assembled history, clinical signs and epidemiological picture to provide a disease diagnosis. Only then, should the focus shift to appropriate control and management measures. Only 11% of laboratory staff felt they could always send their report to someone who was well equipped to interpret it and develop an on ground action plan in response to laboratory findings (see Figure 51). Again this is a striking contrast to the terrestrial animal production industries where the vast majority of samples are submitted through a veterinarian who is trained to interpret the results when they return from the laboratory. The veterinarian generates a treatment and prevention program at the farm, with full knowledge of the husbandry situation. Unfortunately, there appears to be insufficient adequately trained veterinarians to meet all of industry’s needs in some geographic areas of Australia, as was demonstrated by farmers’ comments in interviews. Where farmers could access treatment advice from government veterinarians, it was generally viewed very favourable, with the highest average rating of all service providers (see Figure 18). Implementation of the recommendations to improve undergraduate training will move towards correcting this area of deficiency.

7. Loss of traditional training avenues Through FRDC project 2006/621 interviews, it was determined that almost all of the aging population (70% >50 years of age) of highly skilled AAH laboratory diagnosticians that Australia currently possesses have acquired their skills through Government sponsored opportunities, such as the establishment of the former Australian Fish Health Reference Laboratory, Benalla, Victoria. Very few of the current high-level aquatic animal health professionals have acquired their knowledge through formal training programs - it was a process of learning on the job. Time was provided within government positions to acquire the knowledge required and resources were available to encourage disease investigation through subsidisation of laboratory samples for testing. This funding greatly enhanced the low rate of submissions to the laboratory. During informal discussions with the consultant almost all diagnosticians noted the need for a significant case load to generate and maintain high levels of competency. It must be noted that all Government laboratories recognise that few, if any, of these opportunities are currently available and this is common throughout the laboratory system (see the Frawley Review into Rural Veterinary Services, 2003). This trend reinforces the need to establish new formal training pathways and give consideration to offering more traineeships within established AAH laboratories.

8. Increasing demand for AAH services over the next 5-10 years The lack of identified training pathways is concerning in light of the view expressed by all stakeholder groups that AAH services were likely to be in a state of increasing demand over the next 5-10 years. 73% of all respondents agreed or strongly agreed that demand would increase, 20% were uncertain and only 7% disagreed (See Figures 26, 32, 52, 72).

9. Lack of culture of use of private AAH field service providers The lack of engagement with field veterinarians and other non-vet AAH professionals


(government and private) by farmers has contributed to the formation of a culture, where farmers attempt to deal with their health problems internally (see Figure 16) or to seek help from State Government laboratories or a Government veterinary officer where they are available. Only 20% of industry respondents indicated that they use private veterinary or private non-veterinary AAH professional for their AAH needs. For more than 53% of those using private services it is an infrequent occurrence at only once a year compared to more than 65% utilising Government services, largely through State Government laboratories and CSIRO-AAHL and 16% using advice from other farmers. This is perhaps suggestive of a need for greater marketing of the services available and their value to industry. Improving the culture of aquaculture industries to engage AAH professionals may be facilitated through the educational enhancements proposed for research, veterinary school and diagnostic laboratory linkages in the recommendations.

10. State Government resource trend away from industry development and towards regulation and compliance threatens AAH development A change in focus, away from industry development activities was recognised by the consultant through informal discussions with State Government AAH management staff. During the development of other intensive livestock industries the State Governments have provided considerable diagnostic support to define major disease problems. Currently, according the National Aquaculture Council, there are over 60 species in aquaculture in Australia, most are native animals with a largely unknown parasitic fauna and unique production problems for which information is not available. This creates a high and novel workload for laboratories. As intensive production animal industries mature, the frequency of novel disease investigations declines over time. This is largely due to a bank of understanding being generated to manage around problems that have been clearly identified and characterised. Many of the aquaculture sectors are at least 10-15 years away from this point in time. The frequency of major new disease findings still remains remarkable high. A decline in government focus in this area assumes that the private sector will be able to undertake this work where it is required. However, all Government aquatic animal laboratories attest to the fact that because of the relatively recent emergence of the industry, many investigations of aquatic animal disease are complex, involving attempts to identify novel agents, in novel culture systems. Consequently, significantly greater amounts of time need to be apportioned to these investigations, to reach an outcome that may ultimately be useful to control the problem on the farm. These types of investigations do not readily fit into the high throughput environment of private laboratories. Hence the State Government laboratories tend to be left with these largely cost-unrecoverable investigations. This needs to be recognised by State Governments when resourcing laboratories. Recommendation 5 would go some way to addressing this problem provided that State Governments committed to this industry AAH development activity. These subsidised investigations would become part of the wider training of laboratory diagnosticians and fulfil the recognised need for their up-skilling.

11. State Governments under-resourcing for its own requirements The Government stakeholder survey results clearly noted that Commonwealth and State Governments had an ongoing requirement for high level professional AAH staff and that industry relied heavily on Government laboratories for its high level AAH advice. The


Commonwealth consults with these same professionals through the NAAH-TWG committee, although this is not the only source of AAH service utilised by the Commonwealth. A separate survey of State and Commonwealth Governments was undertaken through NAAH-TWG to determine current and future staff requirements. Through this survey a staffing shortage was identified in provision of diagnostic laboratory services, extension services and working on national initiatives within State Governments (not Commonwealth) (see Figures 42, 43). Concerns were expressed by some that there was a real risk, in the near term, of inexperienced staff replacing those with high level AAH skills, due to a shortage of highly qualified experienced applicants. It is imperative to the quality of outcomes that highly qualified individuals continue to be available to perform these key functions for Government and industry. Currently 68% of industry refers to Government for AAH advice, typically through laboratories, as their first option for assistance. Commonwealth and State Governments need to understand the key role they play in providing employment and training opportunities to maintain the critical mass of AAH expertise in Australia. This necessitates resourcing the recommendations of this report to ensure suitably skilled staff continues to be created. State Government employment and internship opportunities need to be available for suitably qualified people, to ensure biosecurity and AAH policy keeps pace with international best practice, whilst fostering aquaculture growth and protecting fisheries resources. Time within government positions needs to be allocated for self-education to foster continued learning in this rapidly evolving field. This mechanism is also critical to ensure efficient succession of intellectual property takes place, as many aging highly skilled fish pathologists are approaching retirement.

12. Improving the future AAH outcomes for industries The successful examples of health management in Australia’s terrestrial primary production industries and the Tasmanian salmonid industry should be followed, to seek greater engagement of AAH professionals in the aquaculture and fisheries industries. The salmonid industry has provided a useful model for how this can be effectively achieved through government-industry partnerships. A cornerstone of this success has been training and supporting of highly skilled veterinarians, with access to a broad range of ancillary specialists (outlined in Table 1) of varying university qualifications.

13. The role of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists in continuing education of veterinarians The Australian College of Veterinary Scientists has an Aquatic Animal Health Chapter, for which full membership is through examination. The College has broad roles across the veterinary profession to maintain standards and offer continuing education opportunities for veterinarians. Membership of the chapter continues to grow with examinations held every second year. Collaborative arrangements with overseas AAH veterinary groups in the USA and UK are at an advanced stage of discussions, and are set to further expand the educational opportunities of the Chapter. It is likely that the Chapter will continue to provide the role of continuing education for veterinarians, and will ultimately develop a fellowship level examination to permit the creation of registered AAH veterinary specialists in Australia.


14. Competency standards for AAH service provision 60% of respondents supported the creation of competency standards for AAH service provision. A competency standard is provided for veterinarians who have been working the AAH field through the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists Membership examination in aquatic animal health. To be eligible to sit this examination veterinarians must have a minimum of two years engagement within the discipline and generally undertake 12 months of mentoring of study, prior to sitting the written and oral papers. There is currently no mechanism for accreditation of non-veterinarian AAH professionals. The authors recommend as a first step, to request AAHC to identify potential providers of a merit-based accreditation program, to undertake mentoring, training, examination and continuing professional education in AAH. This could then become recognised as a competency standard across Australia. Recently within Asia there have been discussions on the setting up of such a system within the NACA region. Australia should engage in this process and ensure that required attributes and training levels are analogous to those created in Australia and where possible look to offer those training opportunities within tertiary institutions in Australia.

BENEFITS AND ADOPTION The executive summary and recommendations will be forwarded to Aquatic Animal Health Committee once NAAH-TWG has had an opportunity to comment on them. Should AAHC agree with the recommendations, it may forward them to PIHC and PISC and PIMC where resources to implement the recommendations may be identified. Due to the strong commonality of the problems in provision of AAH services to the provision of animal health services more generally, it is suggested that the paper also be presented to AHC. Should the recommendations be implemented, they will, in the long-term, provide some security to the quality and continuity of AAH service supply to aquatic animal industries. The recommendations will provide training pathways to create highly skilled aquatic animal health professionals to deliver improved health outcomes for aquaculture and other aquatic animal stakeholder industries including government. Improved aquatic animal health services will result in more profitable, reliable production in aquaculture and improved surveillance capacity for Australia to maintain its favourable disease status.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT Depending on the agreement within NAAH-TWG and AAHC on the recommendations, further projects to address these recommendations may be warranted. Electronic copies of the report will be disseminated to diagnostic laboratories and government AAH management groups around Australia. Participating stakeholders will be directed to the FRDC website to acquire copies of the final report.


KEY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Australian universities be encouraged to incorporate a greater component of

aquatic animal health into undergraduate training courses, through the development of a national aquatic animal health curriculum and educational resource material.

2. That Australian universities be encouraged to develop post-graduate training opportunities with formal international linkages, e.g. Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific (NACA), Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Asian Fisheries Society (AFS), to encourage overseas students to participate and support the running of such courses. Such training opportunities should include some direct field experience with industry.

3. That funding be sourced to support traineeships in fish pathology at Government and University aquatic animal health laboratories around Australia.

4. That AAHC approach providers to assess potential for endorsed graduates of tertiary undergraduate degree programs to undertake a program of mentoring, training and examination and continuing professional development in AAH which could then be recognised as the competency standard across Australia.

5. That State Governments be asked to subsidise the cost of investigations of novel aquatic animal disease outbreaks, to underpin development of improved understanding of key pathogens and processes whilst the aquaculture industries are developing to maturity

6. That nationally funded research projects with AAH components should include links to a veterinary school, a State Government AAH diagnostic laboratory and with industry.

7. That a nationally coordinated extension program be funded to ensure key stakeholders are aware of all the training opportunities that currently exist.


COMMENT ADDED IN PROOF Feedback from reviewers of early drafts of this document included the following suggestions for training.

• Government scholarships for PG training overseas. • Develop multi-organisation PG program with state government laboratory staff,

CSIRO, invited overseas experts and universities all contributing. Multi-centre delivery and national funding.

• Nationally fund a program where experienced diagnostic fish pathologists and recognised research scientists, at the end of their careers or in early retirement, prepare and present modules of specific advanced topics in aquatic animal diagnosis and health for remote learning and residential workshops. Pay these experts to run a mentorship program across the country in government laboratories and with post-graduate students. There is a travelling mentor program for terrestrial animal diseases and the Australian Animal Pathology Standards Program have recently (December 2005) funded Judith Handlinger to prepare self-teaching continuing education courses for graduate veterinary pathologists on diseases of finfish and molluscs.

• Specific requirement in aquatic animal health research projects to identify and fund specialist training for animal laboratory scientists to acquire experience working with aquatic animal pathogens.

• A nationally funded laboratory exchange or sabbatical program to help train existing animal laboratory scientists in the test methodology for aquatic animal pathogens.

• Facilitate and provide cash incentives for research staff employed on FRDC, ACIAR and ARC etc funds to locate and work in state aquatic animal diagnostic laboratories.

• Require aquatic animal health diagnostic pathology training to be included in nationally funded aquatic animal research projects.

CONCLUSION Demand for AAH services already exceeds the capacity of current resources to supply. This situation is likely to deteriorate significantly within the next 10 years due to the retirement of the majority of highly skilled AAH professionals from the national diagnostic laboratory network. This deterioration will become more marked as demand for services is predicted to continue to rise significantly over the next 10 years. The under-resourcing will be further exacerbated as the understanding by industry of the importance of AAH management increases (to approach that of other intensive production animal industries) from its currently low standing. Current levels of training available in Australia are inadequate to generate AAH diagnostic professionals of the calibre required to meet expectations of Government and industry. Historical training pathways by which the current AAH professionals have been generated are largely no longer available. Urgent action to create new training pathways and improve interaction between veterinary schools and science/aquaculture schools is required. The consideration of this reports recommendations and urgent actioning should be a priority.


BIBLIOGRAPHY Anon. 2006. Competitive edge attracts. Fisheries R&D News. May Vol 14. No. 2. FRDC. p5. Frawley P.T. 2003. Review of Rural Veterinary Services Report for DAFF and

Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training.. Retrieved on 15 March 2006.. viewed on http://www.affa.gov.au/corporate_docs/publications/pdf/animalplanthealth/chief_vet/vetreport.pdf

Heath T.J, Niethe G.E. 2001. Veterinary practitioners in rural Australia: a national survey.

Australian Veterinary Journal 79: 3-8

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY No intellectual property has been generated by this project.

STAFF Matt Landos, Navneet Dhand, Brian Jones, Richard Whittington, Marion Saddington


APP

END

IX 1

: Su

rvey

Que

stio

ns to

Aqu

acul

ture

Indu

stry

sta

keho

lder

s to

ass

ess

curr

ent a

nd fu

ture

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) ed

ucat

ion

and

trai

ning

nee

ds.

1.

Wha

t lev

el o

f aqu

atic

ani

mal

hea

lth k

now

ledg

e do

staf

f req

uire

to p

erfo

rm o

ptim

ally

in th

eir r

espe

ctiv

e ac

tiviti

es?

L

evel

of A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

Kno

wle

dge

O

pera

tor

leve

l A

ctiv

ity

Not

re

quir

ed

Bas

ic

unde

rsta

ndin

g us

ed o

ccas

iona

lly

Bas

ic

unde

rsta

ndin

g us

ed r

egul

arly

Adv

ance

d un

ders

tand

ing

used

occ

asio

nally

Adv

ance

d un

ders

tand

ing

used

reg

ular

ly

Mor

e tr

aini

ng

need

ed

(Y/N

) G

ener

al: f

eedi

ng, h

andl

ing,

ap

plyi

ng tr

eatm

ents

Fish

hea

lth m

onito

ring

(incl

udin

g ro

utin

e m

icro

scop

ic

exam

inat

ions

)

Sam

plin

g fo

r foo

d sa

fety

Sa

mpl

ing

for d

isea

se

inve

stig

atio

n

Rec

ogni

tion

of si

gns o

f di

seas

e/po

or h

ealth

Farm

han

d st

aff

Kee

ping

reco

rds o

f fis

h he

alth

D

etec

t sub

-clin

ical

hea

lth

prob

lem

s, su

ch a

s poo

r gro

wth

or

low

-gra

de m

orta

lity.

Inve

stig

atio

n of

loss

es in

clud

ing

sam

ple

colle

ctio

n

Para

site

iden

tific

atio

n

W

ater

qua

lity

mea

sure

men

t

Farm

man

ager

Dev

elop

men

t and

im

plem

enta

tion

of b

iose

curit

y pl

ans f

or st

ock

mov

emen

t and

di

seas

e co

ntro

l on

farm


Man

age

prev

entio

n m

easu

res

and

chem

ical

trea

tmen

ts to

co

ntro

l dis

ease

out

brea

ks

Man

age

impa

cts o

f tre

atm

ents

on

env

ironm

ent a

nd fo

od sa

fety

Des

ign

sam

plin

g st

rate

gy fo

r fa

rm su

rvei

llanc

e st

atus

App

licat

ion

of v

acci

natio

npr

ogra

m

Dia

gnos

is o

f dis

ease

from

sa

mpl

es se

nt in

.

His

topa

thol

ogy

(look

at s

ectio

ns

of p

rese

rved

tiss

ues u

nder

m

icro

scop

e)

Mic

robi

olog

y (c

ultu

re a

nd

iden

tify

bact

eria

)

Viro

logy

(gro

win

g an

d id

entif

ying

vira

l inf

ectio

ns)

Mol

ecul

ar b

iolo

gy (t

ests

to

dete

ct D

NA

mat

eria

l e.g

. PC

R)

Test

ing

for d

isea

se fr

eedo

m

certi

ficat

ion

for t

rans

loca

tion

Para

site

iden

tific

atio

n

To

xic

alga

e id

entif

icat

ion

Dia

gnos

tic

Lab

orat

ory

Wat

er q

ualit

y te

stin

g

Adv

ise

on tr

eatm

ent a

nd d

isea

se

cont

rol

Stat

e di

seas

e su

rvei

llanc

e to

fa

cilit

ate

inte

rsta

te tr

ade

of

seed

stoc

k an

d pr

oduc

t

Gov

ernm

ent

licen

sing

/ pol

icy

auth

ority

Su

rvei

llanc

e fo

r exo

tic d

isea

ses

and

prov

ide

som

e in

dust

ry a

nd

mar

ket p

rote

ctio

n fr

om p

oten

tial

impo

rts


D

isea

se c

ontro

l pro

gram

s e.g

. zo

ning

to re

stric

t sto

ck

mov

emen

t, er

adic

atio

n of

exo

tic

dise

ases

Li

cenc

e co

nditi

ons t

o m

eet

envi

ronm

enta

l gui

delin

es

Fiel

d se

rvic

es

Dia

gnos

tic in

vest

igat

ions

, di

agno

sing

dis

ease

Para

site

iden

tific

atio

n

Pr

escr

ibin

g, d

ispe

nsin

g an

d ad

visi

ng le

gal t

hera

peut

ants

for

dise

ase

prev

entio

n an

d co

ntro

l

Farm

man

agem

ent a

dvic

e:

husb

andr

y, st

ock

hand

ling,

an

aest

hetic

s, va

ccin

es, n

utrit

ion

Fish

hea

lth V

et

or

Aqu

atic

ani

mal

he

alth

con

sulta

nt

Impa

cts o

f tre

atm

ents

on

the

envi

ronm

ent

2.

Whe

re h

ave

your

farm

staf

f (yo

u in

clud

ed) r

ecei

ved

educ

atio

n to

acq

uire

the

AA

H sk

ills t

hey

curr

ently

pos

sess

? (M

ark

each

box

with

“X

” an

d sp

ecify

whi

ch in

stitu

tion

prov

ided

the

train

ing

(e.g

. UTA

S, F

linde

rs, D

eaki

n, S

penc

er T

AFE

, Nat

fish

etc)

So

urce

of A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

Edu

catio

n an

d T

rain

ing

Ope

rato

r lev

el

On-

the-

job

Trai

ning

TA

FE (i

nclu

ding

Sea

food

Indu

stry

Tr

aini

ng P

acka

ge)

Uni

vers

ity

Farm

han

d st

aff

Fa

rm m

anag

er

Fi

sh h

ealth

vet

or

cons

ulta

nt (i

f use

d)


3.

How

rele

vant

hav

e th

e of

f-fa

rm A

AH

edu

catio

n &

trai

ning

com

pone

nts b

een

for p

ract

ical

app

licat

ion

on th

e fa

rm?

(Mar

k w

ith “

X”,

or l

eave

lin

e bl

ank

if no

t app

licab

le to

you

r situ

atio

n)

Irre

leva

nt

Rel

evan

t but

of

insu

ffic

ient

de

pth

to b

e of

va

lue

Rel

evan

t but

re

quir

ed

mod

ifica

tion

to b

e of

pra

ctic

al v

alue

on

the

farm

Rel

evan

t, qu

ickl

y ap

plic

able

to w

ork

on fa

rm to

mai

ntai

n cu

rren

t AA

H

stan

dard

s

Hig

hly

Rel

evan

t and

in

crea

sed

the

AA

H

stan

dard

s on

the

farm

Seaf

ood

Indu

stry

Tr

aini

ng P

acka

ge

TAFE

Uni

vers

ity

Aqu

acul

ture

deg

ree

Uni

vers

ity v

eter

inar

y de

gree

Oth

er tr

aini

ng (p

leas

e sp

ecify

)

4.

Hav

e st

uden

t job

exp

ecta

tions

at g

radu

atio

n, b

een

an a

ccur

ate

refle

ctio

n of

the

“rea

l wor

ld”,

onc

e sk

ills a

re e

mpl

oyed

on

a fa

rm?

(Mar

k bo

xes

with

“X

” w

here

you

hav

e ha

d ex

perie

nce

with

gra

duat

e em

ploy

ees f

rom

the

vario

us q

ualif

icat

ions

)

St

uden

t job

exp

ecta

tions

E

duca

tion

leve

l

E

xpec

tatio

n to

o hi

gh

Exp

ecta

tion

abou

t rig

ht

Exp

ecta

tion

too

low

TA

FE (e

.g. N

atfis

h A

quac

ultu

re)

TA

FE (S

eafo

od In

dust

ry T

rain

ing

Pack

age)

Uni

vers

ity (S

cien

ce- B

iolo

gy/Z

oolo

gy)

U

nive

rsity

(App

lied

Scie

nce-

Aqu

acul

ture

)

Uni

vers

ity (M

arin

e bi

olog

y)

U

nive

rsity

(Vet

erin

ary

degr

ee)


5.

a.

Scor

e th

e ke

y A

AH

skill

s tha

t wou

ld b

e of

ben

efit

to (i

) far

m h

ands

and

(ii)

farm

man

ager

s (iii

) AA

H v

eter

inar

ian

or c

onsu

ltant

. Sc

ore

1 - n

ot re

quire

d at

all

Scor

e 2

- Bas

ic sk

ill -u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

3 - B

asic

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

Scor

e 4

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

5 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

b.

Fo

r eac

h of

the

skill

s sco

re h

ow m

uch

stud

y/tra

inin

g yo

u w

ould

exp

ect a

com

pete

nt in

divi

dual

to u

nder

take

, to

perf

orm

opt

imal

ly fo

r the

fa

rm.

Scor

e 1

- Tw

o da

y co

urse

Sc

ore

2 - O

ne w

eek

cour

se

Scor

e 3

- One

sem

este

r cou

rse

Scor

e 4

- One

yea

r dip

lom

a Sc

ore

5 - F

ive

year

deg

ree

Farm

Han

d Fa

rm M

anag

er

AA

H v

eter

inar

ian

or c

onsu

ltant

Sk

ill

Skill

leve

l(1

-5)

Sk

ill le

vel (

1-5)

A

mou

nt o

f tra

inin

g (1

-5)

Am

ount

of

train

ing

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) A

mou

nt o

f tra

inin

g (1

-5)

Aw

aren

ess o

f sig

ns o

f sic

knes

s

U

nder

take

rigo

rous

inve

stig

atio

n of

a h

ealth

pro

blem

C

olle

ct a

ppro

pria

te sa

mpl

es to

faci

litat

e an

inve

stig

atio

n

R

each

a d

efin

itive

dia

gnos

is

Cho

ose

and

adm

inis

ter a

ppro

pria

te tr

eatm

ent

Aw

aren

ess o

f gov

ernm

ent r

egul

atio

ns, i

n re

latio

n to

dia

gnos

is o

f di

seas

e, a

pplic

atio

n of

ther

apy

and

food

safe

ty c

onse

quen

ces

Aw

aren

ess o

f the

Nat

iona

l lis

t of d

isea

ses,

and

the

requ

irem

ent t

o re

port

outb

reak

s to

the

Gov

t aut

horit

ies

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent a

farm

bio

secu

rity

plan

for

prot

ectio

n fr

om d

isea

se th

reat

s fro

m o

utsi

de o

f the

farm

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent a

farm

hea

lth m

anag

emen

t pro

gram

, fo

r con

trol a

nd p

reve

ntio

n of

dis

ease

s tha

t occ

ur o

n th

e fa

rm

Abi

lity

to c

ompr

ehen

d th

e in

tera

ctio

n be

twee

n th

e en

viro

nmen

t, th

e pa

thog

en a

nd th

e ho

st, t

o m

anife

st in

dis

ease


6.

a.

Hav

e yo

u ha

d th

e ne

ed to

seek

pro

fess

iona

l lev

el A

AH

serv

ices

from

off

the

farm

, if s

o fr

om w

here

and

how

freq

uent

ly?

(Ran

k pr

ovid

ers

from

thos

e yo

u w

ould

con

tact

firs

t thr

ough

to th

ose

you

cont

act l

ast (

1-10

) - m

ark

any

you

neve

r use

with

n/a

) (M

ark

“X”

in b

ox th

at b

est

desc

ribes

the

freq

uenc

y w

ith w

hich

you

seek

out

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed fo

r dia

gnos

is?

Did

they

wor

k ou

t the

cau

se o

f you

r pro

blem

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

– G

ood

c.

H

ow a

dequ

ate

was

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

you

rece

ived

to im

plem

ent p

ract

ical

con

trol a

nd tr

eatm

ent f

or th

e pr

oble

m?

Wer

e th

ey a

ble

to

fix th

e pr

oble

m?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 –

Goo

d

d.

How

tim

ely

was

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Too

slow

Sc

ore

2 - S

omet

imes

ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 –

Ade

quat

e

e.

How

cos

t eff

ectiv

e is

the

serv

ice

offe

red?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3,4,

5 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - I

t is f

ree-

but

wou

ld p

ay m

arke

t rat

e if

requ

ired

Scor

e 2

- It i

s fre

e- w

ould

not

use

if h

ad to

pay

Sc

ore

3 - C

ost b

enef

icia

l: se

rvic

e m

ore

than

pay

s for

itse

lf Sc

ore

4 - C

ost n

eutra

l Sc

ore

5 - T

oo e

xpen

sive

- min

imis

e us

e du

e to

cos

t con

cern

s


R

ank

orde

r Fr

eque

ncy

of se

rvic

e us

e D

iagn

ostic

T

echn

ical

A

dequ

acy

Tre

atm

ent

tech

nica

l ad

equa

cy

Tim

elin

ess

C

ost

effe

ctiv

enes

s

Off

Far

m A

AH

Ser

vice

pr

ovid

er

1-10

N

ever

O

nce

a ye

ar

Th

ree

mon

thly

M

onth

ly

Wee

kly

1,2,

3 1,

2,3

1,2,

31,

2,3,

4,5

Oth

er fa

rmer

s

G

ovt.

exte

nsio

n of

ficer

G

ovt v

eter

inar

y of

ficer

G

ovt a

quac

ultu

re m

anag

er

Gov

t lab

orat

ory

(inc.

C

SIR

O)

Priv

ate

labo

rato

ry

Priv

ate

vete

rinar

ian

with

sp

ecia

l int

eres

t in

fish

Priv

ate

non-

vete

rinar

y aq

uatic

ani

mal

hea

lth

cons

ulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

Res

earc

her

7.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

r sta

ff w

ith tr

aini

ng in

the

requ

ired

AA

H a

reas

? (M

ark

“X”

in a

ppro

pria

te b

ox a

nd sp

ecify

pro

gram

s, if

any)

No,

trai

ning

una

vaila

ble

Yes

, but

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th

Yes

, suf

ficie

nt

Sp

ecify

trai

ning

pro

gram

s: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

..

8.

Do

you

feel

you

r bus

ines

s wou

ld b

enef

it fr

om im

prov

ed A

AH

inpu

t? (M

ark

“X”

in a

ppro

pria

te b

ox)

Ver

y un

likel

y U

nlik

ely

Poss

ibly

L

ikel

y D

efin

itely


9.

Wha

t AA

H o

utco

me

are

you

seek

ing?

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in e

ach

row

)

Des

ired

Out

com

es

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

Cos

t-eff

ectiv

e m

easu

res f

or th

e re

duct

ion

of lo

sses

from

di

seas

e(s)

alre

ady

pres

ent o

n th

e fa

rm

Prot

ectio

n fr

om in

curs

ion

of n

ew e

nzoo

tic/e

xotic

dis

ease

s

Dis

ease

free

stat

us o

n liv

esto

ck fa

cilit

y tra

nslo

catio

n of

st

ock

Dis

ease

free

stat

us o

n pr

oduc

t to

faci

litat

e m

arke

t acc

ess

and

prot

ect d

omes

tic m

arke

t pos

ition

Impr

oved

pro

duct

ivity

from

exi

stin

g st

ock,

thro

ugh

cont

rol

of su

b cl

inic

al h

ealth

pro

blem

s.

10. U

se o

f AA

H se

rvic

es is

like

ly to

incr

ease

in th

e ne

xt 5

-10

year

s. (M

ark

“X”

in a

ppro

pria

te b

ox in

resp

onse

to th

is st

atem

ent)

St

rong

ly d

isag

ree

Dis

agre

e U

ncer

tain

A

gree

St

rong

ly a

gree

11. H

as y

our a

quac

ultu

re b

usin

ess e

xper

ienc

ed si

gnifi

cant

loss

es d

ue to

hea

lth/d

isea

se p

robl

ems?

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

)

Yes

N

o

12

. How

wou

ld y

ou p

refe

r to

inco

rpor

ate

mor

e A

AH

serv

ices

into

you

r ope

ratio

ns, i

f req

uire

d? (“

X”

all r

elev

ant b

oxes

)

Trai

ning

exi

stin

g st

aff

H

ire n

ew st

aff w

ho h

ave

been

trai

ned

U

se c

ontra

ctor

s on

an a

s nee

ds b

asis

Serv

ice

not r

equi

red


13. W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n th

at y

our i

ndus

try

utili

ses?

(e.g

. Pro

fess

iona

l Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth a

dvic

e, L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

es) W

ould

you

use

such

a st

anda

rd to

ass

ist i

n se

lect

ing

suita

bly

qual

ified

per

sons

to u

nder

take

wor

k fo

r you

r ind

ustry

?

Yes

N

o U

ncer

tain


Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) Sur

vey

Que

stio

ns to

Gov

ernm

ent F

ishe

ries

and

Aqu

acul

ture

Man

agem

ent S

take

hold

ers

to

asse

ss c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) edu

catio

n an

d tr

aini

ng n

eeds

1.

H

ow fr

eque

ntly

do

you

prov

ide/

requ

ire th

e fo

llow

ing

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) ser

vice

s, to

mee

t you

r leg

isla

tive

and

othe

r obl

igat

ions

? Sc

ore

1 - n

ever

Sc

ore

2 - o

nce

a ye

ar

Scor

e 3

- fou

r tim

es a

yea

r Sc

ore

4 - m

onth

ly

Scor

e 5

- wee

kly

A

AH

Ser

vice

s Fr

eque

ncy

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

Man

agin

g fis

herie

s and

aqu

acul

ture

rese

arch

Aqu

atic

ani

mal

wel

fare

Dom

estic

surv

eilla

nce

for i

ncur

sion

of e

xotic

dis

ease

or s

prea

d of

end

emic

dis

ease

at S

tate

by

Stat

e or

Nat

iona

l lev

el

Se

tting

regu

latio

ns fo

r dom

estic

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r tra

nslo

catio

n of

fish

with

in S

tate

and

Aus

tralia

Fiel

d In

vest

igat

ion

and

diag

nosi

s of s

ickn

ess o

r mor

talit

y ev

ent

D

rafti

ng p

olic

y fo

r con

trol o

f AA

H in

aqu

acul

ture

, wild

com

mer

cial

and

recr

eatio

nal f

ishe

ries

La

bora

tory

dia

gnos

tic se

rvic

es

Pr

ovis

ion

of d

isea

se c

ontro

l, pr

even

tion

and

treat

men

t adv

ice

In

dust

ry d

evel

opm

ent,

educ

atio

n an

d ex

tens

ion

Pr

ovid

e gu

idan

ce fo

r che

mic

al u

se

C

ontri

bute

to a

nd re

view

AA

HC

and

AQ

UA

PLA

N d

ocum

ents

Food

safe

ty a

nd O

H&

S

Oth

er (p

leas

e sp

ecify

)


2.

a.

Wha

t AA

H sk

ills d

o yo

u re

quire

to p

rovi

de th

e se

rvic

es in

Q1

com

pete

ntly

? Pl

ease

rate

you

r ski

ll le

vel c

urre

ntly

in e

ach

area

. In

addi

tion

note

the

skill

leve

l you

bel

ieve

is re

quire

d to

per

form

at t

he sa

me

high

stan

dard

, as i

s pre

sent

in te

rres

trial

ani

mal

hea

lth m

anag

emen

t (n

ote

entri

es in

thes

e tw

o co

lum

ns m

ay b

e th

e sa

me

num

ber.)

Sc

ore

1 - N

ot re

quire

d at

all

Scor

e 2

- Bas

ic sk

ill u

sed

rare

ly (o

nce

a ye

ar)

Scor

e 3

- Bas

ic sk

ill u

sed

regu

larly

Sc

ore

4 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d oc

casi

onal

ly

Scor

e 5

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

regu

larly

b.

For e

ach

of th

e sk

ills,

whi

ch o

f the

follo

win

g qu

alifi

catio

ns w

ould

be

mos

t app

licab

le a

s bac

kgro

und

educ

atio

n?

Scor

e 1

- Dip

lom

a of

Aqu

acul

ture

Sc

ore

2 - B

ache

lor o

f Sci

ence

(Aqu

acul

ture

) Sc

ore

3 - B

ache

lor o

f Sci

ence

(Zoo

logy

/Fis

herie

s Man

agem

ent)

Scor

e 4

- Bac

helo

r of V

eter

inar

y Sc

ienc

e Sc

ore

5 - B

ache

lor o

f Eco

nom

ics/

Com

mer

ce/B

usin

ess A

dmin

istra

tion

Scor

e 6

- Oth

er- p

leas

e sp

ecify

c.

For e

ach

of th

e sk

ills s

core

how

muc

h st

udy/

train

ing

you

wou

ld e

xpec

t a c

ompe

tent

indi

vidu

al to

und

erta

ke, t

o pe

rfor

m o

ptim

ally

for

man

agem

ent o

pera

tions

. Sc

ore

1 - T

wo

day

cour

se

Scor

e 2

- One

wee

k co

urse

Sc

ore

3 - O

ne se

mes

ter c

ours

e Sc

ore

4 - O

ne y

ear d

iplo

ma

Scor

e 5

- Uni

vers

ity d

egre

e w

ith A

AH

uni

ts

Scor

e 6

- Pos

t-gra

duat

e qu

alifi

catio

n in

AA

H re

late

d di

scip

line


d.

Wou

ld y

ou su

ppor

t and

atte

nd a

trai

ning

cou

rse

in th

is sk

ill a

rea?

Ans

wer

: Yes

or N

o

G

over

nmen

t Man

agem

ent S

kill

and

trai

ning

leve

l Sk

ill

Cur

rent

Ski

ll le

vel

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

Req

uire

d sk

ill

leve

l (1

,2,3

,4,5

)

Bac

kgro

und

educ

atio

n (1

,2,3

,4,5

,6)

Len

gth

of

trai

ning

re

quir

ed

(1,2

,3,4

,5,6

)

Mor

e tr

aini

ng

supp

orte

d Y

es/N

o

Cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of im

porta

nt n

atio

nal a

nd in

tern

atio

nal

dise

ases

of a

quat

ic a

nim

als

Reg

ulat

ory

know

ledg

e of

risk

ass

essm

ent p

roce

ss in

clud

ing

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res t

o fa

cilit

ate

inte

rnat

iona

l and

dom

estic

tra

de a

nd m

inim

ise

dise

ase

impa

cts o

n do

mes

tic fi

sher

ies a

nd

aqua

cultu

re

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret t

echn

ical

scie

ntifi

c in

form

atio

n to

app

ly to

fis

herie

s and

aqu

acul

ture

man

agem

ent

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d op

erat

e su

rvei

llanc

e an

d re

porti

ng

syst

ems f

or ra

pid

dete

ctio

n of

new

dis

ease

out

brea

ks/in

curs

ions

Abi

lity

to o

rgan

ise

and

inte

rpre

t a th

orou

gh d

isea

se o

utbr

eak

incl

udin

g fie

ld in

vest

igat

ion,

col

lect

ing

accu

rate

ep

idem

iolo

gica

l inf

orm

atio

n ab

out t

he o

utbr

eak,

col

lect

ion

of

diag

nost

ic sa

mpl

es.

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret l

abor

ator

y te

stin

g re

sults

.

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret S

tate

and

Nat

iona

l leg

isla

tive

requ

irem

ents

w

ith re

spec

t to

man

agem

ent o

f aqu

atic

ani

mal

hea

lth.

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent p

reve

ntio

n/co

ntro

l and

tre

atm

ent s

trate

gies

to m

inim

ise

dise

ase

impa

cts

Tech

nica

l und

erst

andi

ng o

f aqu

acul

ture

farm

ing

syst

ems t

o im

plem

ent a

ppro

pria

te b

iose

curit

y pl

ans t

o m

inim

ise

risk

of

dise

ase

trans

loca

tion

betw

een

aqua

cultu

re fa

cilit

ies a

nd to

the

rece

ivin

g en

viro

nmen

t.

Com

bina

tion

of a

ll of

the

abov

e sk

ills


3.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Res

pons

e to

Q3)

Stat

emen

t G

over

nmen

t ar

eas

Stro

ngly

di

sagr

ee

Dis

agre

e U

ncer

tain

A

gree

St

rong

ly a

gree

Labo

rato

ry

Po

licy/

M

anag

emen

t

Fiel

d

4.

a.

Who

pro

vide

s the

tech

nica

l AA

H se

rvic

es a

nd a

dvic

e to

you

r man

agem

ent t

eam

cur

rent

ly?

(Mar

k “X

” if

you

use

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed?

Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 - E

xcel

lent

c.

How

tim

ely

was

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? Sc

ore

1 - T

oo sl

ow

Scor

e 2

- Som

etim

es a

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Alw

ays a

dequ

ate

d.

H

ow c

ost e

ffec

tive

was

the

serv

ice

offe

red?

Sc

ore

1 - I

t is f

ree-

but

wou

ld p

ay m

arke

t rat

e if

requ

ired

Scor

e 2

- It i

s fre

e- w

ould

not

use

if h

ad to

pay

Sc

ore

3 - C

ost b

enef

icia

l: se

rvic

e m

ore

than

pay

s for

itse

lf Sc

ore

4 - C

ost n

eutra

l Sc

ore

5 - T

oo e

xpen

sive

- min

imis

e us

e du

e to

cos

t con

cern

s


Serv

ice

prov

ider

U

se se

rvic

e T

echn

ical

kno

wle

dge

(1,2

,3)

Tim

elin

ess

(1,2

,3)

Cos

t eff

ectiv

e (1

,2,3

,4,5

) N

o se

rvic

es so

ught

No

serv

ice

avai

labl

e

Se

lf-ta

ught

/ pu

blis

hed

liter

atur

e / i

nter

net

Res

earc

h fa

cilit

y st

aff

Uni

vers

ity-b

ased

AA

H e

xper

ts

Fish

erie

s and

Aqu

acul

ture

man

ager

s

G

over

nmen

t ext

ensi

on/ v

eter

inar

y of

ficer

G

ovt l

abor

ator

y st

aff (

inc.

CSI

RO

)

Pr

ivat

e la

bora

tory

staf

f

Pr

ivat

e ve

terin

ary

cons

ulta

nt

Priv

ate

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth c

onsu

ltant

O

ther

(spe

cify

)

5.

H

ow w

ould

you

pre

fer t

o in

corp

orat

e m

ore

AA

H sk

ills a

nd se

rvic

es in

to y

our m

anag

emen

t stru

ctur

e? (M

ark

appr

opria

te b

oxes

with

“X

”)

Tr

aini

ng e

xist

ing

man

agem

ent s

taff

Hiri

ng n

ew tr

aine

d m

anag

emen

t sta

ff

En

hanc

e tra

inin

g fo

r gov

t fie

ld/ e

xten

sion

off

icer

s

Use

con

tract

ors o

n an

‘as n

eeds

’ bas

is

In

crea

sed

serv

ice

not r

equi

red

6.

A

re y

ou a

war

e of

any

edu

catio

nal p

rogr

ams i

n A

ustra

lia th

at a

re a

ble

to p

rovi

de y

our s

taff

with

trai

ning

in th

e re

quire

d A

AH

are

as?

N

o, tr

aini

ng u

nava

ilabl

e Y

es, b

ut in

suff

icie

nt d

epth

Y

es, s

uffic

ient

Ex

ampl

es o

f tra

inin

g: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

..


7.

Do

you

feel

you

r man

agem

ent w

ould

ben

efit

from

impr

oved

AA

H in

put?

V

ery

unlik

ely

Unl

ikel

y Po

ssib

ly

Lik

ely

Def

inite

ly

8.

H

as y

our m

anag

emen

t tea

m h

ad to

dea

l with

a si

gnifi

cant

scal

e he

alth

/dis

ease

pro

blem

s?

Y

es

No

9.

Wha

t ter

tiary

qua

lific

atio

ns d

o m

embe

rs o

f you

r aqu

acul

ture

and

fish

erie

s man

agem

ent t

eam

(who

cov

er A

AH

issu

es) h

ave?

Te

rtiar

y qu

alifi

catio

ns:…

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

…

10. W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n? (e

.g. V

eter

inar

y ad

vice

, Lab

orat

ory

serv

ices

) to

assi

st in

sele

ctin

g su

itabl

y qu

alifi

ed p

erso

ns to

und

erta

ke w

ork

for y

our m

anag

emen

t ope

ratio

ns.

Y

es

No

Unc

erta

in


Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) Sur

vey

Que

stio

ns to

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Dia

gnos

tic L

abor

ator

y St

akeh

olde

rs to

ass

ess

curr

ent

and

futu

re A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

(AA

H) e

duca

tion

and

trai

ning

nee

ds

1.

a.

Whi

ch A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

(AA

H) s

ervi

ces d

o yo

u pr

ovid

e th

roug

h yo

ur la

bora

tory

serv

ice

to a

quac

ultu

re a

nd fi

sher

ies i

ndus

tries

? M

ark

mos

t app

ropr

iate

box

with

“X

” fo

r eac

h se

rvic

e.

b.

Fr

eque

ncy

Scor

e 1

- onc

e a

year

Sc

ore

2 - f

our t

imes

a y

ear

Scor

e 3

- mon

thly

Sc

ore

4 - w

eekl

y Sc

ore

5 - a

ll of

the

time

A

AH

Ser

vice

s Y

es

No,

serv

ice

not p

rovi

ded

N

o, b

ut w

ould

like

to p

rovi

de

Freq

uenc

y (1

,2,3

,4,5

) A

quat

ic a

nim

al w

elfa

re a

dvic

e

D

omes

tic su

rvei

llanc

e fo

r inc

ursi

on o

f exo

tic d

isea

se

or sp

read

of e

ndem

ic d

isea

se a

t Sta

te b

y St

ate

leve

l

Prov

idin

g te

chni

cal i

nput

into

des

igni

ng re

gula

tions

fo

r dom

estic

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r tra

nslo

catio

n of

aqu

atic

an

imal

s with

in A

ustra

lia

Fiel

d In

vest

igat

ion

of si

ckne

ss o

r mor

talit

y ev

ent

Prov

ide

dise

ase

diag

nosi

s

Te

chni

cal i

nput

to d

rafti

ng p

olic

y fo

r con

trol o

f AA

H

in a

quac

ultu

re, w

ild c

omm

erci

al a

nd re

crea

tiona

l fis

herie

s

Com

mer

cial

and

rese

arch

labo

rato

ry d

iagn

ostic

se

rvic

es

Prov

isio

n of

adv

ice

for c

ontro

l, pr

even

tion

and

treat

men

t of d

isea

se

Indu

stry

dev

elop

men

t, ed

ucat

ion

and

exte

nsio

n

A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

Res

earc

h

Fo

od sa

fety

and

OH

&S

Oth

er (p

leas

e sp

ecify

)


2.

a.

Whi

ch A

AH

skill

s, do

you

requ

ire to

pro

vide

the

serv

ices

in Q

1 co

mpe

tent

ly?

Plea

se ra

te y

our s

kill

leve

l cur

rent

ly in

eac

h ar

ea. I

n ad

ditio

n, n

ote

the

skill

leve

l you

bel

ieve

is re

quire

d to

per

form

at t

he sa

me

high

st

anda

rd, a

s is p

rese

nt in

terr

estri

al a

nim

al h

ealth

labo

rato

ry se

rvic

es (n

ote

entri

es in

thes

e tw

o co

lum

ns m

ay b

e th

e sa

me

num

ber.)

Als

o no

te if

serv

ice

is u

nava

ilabl

e.

Scor

e 1

- not

requ

ired

at a

ll Sc

ore

2 - B

asic

skill

-use

d ra

rely

(onc

e a

year

) Sc

ore

3 - B

asic

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

Scor

e 4

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

5 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

b.

Fo

r eac

h of

the

skill

s use

d, sc

ore

how

muc

h st

udy/

train

ing

you

wou

ld e

xpec

t a c

ompe

tent

indi

vidu

al to

und

erta

ke, t

o pe

rfor

m o

ptim

ally

fo

r the

labo

rato

ry.

Scor

e 1

- Tw

o da

y co

urse

Sc

ore

2 - O

ne w

eek

cour

se

Scor

e 3

- One

mon

th c

ours

e Sc

ore

4 - O

ne y

ear d

iplo

ma

(With

AA

H u

nits

) Sc

ore

5 - U

nive

rsity

deg

ree

(BV

Sc, B

Sc(A

quac

ultu

re)

Scor

e 6

- Pos

t gra

duat

e qu

alifi

catio

n in

AA

H

Sk

ill a

nd tr

aini

ng le

vel

Skill

C

urre

nt S

kill

leve

l (1

,2,3

,4,5

)

Req

uire

d sk

ill

leve

l (1

,2,3

,4,5

)

Am

ount

of t

rain

ing

requ

ired

to

achi

eve

requ

ired

leve

l (1

,2,3

,4,5

,6)

Cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of im

porta

nt n

atio

nal a

nd in

tern

atio

nal d

isea

ses o

f aqu

atic

ani

mal

s

Kno

wle

dge

of ri

sk a

sses

smen

t pro

cess

incl

udin

g m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s to

faci

litat

e in

tern

atio

nal a

nd

dom

estic

trad

e an

d m

inim

ise

dise

ase

impa

cts o

n do

mes

tic fi

sher

ies a

nd a

quac

ultu

re

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n ep

idem

iolo

gica

l sou

nd su

rvei

llanc

e an

d re

porti

ng sy

stem

s for

rapi

d de

tect

ion

of n

ew

dise

ase

outb

reak

s/in

curs

ions

to su

ppor

t qua

rterly

dis

ease

repo

rting

to th

e C

omm

onw

ealth

Abi

lity

to u

nder

take

a th

orou

gh d

isea

se o

utbr

eak

inve

stig

atio

n in

clud

ing,

fiel

d in

vest

igat

ion,

col

lect

ing

accu

rate

epi

dem

iolo

gica

l inf

orm

atio

n ab

out t

he o

utbr

eak,

col

lect

ion

of d

iagn

ostic

sam

ples

.

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret w

ater

qua

lity

labo

rato

ry te

stin

g re

sults

.

Abi

lity

to u

nder

take

rapi

d, re

liabl

e ac

cred

ited

labo

rato

ry te

sts t

o id

entif

y ca

usat

ive

dise

ase

agen

ts,

incl

udin

g aw

aren

ess o

f exo

tic d

isea

ses.


His

topa

thol

ogy

M

icro

biol

ogy

M

olec

ular

bio

logy

Viro

logy

Para

sito

logy

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent p

reve

ntio

n/co

ntro

l and

trea

tmen

t stra

tegi

es to

min

imis

e di

seas

e im

pact

s

Tech

nica

l und

erst

andi

ng o

f aqu

acul

ture

syst

ems t

o in

terp

ret s

igni

fican

ce o

f lab

orat

ory

findi

ngs i

n lig

ht

of th

e re

arin

g sy

stem

.

Abi

lity

to p

rovi

de a

dis

ease

dia

gnos

is, r

athe

r tha

n ju

st a

labo

rato

ry re

port.

Abi

lity

to c

ertif

y st

ock

free

of d

isea

se to

faci

litat

e re

stoc

king

/ sal

e of

aqu

acul

ture

pro

duct

/ tra

nslo

catio

n of

seed

stoc

k

3.

Do

you

feel

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

of y

our d

isci

plin

e w

ithin

the

labo

rato

ry, i

s of t

he sa

me

stan

dard

for A

quat

ic A

nim

als,

as th

at w

hich

is

prov

ided

for t

erre

stria

l ani

mal

subm

issi

ons?

Yes

N

o In

som

e ar

eas o

nly

(spe

cify

def

icie

ncie

s)

4.

W

ho a

re th

e m

ost c

omm

on su

bmitt

ers o

f aqu

atic

ani

mal

dia

gnos

tic sa

mpl

es?

A

quac

ultu

re

farm

ers

Priv

ate

Vet

erin

aria

ns

Gov

ernm

ent

vete

rina

rian

s A

AH

co

nsul

tant

s R

esea

rch

Scie

ntis

ts o

r bi

olog

ists


5.

Is th

e la

b ab

le to

obt

ain

the

field

info

rmat

ion

on a

quat

ic a

nim

al su

bmis

sion

s, re

quire

d to

ass

ist i

n se

lect

ion

of d

iagn

ostic

test

s and

in

terp

reta

tion

of fi

ndin

gs?

A

lway

s M

ore

ofte

n th

an n

ot

Rar

ely

Nev

er

6.

Is th

e la

b ab

le to

send

resu

lts to

a q

ualif

ied

third

par

ty w

ho c

an in

terp

ret l

abor

ator

y re

sults

and

gen

erat

e m

anag

emen

t and

trea

tmen

t re

com

men

datio

ns to

app

ly in

the

field

?

Alw

ays

Mor

e of

ten

than

not

R

arel

y N

ever

7.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t- Pr

ivat

e la

bs n

ot

requ

ired

to re

spon

d to

Pol

icy

or F

ield

are

as)

R

espo

nse

to Q

3)St

atem

ent

Gov

ernm

ent

area

s St

rong

ly

disa

gree

D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

Labo

rato

ry

Po

licy/

M

anag

emen

t

Fiel

d


8.

a.

If a

dditi

onal

tech

nica

l ass

ista

nce

is so

ught

with

aqu

atic

ani

mal

cas

es, w

ho p

rovi

des t

his t

echn

ical

AA

H a

dvic

e to

you

? (M

ark

“X”

if yo

u us

e th

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er)

b.

How

ade

quat

e is

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

you

rece

ived

? (i.

e. A

re y

ou a

ble

to g

et th

e ad

vice

you

nee

d to

acc

urat

ely

inte

rpre

t tes

t res

ults

?)

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Exc

elle

nt

c.

H

ow ti

mel

y is

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? Sc

ore

1 - T

oo sl

ow

Scor

e 2

- Som

etim

es a

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Alw

ays a

dequ

ate

d.

H

ow c

ost e

ffec

tive

is th

e se

rvic

e of

fere

d?

Scor

e 1

- It i

s fre

e- b

ut w

ould

pay

mar

ket r

ate

if re

quire

d Sc

ore

2 - I

t is f

ree-

wou

ld n

ot u

se if

had

to p

ay

Scor

e 3

- Cos

t ben

efic

ial:

serv

ice

mor

e th

an p

ays f

or it

self

Scor

e 4

- Cos

t neu

tral

Scor

e 5

- Too

exp

ensi

ve- m

inim

ise

use

due

to c

ost c

once

rns

Se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er

Use

serv

ice

prov

ider

T

echn

ical

kno

wle

dge

(1,2

,3)

Tim

elin

ess

(1,2

) C

ost e

ffec

tive

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

In h

ouse

: Sel

f-ta

ught

/ pu

blis

hed

liter

atur

e / i

nter

net

Res

earc

h fa

cilit

y st

aff

Uni

vers

ity-b

ased

AA

H e

xper

ts

Fish

erie

s and

Aqu

acul

ture

man

ager

s

G

over

nmen

t ext

ensi

on/ v

eter

inar

y of

ficer

O

ther

inte

rsta

te G

ovt o

r priv

ate

Labo

rato

ry st

aff (

inc.

CSI

RO

)

Pr

ivat

e ve

terin

ary

cons

ulta

nt

Priv

ate

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth c

onsu

ltant

O

ther

(spe

cify

)


9.

How

wou

ld y

ou p

refe

r to

inco

rpor

ate

mor

e A

AH

skill

s and

serv

ices

into

you

r bus

ines

s/in

dust

ry?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

es w

ith “

X”)

Trai

ning

exi

stin

g la

b st

aff

H

iring

new

trai

ned

lab

staf

f

Enha

nce

train

ing

for g

ovt f

ield

/ ext

ensi

on o

ffic

ers

U

se c

ontra

ctor

s on

an a

s nee

ds b

asis

Incr

ease

d se

rvic

e no

t req

uire

d

10. A

re y

ou a

war

e of

any

edu

catio

nal p

rogr

ams i

n A

ustra

lia th

at a

re a

ble

to p

rovi

de y

our s

taff

with

trai

ning

in th

e re

quire

d A

AH

are

as?

N

o, tr

aini

ng u

nava

ilabl

e Y

es, b

ut in

suff

icie

nt d

epth

Y

es, s

uffic

ient

Exam

ples

of c

ours

es: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

….

11. D

o yo

u fe

el y

our l

abor

ator

y se

rvic

e w

ould

ben

efit

from

impr

oved

AA

H e

xper

tise?

V

ery

unlik

ely

Unl

ikel

y Po

ssib

ly

Lik

ely

Def

inite

ly

12

. Wou

ld y

ou li

ke to

see

a m

inim

um c

ompe

tenc

y/ac

cred

itatio

n st

anda

rd b

roug

ht in

for A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n? (e

.g. V

eter

inar

y ad

vice

, La

bora

tory

serv

ices

) to

assi

st in

sele

ctin

g su

itabl

y qu

alifi

ed p

erso

ns to

und

erta

ke w

ork.

Yes

N

o U

ncer

tain


Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) Sur

vey

Que

stio

ns to

Fis

herie

s an

d A

quac

ultu

re R

esea

rch

Indu

stry

Sta

keho

lder

s to

ass

ess

curr

ent a

nd fu

ture

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) edu

catio

n an

d tr

aini

ng n

eeds

1.

a.

D

o yo

u ut

ilise

, or h

ave

any

aqua

tic a

nim

al h

ealth

(AA

H) s

ervi

ces i

ssue

s im

pact

on

your

indu

stry

sect

or c

urre

ntly

? M

ark

mos

t app

ropr

iate

bo

x w

ith “

X”

for e

ach

serv

ice.

b.

Scor

e th

e fr

eque

ncy

Scor

e 1

- onc

e a

year

Sc

ore

2 - f

our t

imes

a y

ear

Scor

e 3

- mon

thly

Sc

ore

4 - w

eekl

y Sc

ore

5 - a

ll of

the

time

A

AH

Ser

vice

s Y

es

No,

serv

ice

unav

aila

ble

or n

ot r

equi

red

N

o, b

ut w

ould

like

to a

cces

s, if

serv

ice

was

ava

ilabl

e Fr

eque

ncy

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

Reg

ulat

ory

rest

rictio

n of

spec

ies a

llow

ed to

be

rese

arch

ed d

ue to

dis

ease

co

ncer

ns

Aqu

atic

ani

mal

wel

fare

D

omes

tic su

rvei

llanc

e fo

r inc

ursi

on o

f exo

tic d

isea

se a

t Sta

te b

y St

ate

leve

l

Dom

estic

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r tra

nslo

catio

n of

fish

with

in A

ustra

lia e

.g.

seed

stoc

k fo

r res

tock

ing,

bro

odst

ock

for s

peci

fic p

atho

gen

free

(SPF

) br

eedi

ng p

rogr

ams

Fiel

d In

vest

igat

ion

and

diag

nosi

s of s

ickn

ess o

f mor

talit

y ev

ent

Res

earc

h pr

ogra

ms t

o co

ntro

l dis

ease

s aff

ectin

g aq

uacu

lture

and

wild

fis

herie

s

Labo

rato

ry d

iagn

ostic

serv

ices

Pr

ovis

ion

of d

isea

se c

ontro

l, pr

even

tion

and

treat

men

t in

rese

arch

stoc

k


2.

Who

do

you

expe

ct to

pro

vide

you

with

the

AA

H se

rvic

es n

oted

abo

ve?

(Mar

k al

l app

ropr

iate

pro

vide

rs w

ith “

X”)

Com

mon

wea

lth

Gov

ernm

ent

Gov

ernm

ent

Lab

orat

ory

inc.

CSI

RO

St

ate

Gov

ernm

ent F

ishe

ries

man

agem

ent

Priv

ate

sect

or

Vet

erin

aria

ns o

r A

AH

con

sulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

Stat

e G

ovt

vete

rina

ry/

exte

nsio

n st

aff

Res

earc

h fa

cilit

y st

aff

3.

a.

W

hat s

kills

do

you

requ

ire th

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er (o

nly

fill i

n bo

xes f

or se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ers y

ou id

entif

ied

in Q

2) to

hav

e to

mee

t you

r AA

H

need

s?

Scor

e 1

- not

requ

ired

at a

ll Sc

ore

2 - B

asic

skill

-use

d ra

rely

(onc

e a

year

) Sc

ore

3 - B

asic

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

Scor

e 4

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

5 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

b.

Fo

r eac

h of

the

skill

s sco

re h

ow m

uch

stud

y/tra

inin

g yo

u w

ould

exp

ect a

com

pete

nt in

divi

dual

to u

nder

take

, to

perf

orm

opt

imal

ly fo

r the

re

sear

ch te

am.

Scor

e 1

- Tw

o da

y co

urse

Sc

ore

2 - O

ne w

eek

cour

se

Scor

e 3

- One

sem

este

r cou

rse

Scor

e 4

- One

yea

r dip

lom

a (A

quac

ultu

re)

Scor

e 5

- Uni

vers

ity d

egre

e (B

Sc (A

quac

ultu

re) B

VSc

) Sc

ore

6 - P

ost g

radu

ate

qual

ifica

tion

in A

AH


St

ate

Gov

t. L

ab o

r pr

ivat

e L

ab o

r C

SIR

O la

b or

U

nive

rsity

lab

Stat

e/ C

omm

on-w

ealth

G

ovt.

Fish

erie

s M

anag

emen

t

Priv

ate

vete

rina

rian

or

AA

H c

onsu

ltant

R

esea

rch

staf

f

Skill

Sk

ill le

vel

1-5

Am

t. of

tr

aini

ng

1-6

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

6

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

6

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

6 A

bilit

y to

reco

gnis

e si

gns o

f sic

knes

s and

dis

ease

in re

sear

ch

stoc

k

Abi

lity

to th

orou

ghly

inve

stig

ate

a di

seas

e ou

tbre

ak in

clud

ing

field

inve

stig

atio

n, c

olle

ctin

g ac

cura

te in

form

atio

n ab

out t

he

outb

reak

, col

lect

ion

of d

iagn

ostic

sam

ples

Rap

id, r

elia

ble

accu

rate

labo

rato

ry te

stin

g ca

paci

ty to

exc

lude

ex

otic

dis

ease

s and

iden

tify

caus

ativ

e ag

ent i

n re

sear

ch a

nim

als.

Reg

ulat

ory

know

ledg

e of

risk

ass

essm

ent p

roce

ss in

clud

ing

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res t

o fa

cilit

ate

inte

rnat

iona

l and

dom

estic

trad

e

Abi

lity

to p

rovi

de a

dis

ease

dia

gnos

is

Abi

lity

to c

hoos

e an

d ad

min

iste

r app

ropr

iate

trea

tmen

t and

co

ntro

l mea

sure

s

Abi

lity

of G

over

nmen

t to

mai

ntai

n a

natio

nal s

urve

illan

ce a

nd

repo

rting

syst

em fo

r det

ectio

n of

new

dis

ease

ou

tbre

aks/

incu

rsio

ns, w

hich

acc

urat

ely

refle

ct th

e st

atus

of

aqua

tic a

nim

al d

isea

ses i

n A

ustra

lia

Cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of d

isea

se th

reat

s tha

t may

aff

ect r

esea

rch

prog

ram

out

com

es

Lice

ncin

g an

d su

rvei

llanc

e of

rese

arch

faci

litie

s to

ensu

re th

ey d

o no

t con

tam

inat

e/in

fect

the

wild

fish

ery

from

thei

r ope

ratio

ns

4.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Stro

ngly

di

sagr

ee

Dis

agre

e U

ncer

tain

A

gree

St

rong

ly a

gree


5.

a.

Who

pro

vide

s the

se se

rvic

es to

you

r res

earc

h se

ctor

and

how

freq

uent

ly?

(Ran

k pr

ovid

ers f

rom

thos

e yo

u w

ould

con

tact

firs

t thr

ough

to

thos

e yo

u co

ntac

t las

t (1-

11) -

mar

k an

y yo

u ne

ver u

se w

ith n

/a)

(Mar

k “X

” in

box

that

bes

t des

crib

es th

e fr

eque

ncy

with

whi

ch y

ou se

ek

out t

he se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er)

b.

H

ow a

dequ

ate

was

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

you

rece

ived

for d

iagn

osis

? D

id th

ey w

ork

out t

he c

ause

of y

our p

robl

em?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 - E

xcel

lent

c.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed to

impl

emen

t pra

ctic

al c

ontro

l and

trea

tmen

t for

the

prob

lem

? W

ere

they

abl

e to

fix

the

prob

lem

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Exc

elle

nt

d.

H

ow ti

mel

y w

as th

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ed?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - T

oo sl

ow

Scor

e 2

- Som

etim

es a

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Ade

quat

e

e.

How

cos

t eff

ectiv

e is

the

serv

ice

offe

red?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3,4,

5 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - I

t is f

ree-

but

wou

ld p

ay m

arke

t rat

e if

requ

ired

Scor

e 2

- It i

s fre

e- w

ould

not

use

if h

ad to

pay

Sc

ore

3 - C

ost b

enef

icia

l: se

rvic

e m

ore

than

pay

s for

itse

lf Sc

ore

4 - C

ost n

eutra

l Sc

ore

5 - T

oo e

xpen

sive

- min

imis

e us

e du

e to

cos

t con

cern

s


R

ank

orde

r Fr

eque

ncy

of se

rvic

e us

e D

iagn

ostic

T

echn

ical

A

dequ

acy

Tre

atm

ent

tech

nica

l ad

equa

cy

-

Tim

elin

ess

Cos

t ef

fect

iven

ess

AA

H S

ervi

ce

prov

ider

1-

11

Nev

er

Onc

e a

year

T

hree

m

onth

ly

Mon

thly

W

eekl

y 1,

2,3

1,2,

3 1,

2,3

1,2,

3,4,

5

Self-

taug

ht (i

nter

net

reso

urce

s, te

xtbo

oks)

Gov

t. ex

tens

ion

offic

er (n

on-v

et)

Gov

t vet

erin

ary

offic

er

Gov

t aqu

acul

ture

m

anag

er

Gov

t lab

orat

ory

inc

CSI

RO

Priv

ate

labo

rato

ry

Priv

ate

vete

rinar

ian

with

spec

ial i

nter

est

in fi

sh

Priv

ate

non-

vete

rinar

y aq

uatic

an

imal

hea

lth

cons

ulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

In h

ouse

R

esea

rche

rs

Res

earc

hers

in

othe

r ins

titut

es


6.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

r res

earc

h st

aff w

ith tr

aini

ng in

the

requ

ired

AA

H a

reas

?

No,

trai

ning

una

vaila

ble

Yes

, but

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th

Yes

, suf

ficie

nt

Ex

ampl

es o

f tra

inin

g: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

.. 7.

H

ow w

ould

you

pre

fer t

o in

corp

orat

e m

ore

AA

H se

rvic

es in

to y

our r

esea

rch

team

, if r

equi

red?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

es w

ith “

X”)

Trai

ning

exi

stin

g re

sear

ch st

aff

H

iring

new

trai

ned

rese

arch

staf

f

Enha

nce

train

ing

for g

ovt f

ield

/ ext

ensi

on o

ffic

ers

U

se c

ontra

ctor

s on

an a

s nee

ds b

asis

Serv

ice

not r

equi

red

8.

D

o yo

u fe

el y

our r

esea

rch

oper

atio

ns w

ould

ben

efit

from

impr

oved

AA

H in

put?

V

ery

unlik

ely

Unl

ikel

y Po

ssib

ly

Lik

ely

Def

inite

ly

9.

H

as y

our r

esea

rch

prog

ram

eve

r exp

erie

nced

sign

ifica

nt lo

sses

/pro

ject

inte

rrup

tions

due

to h

ealth

/dis

ease

pro

blem

s?

Y

es

No

10. W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n th

at y

our

busi

ness

/indu

stry

util

ises

? (e

.g. V

eter

inar

y ad

vice

, Lab

orat

ory

serv

ices

) to

assi

st in

sele

ctin

g su

itabl

y qu

alifi

ed p

erso

ns to

und

erta

ke A

AH

w

ork

for y

our r

esea

rch

proj

ects

. Y

es

No

Unc

erta

in


Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) Sur

vey

Que

stio

ns to

Rec

reat

iona

l Fis

hing

Indu

stry

Sta

keho

lder

s

1.

a.

Do

you

utili

se, o

r or a

re y

ou c

urre

ntly

aw

are

of a

ny im

pact

s of a

quat

ic a

nim

al h

ealth

(AA

H) s

ervi

ces o

n yo

ur in

dust

ry se

ctor

? (M

ark

mos

t ap

prop

riate

box

with

“X

” fo

r eac

h se

rvic

e.)

b.

Fr

eque

ncy

Scor

e 1

- Nev

er

Scor

e 2

- onc

e a

year

Sc

ore

3 - f

our t

imes

a y

ear

Scor

e 4

- mon

thly

Sc

ore

5 - w

eekl

y

AA

H S

ervi

ces

Yes

N

o N

o, b

ut w

ould

like

to a

cces

s, if

serv

ice

was

ava

ilabl

e Fr

eque

ncy

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

Inve

stig

atio

n of

fish

kill

s/ si

ck lo

okin

g fis

h e.

g. p

aras

ites;

EU

S sk

in le

sion

s .

Pr

otec

tion

from

exo

tic d

isea

se in

curs

ion

Pre-

rele

ase

heal

th c

ertif

icat

ion

of fi

sh fo

r res

tock

ing

prog

ram

s

C

ontro

l of A

AH

in a

quac

ultu

re e

nter

pris

es th

at h

ave

an o

pen

inte

rfac

e w

ith th

e w

ild

fishe

ry

Fish

rele

ase

prog

ram

Fi

sh w

elfa

re

Wat

er q

ualit

y co

ntro

l, e.

g. a

cid

sulfa

te so

il ru

n-of

f man

agem

ent,

pollu

tion,

pes

ticid

es

run-

off

Res

trict

ion

on m

ovem

ent o

f boa

ts, g

ear d

ue to

dis

ease

spre

ad th

reat

D

isea

se re

late

d fis

hery

impa

cts i

nclu

ding

clo

sure

s

Fo

od sa

fety

, e.g

. oys

ters

are

safe

to c

onsu

me

Bai

t con

trols

: ille

gal t

o m

ove

som

e ba

its b

etw

een

loca

tions

, ris

ks a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith u

se o

f im

porte

d pr

oduc

ts (p

raw

ns, p

ilcha

rds,

herr

ing)

for b

ait


2.

Who

do

you

expe

ct to

pro

vide

AA

H se

rvic

es to

the

recr

eatio

nal f

ishi

ng in

dust

ry?

(Mar

k al

l app

ropr

iate

pro

vide

rs w

ith “

X”)

Com

mon

wea

lth

Gov

ernm

ent

Gov

ernm

ent

Lab

orat

ory

(inc.

CSI

RO

)

Stat

e G

over

nmen

t Fi

sher

ies

man

agem

ent

Priv

ate

sect

or

Vet

erin

aria

ns

Mar

ine

biol

ogis

ts

Tac

kles

hop

prop

riet

ors

Uni

vers

ity

3.

a.

W

hat s

kills

do

you

requ

ire/e

xpec

t the

serv

ice

prov

ider

to h

ave

to m

eet y

our A

AH

nee

ds?

Sc

ore

1 - n

ot re

quire

d at

all

Scor

e 2

- Bas

ic sk

ill

Scor

e 3

- Mod

erat

e sk

ill

Scor

e 4

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill

Scor

e 5

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill a

nd a

dvan

ced

expe

rienc

e

C

omm

on-w

ealth

G

ovt.

Gov

t. L

ab. I

nc.

CSI

RO

Stat

e G

ovt.

Fish

erie

s M

anag

e-m

ent

Priv

ate

Vet

erin

-ari

an

with

inte

rest

in

fish

Mar

ine

biol

ogis

t (o

ther

aqu

atic

an

imal

hea

lth

prof

essi

on-a

l)

Tac

kle-

shop

op

erat

ors

Uni

ver-

sity

Skill

s Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) Sk

ill le

vel

(1-5

) A

bilit

y to

thor

ough

ly in

vest

igat

e a

dise

ase

outb

reak

incl

udin

g fie

ld

inve

stig

atio

n

Abi

lity

to c

olle

ct re

leva

nt

epid

emio

logi

cal i

nfor

mat

ion

abou

t th

e ou

tbre

ak

Col

lect

app

ropr

iate

sam

ples

to

faci

litat

e an

inve

stig

atio

n

Abi

lity

to u

nder

take

a c

ompe

tent

la

bora

tory

inve

stig

atio

n in

an

accr

edite

d la

b

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret l

abor

ator

y re

sults


and

prov

ide

man

agem

ent o

ptio

ns

Aw

aren

ess o

f gov

ernm

ent

regu

latio

ns, i

n re

latio

n to

dia

gnos

is o

f di

seas

e, fo

od sa

fety

, and

dis

ease

re

porti

ng re

quire

men

ts

Up

to d

ate

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

in

tern

atio

nal d

isea

ses o

f im

porta

nce

and

requ

irem

ent f

or re

porti

ng e

xotic

di

seas

e in

curs

ions

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent a

bi

osec

urity

pla

n fo

r pro

tect

ion

from

di

seas

e th

reat

s fro

m o

utsi

de th

e St

ate

Abi

lity

to d

iagn

ose

dise

ase

A

bilit

y to

des

ign

and

unde

rtake

pr

otoc

ols f

or d

etec

tion

of d

isea

se in

fis

h fo

r sto

ckin

g pr

ogra

ms

Res

earc

h sk

ills t

o in

vest

igat

e ne

gativ

e im

pact

s of r

ecre

atio

nal f

ishi

ng su

ch

as h

ooki

ng m

orta

lity,

cat

ch a

nd

rele

ase

durin

g th

e br

eedi

ng se

ason

an

d th

e im

pact

s of o

ther

act

iviti

es o

n th

e su

stai

nabi

lity

of th

e re

crea

tiona

l fis

hery

(e.g

. aqu

acul

ture

eff

luen

t, ur

ban

sew

age

efflu

ent)

4.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee


5.

a.

Who

pro

vide

s the

se se

rvic

es to

you

r ind

ustry

and

how

freq

uent

ly?

(Ran

k pr

ovid

ers f

rom

thos

e yo

u w

ould

con

tact

firs

t, th

roug

h to

thos

e yo

u co

ntac

t las

t (1-

12))

(M

ark

“X”

in b

ox th

at b

est d

escr

ibes

the

freq

uenc

y w

ith w

hich

you

seek

out

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed fo

r dia

gnos

is?

Did

they

wor

k ou

t the

cau

se o

f you

r pro

blem

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

- Goo

d

c.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e re

spon

se to

impl

emen

t pra

ctic

al c

ontro

l and

trea

tmen

t for

the

prob

lem

? W

ere

they

abl

e to

fix

the

prob

lem

? (P

lace

sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 - G

ood

d.

H

ow ti

mel

y w

as th

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

ed?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - T

oo sl

ow

Scor

e 2

- Som

etim

es a

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

– A

dequ

ate

e.

H

ow c

ost e

ffec

tive

was

the

serv

ice

offe

red?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3,4,

5 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - I

t was

free

- but

wou

ld p

ay m

arke

t rat

e if

requ

ired

Scor

e 2

- It w

as fr

ee- w

ould

not

use

if h

ad to

pay

Sc

ore

3 - C

ost b

enef

icia

l: se

rvic

e m

ore

than

pay

s for

itse

lf Sc

ore

4 - C

ost n

eutra

l Sc

ore

5 - T

oo e

xpen

sive

- min

imis

e us

e du

e to

cos

t con

cern

s


R

ank

orde

r Fr

eque

ncy

of se

rvic

e us

e D

iagn

ostic

T

echn

ical

A

dequ

acy

Con

trol

res

pons

e te

chni

cal a

dequ

acy

-

Tim

elin

ess

C

ost

effe

ctiv

enes

s

AA

H S

ervi

ce p

rovi

der

1-12

N

ever

O

nce

a ye

ar

Thr

ee

mon

thly

M

onth

ly

Wee

kly

1,2,

3 1,

2,3

1,2,

3 1,

2,3,

4,5

Self-

taug

ht

Oth

er fi

sher

men

Ta

ckle

shop

pro

prie

tor

Gov

t. ex

tens

ion

offic

er

Gov

t vet

erin

ary

offic

er

Gov

t aqu

acul

ture

man

ager

G

ovt l

abor

ator

y in

c.

CSI

RO

Priv

ate

labo

rato

ry

Priv

ate

vete

rinar

ian

with

sp

ecia

l int

eres

t in

fish

Priv

ate

non-

vete

rinar

y aq

uatic

ani

mal

hea

lth

cons

ulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

Res

earc

her

6.

Wha

t AA

H o

utco

me

are

you

seek

ing?

Des

ired

Out

com

es

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

Min

imal

impa

ct o

f exi

stin

g di

seas

es o

n su

stai

nabi

lity

of w

ild fi

sh

stoc

ks

Prot

ectio

n fr

om in

curs

ion

of n

ew e

nzoo

tic/e

xotic

dis

ease

s

Iden

tify

thre

ats f

rom

indu

stry

/ agr

icul

ture

and

dev

elop

and

im

plem

ent p

rote

ctio

n m

easu

res

Ensu

re a

quac

ultu

re p

ract

ices

do

not s

prea

d di

seas

es in

to w

ild fi

sher

y

Ensu

re m

axim

um su

rviv

al o

f cat

ch a

nd re

leas

e fis

h

Ensu

re a

ny st

ocki

ng p

rogr

ams d

eliv

ery

cost

eff

ectiv

e fis

hery

en

hanc

emen

t, w

ithou

t det

rimen

tal i

mpa

cts o

n th

e ec

osys

tem

s


7.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

r bus

ines

s with

trai

ning

in th

e re

quire

d A

AH

are

as?

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

and

spec

ify p

rogr

ams,

if an

y)

N

o, tr

aini

ng u

nava

ilabl

e Y

es, b

ut in

suff

icie

nt d

epth

Y

es, s

uffic

ient

Sp

ecify

trai

ning

pro

gram

s tha

t you

kno

w o

f: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

.. Sp

ecify

trai

ning

pro

gram

s you

wou

ld e

nrol

in:…

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

8.

H

ow w

ould

you

pre

fer t

o in

corp

orat

e m

ore

AA

H se

rvic

es in

to y

our i

ndus

try?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

es w

ith “

X”)

Trai

ning

Tac

kles

hop

prop

rieto

rs

En

hanc

e tra

inin

g fo

r gov

t fie

ld o

ffic

ers

R

un tr

aini

ng c

ours

es fo

r the

pub

lic e

.g. f

ishc

are

volu

ntee

rs

Use

con

tract

ors o

n an

as n

eeds

bas

is

M

ore

serv

ice

not r

equi

red

9.

W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n th

at y

our i

ndus

try

utili

ses?

(e.g

. Vet

erin

ary

advi

ce, L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

es) t

o as

sist

in se

lect

ing

suita

bly

qual

ified

per

sons

to u

nder

take

wor

k fo

r the

indu

stry

.

Yes

N

o U

ncer

tain


Surv

ey Q

uest

ions

to W

ild C

aptu

re (P

rofe

ssio

nal f

ishi

ng) I

ndus

try,

and

Sea

food

Impo

rter

sta

keho

lder

s 1.

a.

D

o yo

u re

quire

any

of t

he a

quat

ic a

nim

al h

ealth

(AA

H) s

ervi

ces b

elow

, in

your

indu

stry

sect

or c

urre

ntly

? (M

ark

all a

ppro

pria

te b

oxes

w

ith “

X”)

.

b.

Freq

uenc

y of

serv

ice

use?

Sc

ore

1 - o

nce

a ye

ar

Scor

e 2

- fou

r tim

es a

yea

r Sc

ore

3 - m

onth

ly

Scor

e 4

- wee

kly

Scor

e 5

- all

the

time

c.

W

ould

you

, or y

our e

mpl

oyee

s, pa

rtici

pate

in fo

rmal

trai

ning

in a

ny o

f the

se se

rvic

e ar

eas i

f off

ered

? (A

nsw

er Y

es o

r No)

AA

H S

ervi

ces

Not

use

d/ n

ot r

equi

red

Fr

eque

ncy

of u

se

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

Not

use

d, b

ut w

ould

be

use

ful i

f ser

vice

w

as a

vaila

ble

Ext

ra tr

aini

ng

requ

ired

(Y

es/N

o)

Inve

stig

atio

n of

fish

kill

s/ si

ck lo

okin

g aq

uatic

ani

mal

s e.

g. sk

in le

sion

s-re

d sp

ot, d

eath

s in

live

hold

ing

tank

s, sk

in d

isco

lour

atio

n, c

otto

ntai

l in

praw

ns

Surv

eilla

nce

for e

xotic

dis

ease

incu

rsio

n e.

g.

Whi

tesp

ot v

irus (

WSV

) in

praw

ns, V

iral H

aem

orha

gic

Sept

icae

mia

(VH

S) in

impo

rted

baitf

ish

Dev

elop

men

t of Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

/Con

trol p

roto

cols

fo

r liv

e fis

h ho

ldin

g/pr

oces

sing

pla

nts

Mar

ket a

cces

s / p

rote

ctio

n th

roug

h di

seas

e ce

rtific

atio

n, im

port

risk

asse

ssm

ent (

clai

m d

isea

se

free

dom

) e.g

. Req

uire

test

ing

on im

porte

d ra

w b

ait

(pra

wns

/cra

b ba

it/pi

lcha

rds)

due

to d

isea

se tr

ansf

er

risks

Con

trol o

f AA

H in

aqu

acul

ture

ent

erpr

ises

that

hav

e an

op

en in

terf

ace

with

the

wild

fish

ery

to a

void

spre

ad o

f di

seas

e fr

om a

quac

ultu

re to

the

wild

fish

ery

Tran

sloc

atio

n ce

rtific

atio

n - m

ovin

g liv

e fis

h be

twee

n


area

s, fo

r res

tock

ing/

ranc

hing

pro

gram

s, liv

e fis

h ha

rves

t and

tran

spor

tatio

n.

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

wel

fare

adv

ice

Wat

er q

ualit

y co

ntro

l, e.

g. a

cid

sulfa

te so

il ru

n-of

f m

anag

emen

t, po

llutio

n, p

estic

ides

run-

off,

heav

y m

etal

re

sidu

e

Res

trict

ion

on m

ovem

ent o

f boa

ts o

r gea

r due

to

dise

ase

spre

ad th

reat

(e.g

. for

aba

lone

in-b

etw

een

perk

insu

s inf

ecte

d zo

nes i

n N

SW)

Dis

ease

rela

ted

impa

cts o

n fis

hery

via

bilit

y e.

g.

asso

ciat

ed w

ith c

losu

res o

r sto

ck re

duct

ion

(pilc

hard

ki

ll, a

balo

ne d

ie-o

ff)

Food

safe

ty, e

.g. s

hellf

ish

are

safe

to c

onsu

me,

ci

guat

era,

alg

al to

xins

, sco

mbr

otox

ins i

n tu

na/m

acke

rel,

flesh

qua

lity

prob

lem

s fro

m p

aras

ites

like

kudo

a.

2.

a.

Wha

t ski

lls d

o yo

u re

quire

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

to h

ave

to m

eet y

our A

AH

nee

ds in

the

com

mer

cial

wild

cap

ture

, sea

food

impo

rtatio

n in

dust

ry?

Sc

ore

1 - n

ot re

quire

d at

all

Scor

e 2

- Bas

ic sk

ill -u

sed

rare

ly (o

nce

a ye

ar)

Scor

e 3

- Bas

ic sk

ill u

sed

regu

larly

Sc

ore

4 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d oc

casi

onal

ly

Scor

e 5

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

regu

larly

b.

For e

ach

of th

e sk

ills,

scor

e ho

w m

uch

stud

y/tra

inin

g yo

u w

ould

exp

ect a

com

pete

nt in

divi

dual

to u

nder

take

, to

perf

orm

opt

imal

ly fo

r the

co

mm

erci

al fi

shin

g in

dust

ry, s

eafo

od im

porta

tion

busi

ness

. Sc

ore

1 - T

wo

day

cour

se

Scor

e 2

- One

wee

k co

urse

Sc

ore

3 - O

ne se

mes

ter c

ours

e Sc

ore

4 - O

ne y

ear d

iplo

ma

Scor

e 5

- Uni

vers

ity d

egre

e an

d fie

ld e

xper

ienc

e


St

ate

Gov

t Fi

sher

ies

Com

plia

nce

Off

icer

Stat

e G

ovt

Fish

erie

s M

anag

emen

t

Priv

ate

vete

rina

rian

or

cons

ulta

nt

Gov

t lab

orat

ory

staf

f inc

CSI

RO

In

hou

se st

aff

Sk

ill

leve

l 1-

5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

5

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

5

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

5

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

5

Skill

le

vel

1-5

Am

t of

trai

ning

1-

5 Fi

eld

skill

s Th

orou

ghly

inve

stig

ate

a di

seas

e ou

tbre

ak o

n si

te

Rec

ogni

se si

ck a

nim

als

Abi

lity

to c

olle

ct re

leva

nt e

pide

mio

logi

cal i

nfor

mat

ion

abou

t the

out

brea

k

Col

lect

app

ropr

iate

(fis

h/w

ater

/alg

ae) s

ampl

es to

faci

litat

e an

inve

stig

atio

n

L

abor

ator

y sk

ills

Und

erta

ke a

com

pete

nt la

bora

tory

inve

stig

atio

n in

an

accr

edite

d la

b

R

apid

, rel

iabl

e ac

cura

te te

stin

g ca

paci

ty to

exc

lude

exo

tic d

isea

ses f

rom

im

porte

d pr

oduc

t

Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret l

abor

ator

y re

sults

and

pro

vide

scie

nce-

base

d m

anag

emen

t opt

ions

Dia

gnos

e di

seas

e ou

tbre

aks

Polic

y Sk

ills

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f nat

iona

l and

inte

rnat

iona

l dis

ease

s of i

mpo

rtanc

e

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f ris

k m

anag

emen

t of d

isea

se th

reat

s (or

thre

aten

ing

proc

esse

s suc

h as

aci

d-su

lfate

run-

off,

and

salin

isat

ion

of th

e M

urra

y D

arlin

g) p

osed

by

impo

rted

prod

ucts

, dom

estic

aqu

acul

ture

and

oth

er

impa

cts o

n th

e do

mes

tic fi

sher

y

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent a

bio

secu

rity

plan

for p

rote

ctio

n fr

om

dise

ase

thre

ats f

rom

out

side

the

Stat

e

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d un

derta

ke p

roto

cols

for d

etec

tion

of d

isea

se in

fish

fo

r sto

ckin

g pr

ogra

ms

Res

earc

h sk

ills t

o in

vest

igat

e po

tent

ial i

mpa

cts o

n th

e fis

hery

from

di

seas

e/po

or a

quat

ic a

nim

al h

ealth

(e.g

. due

to a

quac

ultu

re e

fflu

ent,

urba

n se

wag

e ef

fluen

t, re

crea

tiona

l cat

ch a

nd re

leas

e im

pact

s dur

ing

bree

ding

se

ason

s)


3.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

r sta

ff w

ith tr

aini

ng in

the

requ

ired

AA

H a

reas

?

No,

trai

ning

una

vaila

ble

Yes

, but

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th

Yes

, suf

ficie

nt

Sp

ecify

trai

ning

opt

ions

: ……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

…..

4.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

5.

a.

W

ho p

rovi

des t

hese

serv

ices

to y

our i

ndus

try/b

usin

ess c

urre

ntly

and

how

freq

uent

ly?

(Ran

k pr

ovid

ers f

rom

thos

e yo

u w

ould

con

tact

firs

t th

roug

h to

thos

e yo

u co

ntac

t las

t (1-

10) -

mar

k an

y yo

u ne

ver u

se w

ith n

/a)

(Mar

k “X

” in

box

that

bes

t des

crib

es th

e fr

eque

ncy

with

w

hich

you

seek

out

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed fo

r dia

gnos

is?

Did

they

wor

k ou

t the

cau

se o

f the

pro

blem

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in

box)

Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 - G

ood

c.

H

ow a

dequ

ate

was

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

you

rece

ived

to im

plem

ent p

ract

ical

con

trol a

nd tr

eatm

ent f

or th

e pr

oble

m?

Wer

e th

ey a

ble

to

fix th

e pr

oble

m?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 - G

ood


d.

How

tim

ely

was

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Too

slow

Sc

ore

2 - S

omet

imes

ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 -A

dequ

ate

e.

H

ow c

ost e

ffec

tive

is th

e se

rvic

e of

fere

d? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3,

4,5

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- It i

s fre

e- b

ut w

ould

pay

mar

ket r

ate

if re

quire

d Sc

ore

2 - I

t is f

ree-

wou

ld n

ot u

se if

had

to p

ay

Scor

e 3

- Cos

t ben

efic

ial:

serv

ice

mor

e th

an p

ays f

or it

self

Scor

e 4

- Cos

t neu

tral

Scor

e 5

- Too

exp

ensi

ve- m

inim

ise

use

due

to c

ost c

once

rns

Ran

k or

der

Freq

uenc

y of

serv

ice

use

Dia

gnos

tic

Tec

hnic

al

Ade

quac

y

Tre

atm

ent

tech

nica

l ad

equa

cy

-

Tim

elin

ess

Cos

t ef

fect

iven

ess

Off

Far

m A

AH

Ser

vice

pro

vide

r 1-

10

Nev

er

Onc

e a

year

T

hree

m

onth

ly

Mon

thly

W

eekl

y 1,

2,3

1,2,

3 1,

2,3

1,2,

3,4,

5

Self

taug

ht (i

nter

net,

text

book

s)

Oth

er p

rofe

ssio

nal f

ishe

rmen

G

ovt.

com

plia

nce

offic

er

Gov

t vet

erin

ary

offic

er

Gov

t aqu

acul

ture

man

ager

G

ovt l

abor

ator

y in

c C

SIR

O

Priv

ate

labo

rato

ry

Priv

ate

vete

rinar

ian

with

spec

ial i

nter

est

in fi

sh

Priv

ate

non-

vete

rinar

y aq

uatic

ani

mal

he

alth

con

sulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

Res

earc

her


6.

Has

an

AA

H p

robl

em e

ver a

ffec

ted

your

bus

ines

s thr

ough

inab

ility

to fi

sh (e

.g. c

losu

res)

or u

nsal

eabl

e ca

tch

(e.g

. red

spot

), in

abili

ty to

acc

ess

bait

(due

to q

uara

ntin

e re

stric

tion)

? 7.

W

hat A

AH

out

com

e ar

e yo

u se

ekin

g? (M

ark

“X”

in a

ppro

pria

te b

ox in

eac

h ro

w)

D

esir

ed O

utco

mes

St

rong

ly d

isag

ree

Dis

agre

e U

ncer

tain

A

gree

St

rong

ly a

gree

M

inim

al im

pact

of e

xist

ing

dise

ases

on

sust

aina

bilit

y of

wild

fis

h st

ocks

Prot

ectio

n fr

om in

curs

ion

of n

ew e

nzoo

tic/e

xotic

dis

ease

s

Mai

ntai

n A

ustra

lia’s

“cl

ean

gree

n” re

lativ

ely

dise

ase

free

stat

us

for m

arke

ting

edge

Dis

ease

free

stat

us o

n pr

oduc

t to

faci

litat

e m

arke

t acc

ess a

nd

prot

ect d

omes

tic m

arke

t pos

ition

Ensu

re a

quac

ultu

re p

ract

ices

do

not s

prea

d di

seas

es in

to w

ild

fishe

ry

8.

How

wou

ld y

ou p

refe

r to

inco

rpor

ate

mor

e A

AH

serv

ices

into

you

r ind

ustry

? (M

ark

appr

opria

te b

oxes

with

“X

”)

Tr

aini

ng p

rofe

ssio

nal f

ishe

rmen

Enha

nce

train

ing

for g

ovt f

ield

off

icer

s

Use

con

tract

ors o

n an

as n

eeds

bas

is

N

o m

ore

serv

ice

requ

ired

9.

W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n th

at y

our i

ndus

try

utili

ses?

(e.g

. Vet

erin

ary

advi

ce, L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

es) t

o as

sist

in se

lect

ing

suita

bly

qual

ified

per

sons

to u

nder

take

wor

k fo

r the

indu

stry

.

Yes

N

o

Yes

N

o


Surv

ey Q

uest

ions

to A

quac

ultu

re F

eed

Indu

stry

1.

a.

W

hat s

kills

are

requ

ired

to fu

lfil y

our b

usin

ess r

equi

rem

ents

for A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

(AA

H)?

(For

eac

h sk

ill, m

ark

mos

t app

ropr

iate

bo

x w

ith “

X”)

b.

Can

you

acc

ess s

uffic

ient

info

rmat

ion

in th

is sk

ill a

rea?

(Ans

wer

Yes

or N

o)

Sk

ill

Not

re

quir

ed

Bas

ic sk

ill -

used

rar

ely

(onc

e a

year

)

Bas

ic sk

ill

used

reg

ular

ly

Adv

ance

d sk

ill

used

occ

asio

nally

A

dvan

ced

skill

us

ed r

egul

arly

Is

info

rmat

ion

avai

labl

e?

(Yes

/No)

U

nder

stan

ding

of t

he im

pact

of n

utrit

ion

on

fish

heal

th

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f im

pact

s of t

he fo

rmul

atio

n an

d pr

oces

sing

/ m

anuf

actu

ring

on

nutri

tiona

l val

ue

Gov

ernm

ent r

egul

ator

s req

uire

kno

wle

dge

of

dise

ase

trans

loca

tion

risks

pos

ed b

y do

mes

tic a

nd in

tern

atio

nal m

ovem

ent o

f st

ock

feed

.

Res

earc

h in

to im

prov

ed fe

ed fo

rmul

atio

ns

that

impr

ove

fish

heal

th u

nder

aqu

acul

ture

co

nditi

ons

Und

erst

andi

ng th

e im

pact

of f

eed

stor

age

and

diet

ary

dete

riora

tion

on fi

sh h

ealth

Abi

lity

to u

nder

stan

d sc

ient

ific

rese

arch

pa

pers

on

nutri

tion

and

addi

tives

that

can

im

pact

on

AA

H.


2.

Do

you

utili

se, o

r hav

e an

y aq

uatic

ani

mal

hea

lth (A

AH

) ser

vice

s im

pact

on

your

indu

stry

sect

or c

urre

ntly

? M

ark

“X”

in m

ost a

ppro

pria

te

box.

AA

H S

ervi

ces

Yes

N

o N

o, b

ut w

ould

like

to if

serv

ice

was

av

aila

ble

Res

trict

ion

or S

cree

ning

test

s on

impo

rted

cons

titue

nts o

f fee

d, o

r im

porte

d w

hole

feed

Die

t for

mul

atio

n ad

vice

soug

ht to

max

imis

e fis

h he

alth

Prem

ix a

dditi

ves s

uppl

y (e

.g. p

robi

otic

s, im

mun

omod

ulat

ors,

antib

iotic

s)

En

surin

g fe

ed h

as n

ot b

een

asso

ciat

ed w

ith lo

sses

whe

re it

has

bee

n im

plic

ated

in a

dis

ease

out

brea

k

Nut

ritio

nal r

esea

rch

on fo

rmul

atio

n fo

r im

prov

ed fi

sh h

ealth

and

on

addi

tives

for e

nhan

cing

fish

hea

lth

and

resi

stan

ce to

dis

ease

Oth

er (s

peci

fy)

3.

Hav

e yo

u or

you

r fee

d m

ill st

aff r

ecei

ved

educ

atio

n to

acq

uire

the

AA

H sk

ills t

hey

curr

ently

pos

sess

? (M

ark

each

box

with

“X

” an

d sp

ecify

w

hich

inst

itutio

n pr

ovid

ed th

e tra

inin

g (e

.g. U

TAS,

Flin

ders

, Dea

kin,

Spe

ncer

TA

FE, N

atfis

h et

c)

Sour

ce o

f Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth E

duca

tion

and

Tra

inin

g O

pera

tor

leve

l O

n-th

e-jo

b T

rain

ing

TA

FE (i

nclu

ding

Sea

food

In

dust

ry T

rain

ing

Pack

age)

U

nive

rsity

Farm

han

d st

aff

Fa

rm m

anag

er

Fi

sh h

ealth

vet

or c

onsu

ltant

(if u

sed)


4.

How

rele

vant

hav

e th

e of

f-fa

rm A

AH

edu

catio

n &

trai

ning

com

pone

nts b

een

for p

ract

ical

app

licat

ion

to th

e fe

ed b

usin

ess?

(Mar

k w

ith “

X”,

or

leav

e lin

e bl

ank

if no

t app

licab

le to

you

r situ

atio

n)

Irre

leva

nt

Rel

evan

t but

of

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th to

be

of v

alue

Rel

evan

t but

req

uire

d m

odifi

catio

n to

be

of

prac

tical

val

ue o

n th

e fa

rm

Rel

evan

t, qu

ickl

y ap

plic

able

to

wor

k on

farm

to m

aint

ain

curr

ent A

AH

stan

dard

s

Hig

hly

Rel

evan

t and

in

crea

sed

the

AA

H

stan

dard

s on

the

farm

Se

afoo

d In

dust

ry

Trai

ning

Pac

kage

TAFE

Uni

vers

ity

Aqu

acul

ture

deg

ree

Uni

vers

ity v

eter

inar

y de

gree

Oth

er tr

aini

ng (p

leas

e sp

ecify

)

5.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

6.

a.

W

ho p

rovi

des t

hese

serv

ices

to y

our b

usin

ess?

(Mar

k “X

” if

use

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed?

i.e. W

ere

the

ques

tions

you

ask

ed a

ble

to b

e an

swer

ed?

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

– Ex

celle

nt


c.

How

tim

ely

was

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? Sc

ore

1 - T

oo sl

ow

Scor

e 2

- Som

etim

es a

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

– A

dequ

ate

d.

H

ow c

ost e

ffec

tive

is th

e se

rvic

e of

fere

d?

Scor

e 1

- It i

s fre

e- b

ut w

ould

pay

mar

ket r

ate

if re

quire

d Sc

ore

2 - I

t is f

ree-

wou

ld n

ot u

se if

had

to p

ay

Scor

e 3

- Cos

t ben

efic

ial:

serv

ice

mor

e th

an p

ays f

or it

self

Scor

e 4

- Cos

t neu

tral

Scor

e 5

- Too

exp

ensi

ve- m

inim

ise

use

due

to c

ost c

once

rns

Se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er

Use

serv

ice

Tec

hnic

al k

now

ledg

e(1

,2,3

) T

imel

ines

s(1

,2,3

) C

ost e

ffec

tive

(1,2

,3,4

,5)

No

serv

ices

soug

ht

No

serv

ice

avai

labl

e

Se

lf-ta

ught

/ pu

blis

hed

liter

atur

e / i

nter

net

Oth

er fe

ed in

dust

ry m

embe

rs

Gov

ernm

ent e

xten

sion

/ vet

erin

ary

offic

er

Labo

rato

ry (i

nc. C

SIR

O)

Res

earc

hers

Pr

ivat

e ve

terin

ary

cons

ulta

nt

Uni

vers

ity

Oth

er (s

peci

fy)

7.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

/ you

r sta

ff w

ith tr

aini

ng in

the

requ

ired

AA

H a

reas

?

No,

trai

ning

una

vaila

ble

Yes

, but

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th

Yes

, suf

ficie

nt

Spec

ify c

ours

es y

ou a

re a

war

e of

:……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

….


8.

Do

you

feel

you

r bus

ines

s wou

ld b

enef

it fr

om im

prov

ed A

AH

inpu

t?

V

ery

unlik

ely

Unl

ikel

y Po

ssib

ly

Lik

ely

Def

inite

ly

9.

H

ow w

ould

you

pre

fer t

o in

corp

orat

e A

AH

serv

ices

into

you

r ope

ratio

ns?

Tr

aini

ng e

xist

ing

staf

f

Hire

new

staf

f who

hav

e be

en tr

aine

d

Use

con

tract

ors o

n an

as n

eeds

bas

is

Se

rvic

e no

t req

uire

d

10. W

ould

you

like

to se

e a

min

imum

com

pete

ncy/

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

bro

ught

into

the

area

s of A

AH

serv

ice

prov

isio

n th

at y

our i

ndus

try

utili

ses?

(Vet

erin

ary

advi

ce, L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

es) t

o as

sist

in se

lect

ing

suita

bly

qual

ified

per

sons

to u

nder

take

wor

k fo

r you

r ind

ustry

. Wou

ld

you

use

such

an

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

to fi

nd a

ppro

pria

tely

trai

ned

peop

le to

ass

ist?

Yes

N

o


Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth (A

AH

) Sur

vey

Que

stio

ns to

Orn

amen

tal F

ish

Indu

stry

1.

a.

D

oes y

our b

usin

ess u

se a

ny o

f the

Aqu

atic

Ani

mal

Hea

lth S

ervi

ces?

Mar

k m

ost a

ppro

pria

te b

ox w

ith “

X”

for e

ach

serv

ice.

b.

Freq

uenc

y Sc

ore

1 - o

nce

a ye

ar

Scor

e 2

- fou

r tim

es a

yea

r Sc

ore

3 - m

onth

ly

Scor

e 4

- wee

kly

Scor

e 5

- all

the

time

AA

H S

ervi

ces

Yes

N

o N

o, b

ut w

ould

like

to a

cces

s, if

serv

ice/

skill

s wer

e av

aila

ble

Freq

uenc

y (1

,2,3

,4,5

) A

war

enes

s of s

igns

of s

ickn

ess

Col

lect

sam

ples

to fa

cilit

ate

a di

seas

e in

vest

igat

ion

Sele

ct a

nd a

dmin

iste

r con

trol a

nd tr

eatm

ent

Kee

ping

reco

rds o

f fis

h he

alth

G

ener

al fe

edin

g an

d ha

ndlin

g

In h

ouse

serv

ices

(i.

e. y

ou a

nd y

our

staf

f)

Wat

er q

ualit

y m

easu

rem

ent a

nd in

terp

reta

tion

Impo

rt R

isk

Ass

essm

ent

Mar

ket a

cces

s thr

ough

dis

ease

cer

tific

atio

n un

derta

ken

by a

n ov

erse

as a

utho

rity

Insp

ectio

n of

impo

rted

fish

by A

QIS

D

omes

tic su

rvei

llanc

e fo

r inc

ursi

on o

f exo

tic d

isea

se a

t Sta

te b

y St

ate

leve

l

Gov

ernm

ent

serv

ices

Dom

estic

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r tra

nslo

catio

n of

fish

with

in A

ustra

lia (e

.g. g

oldf

ish

into

Tas

man

ia)

Fiel

d In

vest

igat

ion

of si

ckne

ss o

f mor

talit

y ev

ent

Para

site

iden

tific

atio

n

H

isto

path

olog

y (m

icro

scop

ic e

xam

inat

ion

of ti

ssue

s to

dete

rmin

e ca

use

of

sick

ness

)

Bac

teria

l cul

ture

and

iden

tific

atio

n, a

ntib

iotic

sens

itivi

ty te

stin

g

Pr

ovis

ion

of d

isea

se c

ontro

l, pr

even

tion

and

treat

men

t adv

ice

Supp

ly o

f pha

rmac

eutic

als i

nclu

ding

ant

ibio

tics a

nd p

aras

itici

des

Fiel

d an

d L

abor

ator

y A

quat

ic A

nim

al

Hea

lth S

ervi

ces

Dev

elop

men

t of f

arm

/sho

p di

seas

e pr

even

tion

plan

(bio

secu

rity

mea

sure

s)


2.

Whe

re h

ave

your

farm

staf

f (yo

u in

clud

ed) r

ecei

ved

educ

atio

n to

acq

uire

the

AA

H sk

ills t

hey

curr

ently

pos

sess

? (M

ark

each

box

with

“X

” an

d sp

ecify

whi

ch in

stitu

tion

prov

ided

the

train

ing

(e.g

. UTA

S, F

linde

rs, D

eaki

n, S

penc

er T

AFE

, Nat

fish

etc)

So

urce

of A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

Edu

catio

n an

d T

rain

ing

Ope

rato

r le

vel

On-

the-

job

Tra

inin

g T

AFE

(inc

ludi

ng S

eafo

od

Indu

stry

Tra

inin

g Pa

ckag

e)

Uni

vers

ity

Farm

han

d st

aff

Fa

rm m

anag

er

Fi

sh h

ealth

vet

or

cons

ulta

nt (i

f use

d)

3.

a.

Wou

ld y

ou u

nder

take

trai

ning

cou

rses

(for

you

rsel

f or s

taff

) cov

erin

g th

is sk

ill a

rea

if th

ey w

ere

mad

e av

aila

ble?

(Ans

wer

Yes

or N

o)

b.

W

hat s

kills

do

you

requ

ire th

e se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er to

hav

e to

mee

t you

r AA

H n

eeds

? (P

lace

scor

e in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - n

ot re

quire

d at

all

Scor

e 2

- Bas

ic sk

ill -u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

3 - B

asic

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

Scor

e 4

- Adv

ance

d sk

ill u

sed

occa

sion

ally

Sc

ore

5 - A

dvan

ced

skill

use

d re

gula

rly

c.

Fo

r eac

h of

the

skill

s, sc

ore

how

muc

h st

udy/

train

ing

you

wou

ld e

xpec

t a c

ompe

tent

indi

vidu

al to

und

erta

ke, t

o pe

rfor

m o

ptim

ally

for t

he

orna

men

tal f

ish

indu

stry

/you

r bus

ines

s. Sc

ore

1 - T

wo

day

cour

se

Scor

e 2

- One

wee

k co

urse

Sc

ore

3 - O

ne se

mes

ter c

ours

e Sc

ore

4 - O

ne y

ear d

iplo

ma

Scor

e 5

– U

nive

rsity

deg

ree

(Vet

erin

ary

Scie

nce,

Mar

ine

Bio

logy

)


Aqu

aris

t (in

clud

es

aqua

rium

shop

ow

ners

)

Stat

e/C

omm

-on

wea

lth G

ovt

Fish

erie

s M

anag

emen

t

Gov

ernm

ent

exte

nsio

n se

rvic

e L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

e Pr

ivat

e ve

teri

nari

an o

r A

AH

con

sulta

nt

T

rain

ing

need

ed

(Y/N

)

Skill

le

vel

(1-5

)

Am

t of

trai

ning

(1

-5)

Skill

le

vel

(1-5

)

Am

t of

trai

ning

(1

-5)

Skill

le

vel

(1-5

)

Am

t of

trai

ning

(1

-5)

Skill

le

vel

(1-5

)

Am

t of

trai

ning

(1

-5)

Skill

le

vel

(1-5

)

Am

t of

trai

ning

(1

-5)

Fiel

d sk

ills

Aw

aren

ess o

f sig

ns

of si

ckne

ss

Abi

lity

to th

orou

ghly

in

vest

igat

e a

dise

ase

outb

reak

incl

udin

g fie

ld/s

hop

inve

stig

atio

n

colle

ctin

g ac

cura

te

info

rmat

ion

abou

t th

e ou

tbre

ak,

colle

ctio

n of

di

agno

stic

sam

ples

Abi

lity

to p

rovi

de a

di

seas

e di

agno

sis

Abi

lity

to d

esig

n an

d im

plem

ent

prev

entio

n/co

ntro

l an

d tre

atm

ent

stra

tegi

es to

m

inim

ise

dise

ase

impa

cts

Lab

orat

ory

skill

s R

apid

, rel

iabl

e ac

cura

te la

bora

tory

te

stin

g ca

paci

ty to

ex

clud

e ex

otic

di

seas

es a

nd id

entif

y ca

usat

ive

agen

t in

orna

men

tal f

ish.


Abi

lity

to in

terp

ret

lab

test

resu

lts

Wat

er q

ualit

y te

stin

g

Polic

y/G

ovt M

anag

emen

t ski

lls

Cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of in

tern

atio

nal

dise

ase

thre

ats t

hat

can

be tr

ansl

ocat

ed

by o

rnam

enta

l fis

h

Abi

lity

of

Gov

ernm

ent t

o m

aint

ain

a na

tiona

l su

rvei

llanc

e an

d re

porti

ng sy

stem

for

dete

ctio

n of

new

di

seas

e ou

tbre

aks/

incu

rsio

ns,

whi

ch a

ccur

atel

y re

flect

the

stat

us o

f aq

uatic

ani

mal

di

seas

es in

Aus

tralia

Reg

ulat

ory

know

ledg

e of

risk

as

sess

men

t pro

cess

in

clud

ing

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res t

o fa

cilit

ate

inte

rnat

iona

l and

do

mes

tic tr

ade

Lice

ncin

g an

d su

rvei

llanc

e of

aq

uacu

lture

faci

litie

s to

ens

ure

they

do

not

cont

amin

ate/

infe

ct

the

wild

fish

ery

from

th

eir o

pera

tions


4.

Use

of A

AH

serv

ices

is li

kely

to in

crea

se in

the

next

5-1

0 ye

ars.

(Mar

k “X

” in

app

ropr

iate

box

in re

spon

se to

this

stat

emen

t)

Stro

ngly

dis

agre

e D

isag

ree

Unc

erta

in

Agr

ee

Stro

ngly

agr

ee

5.

a.

H

ave

you

had

the

need

to se

ek p

rofe

ssio

nal l

evel

AA

H se

rvic

es fr

om o

ff th

e fa

rm, i

f so

from

whe

re a

nd h

ow fr

eque

ntly

? (R

ank

prov

ider

s fr

om th

ose

you

wou

ld c

onta

ct fi

rst,

thro

ugh

to th

ose

you

cont

act l

ast (

1-11

) - m

ark

any

you

neve

r use

with

n/a

) (M

ark

“X”

in b

ox th

at b

est

desc

ribes

the

freq

uenc

y w

ith w

hich

you

seek

out

the

serv

ice

prov

ider

)

b.

How

ade

quat

e w

as th

e te

chni

cal k

now

ledg

e yo

u re

ceiv

ed fo

r dia

gnos

is?

Did

they

wor

k ou

t the

cau

se o

f you

r pro

blem

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Poo

r Sc

ore

2 - A

dequ

ate

Scor

e 3

– Ex

celle

nt

c.

H

ow a

dequ

ate

was

the

tech

nica

l kno

wle

dge

you

rece

ived

to im

plem

ent p

ract

ical

con

trol a

nd tr

eatm

ent f

or th

e pr

oble

m?

Wer

e th

ey a

ble

to

fix th

e pr

oble

m?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - P

oor

Scor

e 2

- Ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 –

Exce

llent

d.

How

tim

ely

was

the

serv

ice

prov

ided

? (P

lace

scor

e 1,

2,3

in b

ox)

Scor

e 1

- Too

slow

Sc

ore

2 - S

omet

imes

ade

quat

e Sc

ore

3 –

Ade

quat

e


e.

How

cos

t eff

ectiv

e is

the

serv

ice

offe

red?

(Pla

ce sc

ore

1,2,

3,4,

5 in

box

) Sc

ore

1 - I

t is f

ree-

but

wou

ld p

ay m

arke

t rat

e if

requ

ired

Scor

e 2

- It i

s fre

e- w

ould

not

use

if h

ad to

pay

Sc

ore

3 - C

ost b

enef

icia

l: se

rvic

e m

ore

than

pay

s for

itse

lf Sc

ore

4 - C

ost n

eutra

l Sc

ore

5 - T

oo e

xpen

sive

- min

imis

e us

e du

e to

cos

t con

cern

s

R

ank

orde

r Fr

eque

ncy

of se

rvic

e us

e D

iagn

ostic

T

echn

ical

A

dequ

acy

Tre

atm

ent

tech

nica

l ad

equa

cy

-

Tim

elin

ess

Cos

t ef

fect

iven

ess

Off

Far

m A

AH

Ser

vice

pr

ovid

er

1-11

N

ever

Onc

e a

year

T

hree

m

onth

ly

Mon

thly

W

eekl

y 1,

2,3

1,2,

3 1,

2,3

1,2,

3,4,

5

Self-

taug

ht

Oth

er a

quar

ists

G

ovt.

exte

nsio

n of

ficer

(non

-vet

)

G

ovt v

eter

inar

y of

ficer

G

ovt a

quac

ultu

re m

anag

er

Gov

t lab

orat

ory

(inc.

CSI

RO

)

Pr

ivat

e la

bora

tory

Pr

ivat

e ve

terin

aria

n w

ith sp

ecia

l in

tere

st in

fish

Priv

ate

non-

vete

rinar

y aq

uatic

an

imal

hea

lth c

onsu

ltant

Uni

vers

ity

Res

earc

her

6.

Are

you

aw

are

of a

ny e

duca

tiona

l pro

gram

s in

Aus

tralia

that

are

abl

e to

pro

vide

you

r sta

ff w

ith tr

aini

ng in

the

requ

ired

AA

H a

reas

?

No,

trai

ning

una

vaila

ble

Yes

, but

insu

ffic

ient

dep

th

Yes

, suf

ficie

nt

Ex

ampl

es o

f tra

inin

g: …

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

……

..


7.

Do

you

feel

you

r bus

ines

s wou

ld b

enef

it fr

om im

prov

ed A

AH

inpu

t?

Ver

y un

likel

y U

nlik

ely

Poss

ibly

L

ikel

y D

efin

itely

8.

Has

you

r aqu

acul

ture

bus

ines

s exp

erie

nced

sign

ifica

nt lo

sses

due

to h

ealth

/dis

ease

pro

blem

s?

Y

es

No

9.

How

wou

ld y

ou p

refe

r to

inco

rpor

ate

mor

e A

AH

serv

ices

into

you

r bus

ines

s/in

dust

ry?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

es w

ith “

X”)

Trai

ning

Aqu

ariu

m sh

op p

ropr

ieto

rs

En

hanc

e tra

inin

g fo

r gov

t fie

ld o

ffic

ers

R

un tr

aini

ng c

ours

es fo

r the

priv

ate

aqua

rists

/ or

nam

enta

l fis

h fa

rmer

s

Use

con

tract

ors o

n an

as n

eeds

bas

is

R

un tr

aini

ng c

ours

es fo

r im

port

quar

antin

e op

erat

ors

Serv

ice

not r

equi

red

10

. Wou

ld y

ou li

ke to

see

a m

inim

um c

ompe

tenc

y/ac

cred

itatio

n st

anda

rd b

roug

ht in

to th

e ar

eas o

f AA

H se

rvic

e pr

ovis

ion

that

you

r bu

sine

ss/in

dust

ry u

tilis

es?

(e.g

. Vet

erin

ary

advi

ce, L

abor

ator

y se

rvic

es) t

o as

sist

in se

lect

ing

suita

bly

qual

ified

per

sons

to u

nder

take

wor

k fo

r yo

ur b

usin

ess/

indu

stry

.

Yes

N

o U

ncer

tain


Surv

ey o

f Uni

vers

ity u

nder

grad

uate

cou

rses

whi

ch in

clud

e si

gnifi

cant

AA

H c

ompo

nent

s 1.

Fi

ll in

tabl

e be

low

to re

pres

ent a

ll ed

ucat

ion

and

train

ing

in A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

subj

ect a

reas

with

in th

e co

urse

s tha

t you

r ins

titut

ion

offe

rs. (

If a

subj

ect i

s tau

ght,

with

out s

peci

fic re

fere

nce

to fi

sh a

lthou

gh th

e ge

nera

l prin

cipl

es o

f the

subj

ect d

o ap

ply,

ple

ase

note

thos

e ho

urs

in p

aren

thes

es.

a.

No.

of h

ours

of l

ectu

res o

f eac

h su

bjec

t b.

N

o. o

f hou

rs o

f pra

ctic

al c

lass

es in

eac

h su

bjec

t c.

G

radi

ng o

f the

ant

icip

ated

skill

leve

l acq

uire

d by

the

grad

uate

Subj

ect

Lec

ture

hou

rs

Prac

tical

cla

ss h

ours

B

asic

In

term

edia

te

Adv

ance

d/ sp

ecia

list

Epid

emio

logy

Bio

logy

Ana

tom

y

Med

icin

e

Phys

iolo

gy

Ph

arm

acol

ogy

Pa

thol

ogy

V

irolo

gy

M

olec

ular

bio

logy

Imm

unol

ogy

Pa

rasi

tolo

gy

Fi

eld

obse

rvat

ion

and

reco

rdin

g

Cer

tific

atio

n/co

mpe

tent

aut

horit

y

Wat

er q

ualit

y/ch

emis

try a

sses

smen

t

Alg

al id

entif

icat

ion

N

utrit

ion

O

ther

(spe

cify

)


2.

Wha

t ski

lls d

o yo

u an

ticip

ate

stud

ents

will

acq

uire

in A

AH

?

Lev

el o

f ski

ll ac

quir

ed th

roug

h ed

ucat

ion

cour

se

AA

H S

kills

Sk

ill N

ot

acqu

ired

G

ener

al

awar

enes

s of

issu

es o

nly

Bas

ic sk

ills w

ith

no p

ract

ical

ex

peri

ence

pr

ovid

ed

Soun

d sk

ills

with

som

e pr

actic

al

expe

rien

ce

Adv

ance

d sk

ills

with

con

side

rabl

e pr

actic

al e

xper

ienc

e

Kee

ping

fish

hea

lth re

cord

s

Rec

ogni

se d

isea

sed

fish-

Def

ine

clin

ical

sign

s

Des

crib

e ap

pear

ance

of g

ross

le

sion

s

Col

lect

app

ropr

iate

sam

ples

to

faci

litat

e in

vest

igat

ion

Gen

erat

e a

diff

eren

tial d

iagn

osis

lis

t

Abi

lity

to c

hoos

e an

app

ropr

iate

co

ntro

l, pr

even

tion

and

treat

men

t pla

n

Abi

lity

to a

dmin

iste

r app

ropr

iate

tre

atm

ents

Des

ign

a fa

rm b

iose

curit

y pl

an

H

isto

path

olog

y –

desc

ribe

mic

rosc

opic

tiss

ue c

hang

es in

di

seas

ed fi

sh

Mic

robi

olog

y –

iden

tify

mic

ro-

orga

nism

ass

ocia

ted

with

fish

di

seas

e

Mol

ecul

ar B

iolo

gy –

abi

lity

to

deve

lop

and

run

mol

ecul

ar

assa

ys o

n fis

h pa

thog

ens

Para

sito

logy

- abi

lity

to id

entif

y pa

rasi

tes o

n fis

h

Viro

logy

– a

bilit

y to

und

erta

ke

cell

cultu

re a

nd id

entif

y vi

ral

path

ogen

s


Alg

al id

entif

icat

ion

(toxi

c an

d nu

tritio

nal a

lgae

)

Wat

er q

ualit

yan

alys

is

Und

erst

and

legi

slat

ive

requ

irem

ents

of m

akin

g a

dise

ase

diag

nosi

s and

pro

vidi

ng

ther

apeu

tic tr

eatm

ent a

dvic

e

Und

erst

and

envi

ronm

enta

l and

fo

od sa

fety

issu

es a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith a

pplic

atio

n of

trea

tmen

ts

Und

erst

and

zoon

otic

dis

ease

ris

ks

Aw

aren

ess o

f the

Nat

iona

l Lis

t of

repo

rtabl

e di

seas

es

Aw

aren

ess o

f Sta

te le

gisl

atio

n re

quiri

ng re

porti

ng a

nd

inve

stig

atio

ns o

f sus

pect

exo

tic

dise

ase

outb

reak

s

3.

Wha

t pos

ition

(s) d

o yo

u pe

rcei

ve th

e A

AH

skill

s tau

ght w

ill e

quip

stud

ents

for i

n th

e w

orkf

orce

? M

ark

all r

elev

ant b

oxes

with

“X

”

Gra

duat

ion

job

posi

tions

A

AH

edu

catio

n an

d tr

aini

ng p

rovi

ded

Fa

rm h

and

Fa

rm m

anag

er

La

bora

tory

dia

gnos

ticia

n

Gov

ernm

ent A

AH

man

agem

ent

Pr

ivat

e V

eter

inar

ian

A

quat

ic a

nim

al h

ealth

pos

t-gra

duat

e re

sear

cher

(P

hD st

uden

t)


4.

Cou

rse

emph

asis

on

AA

H su

bjec

ts is

like

ly to

incr

ease

in th

e ne

xt 5

-10

year

s. (M

ark

“X”

in a

ppro

pria

te b

ox in

resp

onse

to th

is st

atem

ent)

St

rong

ly d

isag

ree

Dis

agre

e U

ncer

tain

A

gree

St

rong

ly a

gree

5.

Hav

e yo

u re

ques

ted

and

rece

ived

any

dire

ct in

dust

ry in

put t

o yo

ur A

AH

cur

ricul

a? (M

ark

appr

opria

te b

ox w

ith “

X”)

Yes

No

6.

W

ould

you

see

sign

ifica

nt b

enef

it in

dev

elop

men

t of a

com

preh

ensi

ve N

atio

nal V

eter

inar

y C

urric

ula

for A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

with

tra

nsfe

rabl

e m

odul

es w

ith th

e su

bjec

t are

as o

utlin

ed a

bove

? Th

is m

ater

ial w

ould

be

avai

labl

e as

a N

atio

nal r

esou

rce.

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

w

ith “

X”)

Y

es

N

o

7.

Wou

ld y

ou li

ke to

see

a m

inim

um c

ompe

tenc

y/ac

cred

itatio

n st

anda

rd b

roug

ht in

to th

e ar

eas o

f AA

H se

rvic

e pr

ovis

ion

that

you

r ins

titut

ion

teac

hes t

o m

ake

valid

com

paris

ons o

f uni

ts b

etw

een

inst

itutio

ns?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

with

“X

”)

Y

es

N

o

8.

Ref

lect

ing

the

dive

rsity

of i

ndus

tries

util

isin

g A

AH

serv

ices

, the

pro

pose

d A

AH

cur

ricul

a w

ould

com

pris

e a

gene

ral s

ectio

n pl

us sp

ecia

lised

in

dust

ry c

ompo

nent

s dev

elop

ed in

col

labo

ratio

n w

ith th

e m

ajor

indu

strie

s. Th

is w

ould

faci

litat

e in

stitu

tions

teac

hing

mat

eria

l rel

evan

t to

the

impo

rtant

indu

strie

s of t

heir

geog

raph

ic re

gion

. Is t

his a

ppro

ach

cons

ider

ed a

ppro

pria

te?

(Mar

k ap

prop

riate

box

with

“X

”)

Y

es

N

o (p

leas

e st

ate

alte

rnat

ives

)


9.

Wou

ld y

our i

nstit

utio

n su

ppor

t the

setti

ng u

p of

a si

ngle

cen

tre o

f exc

elle

nce

for A

AH

edu

catio

n an

d tra

inin

g in

Aus

tralia

, as w

as

reco

mm

ende

d in

the

McS

hane

repo

rt 20

04?

This

sing

le c

entre

wou

ld p

rovi

de b

oth

in d

epth

und

ergr

adua

te tr

aini

ng o

ptio

ns in

AA

H a

nd p

ost-

grad

uate

spec

ialis

atio

n in

cer

tain

are

as o

f AA

H. T

he p

ost-g

radu

ate

train

ing

oppo

rtuni

ties a

re e

nvis

aged

to b

e of

equ

al tr

ansf

erab

le v

alue

be

twee

n un

iver

sitie

s, w

hich

wou

ld n

ot b

e re

quiri

ng o

f a d

egre

e? P

ost g

radu

ate

oppo

rtuni

ties w

ould

like

ly b

e of

fere

d in

a m

odul

e fo

rmat

for

flexi

ble

lear

ning

. (M

ark

appr

opria

te b

ox w

ith “

X”)

Yes

No

10

. Pro

file

of st

aff w

ho te

ach

AA

H?

T

ype

of e

xper

ienc

e Y

ears

of e

xper

ienc

e H

ands

on

com

mer

cial

indu

stry

exp

erie

nce

on o

pera

tion

with

>$2

00K

turn

over

AA

H re

sear

ch p

roje

ct

A

quat

ic A

nim

al D

iagn

ostic

Lab

orat

ory

Le

ctur

ing

A

quac

ultu

re o

r bio

logy

deg

ree

11

. Wou

ld y

ou u

tilis

e cu

rric

ulum

mat

eria

l dev

elop

ed b

y an

othe

r ins

titut

ion?

Yes

No

12

. Wou

ld y

ou c

ontri

bute

to c

urric

ulum

dev

elop

men

t?

Y

es

N

o


13. W

ould

you

util

ise

acad

emic

serv

ices

pro

vide

d by

ano

ther

vet

erin

ary

scho

ol, f

or e

xam

ple

a ve

terin

ary

acad

emic

?

Yes

No


APP

END

IX 2

: A

dditi

onal

NA

AH

-TW

G s

urve

y of

Sta

te a

nd C

omm

onw

ealth

Gov

ernm

ent f

ull t

ime

equi

vale

nt s

taff

requ

irem

ents

to c

over

va

rious

legi

slat

ive

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

for A

quat

ic A

nim

al H

ealth

G

over

nmen

t are

a of

A

AH

nee

d Pr

escr

ibed

res

pons

ibili

ties

Spec

ific

aqua

tic h

ealth

task

s req

uire

d of

Gov

ernm

ent

Est

. cu

rren

t FT

E

Est

. re

quir

ed

FTE

Est

. fut

ure

(10

year

s)

FTE

†

Dev

elop

men

t of A

AH

pol

icie

s A

sses

smen

t and

issu

e of

leas

es a

nd

licen

ces

Dev

elop

men

t of c

ondi

tions

that

lic

ence

s and

leas

es w

ill b

e su

bjec

t to

Ef

ficie

nt a

dmin

istra

tion

of th

e ac

t R

equi

res l

icen

ce h

olde

rs to

pro

vide

pe

riodi

c re

ports

R

epor

ting

on th

e ad

min

istra

tion

of

the

Act

Dev

elop

men

t of A

AH

pol

icy

Ass

essm

ent o

f hea

lth im

plic

atio

ns o

f new

aqu

acul

ture

lice

nces

an

d le

ases

D

evel

opm

ent o

f hea

lth a

ssoc

iate

d le

ase

and

licen

ce c

ondi

tions

A

naly

sis o

f rep

orts

from

lice

nce

hold

ers

Dev

elop

men

t of r

epor

ts o

n th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of th

e A

ct

Po

licy

to m

eet v

ario

us

Stat

e G

over

nmen

t le

gisl

ativ

e re

spon

sibi

litie

s

Req

uire

s app

rova

ls fo

r off

-labe

l use

of

che

mic

als

Req

uire

s rep

ortin

g of

unu

sual

ly

high

mor

talit

y ra

tes

Prev

ents

mov

emen

t of d

isea

sed

stoc

k w

ithou

t app

rova

l R

equi

res h

ealth

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r st

ock

to b

e tra

nslo

cate

d to

na

viga

ble

vess

els

Rec

eipt

, ass

essm

ent,

deve

lopm

ent o

f rec

omm

enda

tions

, co

mm

unic

atio

n of

reco

mm

enda

tions

and

adm

inis

tratio

n in

re

spon

se to

requ

ests

for a

ppro

vals

rela

ted

to c

hem

ical

use

, tra

nslo

catio

n, h

ealth

cer

tific

atio

n R

ecei

pt, a

sses

smen

t and

adm

inis

tratio

n of

hea

lth c

ertif

icat

ion


Lice

nces

and

des

crib

es th

e po

wer

s of

Liv

esto

ck In

spec

tors

Es

tabl

ishm

ent o

f a li

st o

f not

ifiab

le

dise

ases

and

con

tam

inan

ts

Prev

entio

n of

mov

emen

t of s

tock

in

fect

ed w

ith n

otifi

able

dis

ease

s or

cont

amin

ants

In

vest

igat

ion

of su

spec

t cas

es o

f no

tifia

ble

dise

ase/

cont

amin

atio

n Pr

oduc

tion

of g

azet

tal n

otic

es to

en

hanc

e th

e ob

ject

ives

of t

he A

ct

Emer

genc

y re

spon

se a

ctiv

ities

M

aint

enan

ce o

f not

ifiab

le d

isea

ses/

cont

amin

ants

list

R

ecei

pt a

nd a

naly

sis o

f sur

veill

ance

dat

a Pr

oduc

tion

of g

azet

te n

otic

es

Con

trol o

f tra

nslo

catio

n of

stoc

k fr

om w

ithin

and

out

side

the

Stat

e.

Rec

eipt

of d

ocum

enta

tion

for t

rans

loca

tions

A

sses

smen

t of t

rans

loca

tions

Pr

oduc

tion

of a

ppro

vals

and

oth

er c

orre

spon

denc

e A

sses

smen

t of p

erio

dic

retu

rns a

gain

st

Adm

inis

tratio

n of

a fr

amew

ork

for

the

lega

l har

vest

of w

ild fi

sh

Ass

essm

ent o

f lic

ence

app

licat

ions

invo

lvin

g ra

nchi

ng

Ass

essm

ent o

f bro

odst

ock

colle

ctio

n re

ques

ts

Con

trol o

f exo

tic fi

sh sp

ecie

s in

clud

ing

aqua

rium

spec

ies

Ass

essm

ent o

f lic

ence

app

licat

ions

invo

lvin

g ex

otic

spec

ies

Ass

essm

ent o

f tra

nslo

catio

ns o

f exo

tic sp

ecie

s

Task

s re

leva

nt to

the

inte

nt o

f leg

isla

tion

Gov

t are

a of

AA

H

need

O

bjec

tives

/ du

ties o

f car

e T

asks

car

ried

out

by

Gov

ernm

ent

Est

. cu

rren

t FT

E

Est

. re

quir

ed

FTE

Est

. fut

ure

(10

year

s)

FTE

.A

quac

ultu

re

deve

lopm

ent a

nd

man

agem

ent

Effic

ient

adm

inis

tratio

n of

the

Act

To

man

age

the

deve

lopm

ent a

nd o

pera

tion

of

the

aqua

cultu

re in

dust

ry in

a su

stai

nabl

e m

anne

r

Aqu

atic

ani

mal

hea

lth a

ctiv

ity re

view

s D

evel

opm

ent o

f an

indu

stry

-gov

ernm

ent w

orki

ng

grou

p R

esid

ue su

rvei

llanc

e st

udie

s Ec

otox

icol

ogy

stud

ies o

n m

edic

ines

of i

nter

est

Hat

cher

y ce

rtific

atio

n pr

ogra

m -

deve

lopm

ent a

nd

impl

emen

tatio

n Em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

exe

rcis

es


Aqu

acul

ture

de

velo

pmen

t Ex

tens

ion

serv

ice

D

eliv

er o

n fa

rm tr

ansf

er o

f res

earc

h fin

ding

s, pr

ovid

e as

sist

ance

with

AA

H is

sues

Tr

ansf

er in

form

atio

n fr

om th

e fie

ld to

man

agem

ent

on A

AH

issu

es- s

urve

illan

ce in

put.

Stat

e G

ovt

com

mitm

ents

to

Nat

iona

l pro

gram

s

Con

trol o

f not

ifiab

le d

isea

se/c

onta

min

ants

C

ontro

l of m

ovem

ent o

f sto

ck

Parti

cipa

tion

in N

AA

H-T

WG

/ A

AH

C

Aqu

atic

ani

mal

hea

lth c

omm

unic

atio

n st

rate

gy

Parti

cipa

tion

in A

QU

APL

AN

Impo

rt ris

k as

sess

men

t Em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

exe

rcis

es

Fish

erie

s co

nser

vatio

n C

ontro

l of e

xotic

fish

spec

ies i

nclu

ding

aq

uariu

m sp

ecie

s In

vest

igat

ion

of w

ild fi

sh k

ills

Hea

lth a

nd su

stai

nabi

lity

revi

ews o

f lis

ts o

f de

velo

pmen

ts in

volv

ing

exot

ic fi

sh

Und

erta

ke fu

ll in

vest

igat

ion

of re

porte

d fis

h ki

lls

Labo

rato

ry A

AH

di

agno

stic

serv

ices

Id

entif

icat

ion

of c

ause

s of d

isea

se in

aq

uacu

lture

and

wild

fish

erie

s, as

sist

ance

with

de

velo

pmen

t of c

ontro

l stra

tegy

. A

ssis

tanc

e w

ith te

stin

g to

com

ply

with

pre

-tra

nslo

catio

n te

stin

g re

quire

men

ts

Vac

cine

man

ufac

ture

Dia

gnos

tic, r

efer

ral a

nd te

stin

g se

rvic

es fo

r co

mm

erci

al su

bmis

sion

s and

rese

arch

. R

esid

ue te

stin

g W

ater

Qua

lity

test

ing

Alg

al id

entif

icat

ion

Cer

tific

atio

n

Serv

ices

C

omm

unic

atio

n w

ith p

olic

y/fis

herie

s & a

quac

ultu

re

man

ager

s and

CV

O’s

sign

ifica

nt fi

ndin

gs. T

echn

ical

de

tail

for q

uarte

rly su

rvei

llanc

e re

port.


Com

plia

nce

activ

ities

G

ovt A

rea

of A

AH

N

eed

Obj

ectiv

es /

dutie

s of c

are

Tas

ks c

arri

ed o

ut b

y G

over

nmen

t E

st.

curr

ent

FTE

Est

. re

quir

ed

FTE

Est

. fut

ure

(10y

ears

) FT

E

Com

plia

nce

in

Aqu

acul

ture

, co

mm

erci

al a

nd

recr

eatio

nal

fishe

ries

Enfo

rcem

ent o

f all

legi

slat

ion

asso

ciat

ed w

ith

aqua

cultu

re. M

ovem

ent c

ontro

ls o

f eq

uipm

ent/s

tock

bet

wee

n di

seas

e zo

nes

Gen

eral

com

plia

nce

/ enf

orce

men

t

Tot

al


Documents

FINAL REPORT - FRDC · FINAL REPORT Aquatic Animal Health Subprogram: ... TAFE Technical and Further Education UTAS University of Tasmania FRDC Project No. 2005/641 Page 2 of 132