Introduction
For a long time, natural occurrences like earthquakes, floods, wildfires, and volcanic activities have been blamed for continuous environmental degradation. However, human activities can’t be ignored for their role in environmental degradation. In this case, man has been a key agent in environmental degradation through the process of industrialization whereby large amounts of pollutants are disposed into the surrounding without treatment. The island of Tasmania in Australia is one of the environmentally degraded areas thus posing a potential risk to humankind and aquatic species. Shellfish farming has been poorly managed thus leading to an immense increase in pests and diseases. This paper will discuss the risk of pests and diseases in Tasmania (Baldwin, Et al, 1994).
Discussion
A research carried on Tasmania Island in major shellfish farms showed that there is a serious environmental degradation caused by poor practices in shellfish farming. Despite that, shellfish farming has had significant benefits to the environment in Tasmania, its evident that effects much evident. For instance, farming has led to improved monitoring of the coastal waters as well as the estuarine. This should however not outweigh the major environmental effects which have been identified on the Island. Most significantly, there is a widespread of pests and diseases which have been induced by shellfish farming. This has been caused by the movement of fish across the island thus putting the whole area at a threat (Bell, Et al, 2000).
According to research conducted by Australian/New Zealand Standards for Risk Management; the magnitude of the risks posed by shellfish farming is very high. Specifically, the major environmental risk in Tasmania is the rampant spread of pests and pathogens which is associated with the movement of fish. This is a very potent risk to the people of Tasmania and Australia in general since the pests and diseases can be moved from place to place. Significantly, recreational fishing, commercial fishing, and sea transport are also major agents of transporting pests. In this case, it should be noted that the pests cause killer diseases to human beings as well as other animals in the surrounding (Burger, 2002).
Tasmanian Environmental Impact Board (TEIB) should establish a viable action plan and lay down strategies that will enable comprehensive research and analysis of the impact of this risk. The personnel appointed by this board should carry out comprehensive research to investigate and analyze all the fishing procedures taking place on the Island. In addition, information from previous research should also be incorporated in undertaking the exercise. For instance, the qualitative analysis by the Australian/New Zealand Standards for Risk Management, 1999 should be keenly taken into consideration. Further, the board should ensure the deployment of modern technology in its research as well as the use of competent personnel. With this issue put in place, the board will be able to come up with credible information about the risk of pests and diseases in Tasmania (Jordan, 1990).
There is a great possibility of measurement of the spread and intensity of risk of pests and diseases in Tasmania. In this phenomenon, the team carrying out the study should identify the potentially affected areas as well as the type of pests and diseases in the area. From the research conducted by the New Zealand Standards for Risk Management, the area under thereat of pests is increasing daily. This is due to the movement of the fish and also the movement of people dealing with the stock. It has also been realized that continued movement by people through; commercial fishing, sea transport, and recreational fishing has been a major agent of spread. Generally, this information on the spread of pests and diseases will help in measuring the impact of the risk in Tasmania (Hamilton, 1999).
Currently, various governmental and nongovernmental bodies are intensely working on the control of these risks. Specifically, there is an increased government concern about the risks of pests and diseases; which has led to the formulation of legislation regarding aquaculture. In this aspect, the legislations ensure environmental management and frequent monitoring in order to avoid degradation. Additionally, monitoring of the seabed is also being done through the use of video footage. Despite these efforts, research has revealed that minimum efforts are being executed in curbing the problem since many people have the idea that shellfish farming has little impact on the environment (Baldwin, Et al, 1994).
Basically, research has shown that the risk is poorly managed; whereby this poor management is attributed to a number of factors. Firstly, the government is relatively reluctant in the mitigation process; whereby it doe not provides the necessary resources and support. In this perspective, the legislations are poorly observed under the government’s watch thus making the mitigation process difficult. In addition, people’s attitudes and conduct have been a big challenge to the management of the risk. Most of the people are incorporative in that they are still guided by the idea that fish farming has no impact on the environment. Moreover, the uncontrolled movement of people through recreational activities and sea transport has been a major challenge in controlling the spread of pests (Peterken, 1995).
In order to adequately address the risk of pests and diseases in Tasmania, the following steps should be adopted. Firstly, there should be strict and mandatory water inspection and regulations which will ensure a decrease in risks of pests. Secondly, there should be sufficient baseline ports’ monitoring and regular surveys of all ports. Thirdly, the government should support education programs that will ensure enlightenment of the people on the impacts of environmental degradation. In addition, a Pest Emergency reply Plan should be established. Further, effective monitoring plans should be put in place which will ensure early warning and prevention plans are implemented. Lastly, an effective monitoring plan should ensure the establishment of a complex Pest Management policy (Peterken, 1995).
Conclusion
From the study it has been revealed that man’s activities in Tasmania are posing a great damage to the environment. Poor fishing practices are blamed for the increase of pests and diseases in Tasmania. Finally, for effective restoration and management of the environment; all stakeholders should join their efforts in dealing with the calamity.
References
Baldwin, A., Et al., 1994. Beyond preservation: restoring and inventing landscapes. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
Bell, F., Et al., 2000. A Survey of Contaminated Ground with Illustrative Case Histories Land Degradation and Development. V.11 (5). Pp.419-437.
Burger, J. 2002. Incorporating Ecology and Ecological Risk into Long-Term Stewardship On Contaminated Sites. Remediation. Vol 13 (1) winter. Pp.107-119.
Jordan, W., Et al., 1990. Restoration ecology: A synthetic approach to ecological Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hamilton, J. &. Viscusi, W., 1999. How Costly is “Clean”? An analysis of the Benefits And Costs of Superfund Site Remediation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.V.18/1. Pp.2-27.
Peterken, G. & Hughes, F., 1995. Restoration of floodplain forests in Britain. Forestry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.