Bold takeaway: the Albanese government rushed to pass pro-industry laws for Tasmanian salmon farming even after new scientific concerns warned about serious environmental impacts. And this is the part most people miss: the evidence suggested urgent reconsideration, not a swift legislative push.
A recent round of freedom-of-information documents reveals that, in late 2024, Australia's environment department advised the government to revoke a 2012 decision permitting further expansion of salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour, on Tasmania’s west coast. The recommendation called for a fresh assessment under national environment law, citing substantial new information about the industry’s effects on two key assets: the endangered Maugean skate (an ancient ray-like species) and the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area, portions of which lie within the harbour.
Officials suggested that Minister Tanya Plibersek could overturn the Gillard-era decision that the farming expansion did not require a full environmental review, and instead initiate an inquiry that might constrain or pause farming activity in the harbour.
The new information indicated the eased oxygen levels caused by salmon farming were harming the skate’s habitat, behavior, physiology, and population. The report also warned that these reduced oxygen levels could undermine the natural heritage values protected by the World Heritage designation.
This advice responded to a 2023 request from three environmental groups urging the government to reconsider the 2012 decision. Nevertheless, the Labor government rejected the department’s recommendation and introduced legislation to limit third-party requests to revisit decisions related to development applications.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced to the three Tasmanian salmon producers that the changes would uphold environmental protections while allowing sustainable salmon farming to continue. The bill, backed by the opposition, passed in March 2025.
Later, Murray Watt, who followed Plibersek as environment minister, announced that a reconsideration request from the Australia Institute, the Bob Brown Foundation, and the Environmental Defenders Office had been rejected.
Tasmanian Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson criticized the release of the documents, arguing they show a willingness to ignore internal scientific advice and environmental concerns in favor of protecting the industry. He called the government’s actions a discreditable move that undermined expert guidance.
A government spokesperson defended the decision, stating that the department’s advice came from a single moment in time within a framework that has since changed, and that the government seeks a sustainable salmon industry that protects both jobs and the environment.
Eloise Carr, an anti-farming campaigner and consultant, argued that the industry has never undergone an environmental impact assessment under national law and should face one now.
Allegations from Alistair Allan of the Bob Brown Foundation contended that Prime Minister Albanese chose to rewrite Australia’s environmental rules rather than fulfill a duty to protect endangered wildlife. He urged discussion on the proper approach to environmental protection.
The government declined further comment, noting the decision is currently challenged in federal court by NWTAS for Clean Oceans, a group opposed to salmon farming.
The Maugean skate is endemic to Macquarie Harbour and has been listed as endangered since 2004. In 2024, a government scientific committee warned that skate numbers were extremely low and recommended reducing or removing fish farming to protect the species. A subsequent Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies report suggested the skate population might have rebounded to 2014 levels but remained endangered, underscoring the need for ongoing monitoring.
If you’d like, I can add some examples of how similar industry-environment debates are resolved in other regions, or provide a concise glossary of the key parties and terms involved.
