Minister made ‘capricious’ demersal ban for political reasons, fishers say in court

Sea Harvest accused the Fisheries Minister of bowing to political pressure over the marine fish ban during a hearing in the state’s highest court.

Fremantle-based Sea Harvest and Seafresh Holdings, trading as Westmore Seafoods, sued the state government and Fisheries Minister Jackie Jarvis in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

A hearing into the dispute began in the WA Supreme Court on Wednesday, with barrister Eric Heenan making opening submissions on behalf of Sea Harvest.

Speaking in court, Mr Heenan claimed there was no scientific evidence for the fishing ban and claimed Ms Jarvis had come up with the idea of ​​closing the Pilbara fishery.

The state government has announced a ban on trawling demersal species, including red emperor and golden bander, on the west coast from January 1.

In their letter against the minister, Sea Harvest and Westmore Seafoods claimed the ban was capricious and unreasonable.

The court was told two seafood companies were trawling in the Pilbara, catching about 74 per cent of the region’s fish.

Mr Heenan told the court Ms Jarvis had gone through a difficult time politically under pressure from the Greens and environmental groups to stop commercial fishing.

“He needs to be seen doing something fishing in the Pilbara,” he said.

“We are not talking about the imminent extinction of the species… [which needs] the most extreme management action.

“There is no evidence that it is necessary to close fisheries or increase fishing. [suggestion] Until the Minister raises the issue… which means the political imperatives of having to be seen to be doing something about west coast fishing.

“This is far outside the scope of where the proportionate exercise of power is intended.”

Mr Heenan claimed there were other methods of regulating stocks, including limiting trawlers’ working hours.

The court was told that it was claimed that the Foreign Office’s own scientific research showed that a 38 per cent reduction in the red emperor fishery was sufficient.

“There is no evidence that anyone has ever told the Minister that you should close the fishery or that you should close the fishery,” Mr Heenan told the court.

“In fact, the evidence suggests the opposite.”

In court, Mr Heenan said the ban had led to an “absurd outcome”.

Mr Heenan claimed the ban made no economic sense because fishing companies were catching undersea species at different rates.

“What is being done here is to target a single sector, a single fishery,” he said.

“Red emperor represents only 4 percent of the fish caught by trawlers.

“When it comes to this issue, one of the big factors why it is so unreasonable to treat the Pilbara the same as the west coast is that they are very different in terms of the makeup of the sectors.

“64 percent of the west coast is made up of recreational fishermen, with the remainder being charter and commercial.

“90 per cent of trawling in the Pilbara is commercial.”

The trial continues.