Tasmanian Salmon Antibiotic Pollution and Marine Risk
- Helena Constela
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
Tasmanian Salmon Antibiotic Pollution and Marine Risk in Ocean Waters
Tasmania’s coastline and clean waters have long been a haven for marine life — but a new chapter in Tasmanian salmon antibiotic pollution and marine risk erupted beneath the waves. A summer of record salmon farm deaths left rotting carcasses floating in pens and on beaches, highlighting how aquaculture practices can turn pristine waters hazardous.
Faced with this “worst die-off we’ve ever seen” (Industry reports), regulators approved a crazy “solution”: the potent antibiotic florfenicol for the first time in Australian aquaculture.
The same week the APVMA (The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority) granted emergency use, state health officials recommended staying at least 3 km away from salmon pens while it was being dosed (and for 21 days afterward).
In other words, the government kept those farmed animals open to consumption, while warning of contamination near farm cages.
From emergency use to environmental hazard
Florfenicol is a broad-spectrum phenicol antibiotic, and it has never been used in Australian seawater until now.
It was only authorized there as an “emergency” measure after the summer slaughter. Salmon companies had pleaded with the federal APVMA to hurry, and by Nov 7, 2025 the drug was approved through to Aug 2026.
Salmon pens in the D’Entrecasteaux Channel were immediately dosed; within days one big operator reported over 1,133 kg of oxytetracycline used in a fortnight (in addition to florfenicol) to battle the outbreak.
Testing soon revealed the fallout: wild blue mackerel caught near one farm showed oxytetracycline residues 12 times higher than safe limits.
No fishery closures were imposed when florfenicol went into feed. Instead, the Tasmanian Director of Public Health recommended that people “consider not eating fish caught within 3 km of a salmon pen” during treatment and for 21 days after.
In plain English: if you fish or swim near a farm treating fish with antibiotics, you’re asked to avoid it - yet those waters remain open, and that seafood sale remains “legal.”
Communities were told to steer clear of public waterways while private companies pollute
People vs. Profit
Community leaders and scientists immediately flagged the dangers. The Australian Medical Association warned this isn’t just about human health, it’s about “wider marine health”.
The Bob Brown Foundation called the health department’s advice a “public health warning” with no teeth – no fines, no cleanup orders, just a slap on the wrist for farmers. They noted that the multinational owners of Tasmanian salmon basically rule the sea now, dumping drugs with impunity.
On the other side, regulators insist they will monitor the fallout. The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) requires salmon farms to take water, sediment and fish samples during antibiotic use, supposedly to ensure no long-term harm... But by the time samples are taken, hundreds of kilograms will already be in the water.
In just two weeks after approval, official estimates showed around 700 kg of florfenicol dumped into the D’Entrecasteaux Channel, more than 10% of all antibiotics used in Tasmanian aquaculture over the past six years. In fact, Tasmanian salmon farms in two weeks used more florfenicol than Norway’s entire annual average (about 500 kg).
Let that sink in: they used more of this drug in two weeks in Tasmania than the entire Norwegian salmon industry uses in a year.
All this before the long summer season, when warm waters and dense stocks make disease even worse.
Antibiotics in the ocean are a time bomb
Antibiotics are biologically active drugs, in the ocean they can disturb whole ecosystems.
Even tiny concentrations in seawater threaten the relevant ecosystems. They kill or inhibit beneficial marine bacteria and plankton that form the basis of food chains. A recent review found that antibiotic residues in aquatic environments affects the growth and reproduction of marine organisms, and also causes liver toxicity to marine organisms.
Fish, shellfish and larvae exposed to these drugs can suffer stunted growth, organ damage or death.
Here are three key points:
- Ecosystem disruption: Florfenicol doesn’t vanish on contact. It lingers in sediments and currents, spreading through the Channel. Even wild fish far from pens can ingest medicated feed or contaminated prey. Antibiotic residues have been found in wild fish caught 7 km from a farm, at levels deemed “not fit for human consumption”, according to The Guardian. Each pill means fewer microbes to break down waste and more drug residues in the food web.
- Algal blooms: Salmon farms also produce heaps of waste feed and faeces. The antibiotics add to this nutrient load. Coastal blooms now appearing off Tasmania’s east coast are a direct result of excess nutrients and chemicals from intensive farming. Algae and jellyfish thrive in polluted waters, choking out other species.
- Superbugs and public health: Every dose in the sea is a breeding ground for resistance. Global health bodies have constantly warned that antibiotic pollution fuels AMR (antimicrobial resistance), the silent pandemic. The heavy use of florfenicol on wild salmon could create reservoirs of drug-resistant bacteria in our waterways. These “superbugs” could jump from fish to people via seafood or beach water.
Lessons from the past and abroad
This scenario isn’t theoretical. Remember the wild blue mackerel we mentioned earlier? That was In 2024. That year no warnings were issued – people simply didn’t know the beds and bays were contaminated.
Internationally, Chile’s salmon industry offers a grim warning: decades of heavy antibiotic use there contributed to collapsed wild fish populations and barren seascapes. Tasmanian Greens have noted that some farm advisory teams were even imported from Chile, a nation “with a shocking global reputation for the damage it has done to the marine environment, to wild fish populations and to local communities”.
Tasmania now follows Chile’s playbook: quick to use drugs but too slow to prevent environmental collapse.
Even the Environment Protection Authority (EPA)’s own testing has been alarming. The recent Huon Aquaculture report found a dozen-fold exceedance of antibiotic limits in wild fish caught near a salmon lease. Despite so much evidence, regulators’ message has been disingenuous: people were told eating fish “does not raise public health concerns” after dilution.
A choice for Tasmania’s future
The approval of florfenicol in open Tasmanian waters is a warning: industry profit is still being placed above nature’s balance. Politicians and regulators have prioritized emergency fixes for factory farms instead of enforcing disease prevention. Allowing unchecked antibiotics in public waters is a gamble with the coastal ecosystems we all depend on.
Seagrass beds, reefs, and fish populations now face contamination.
We have been told the news: that treating farmed fish with heavy antibiotics could poison the waters of all Tasmania. The science and the people’s voices say the same: this is dangerous territory. If regulators continue to turn a blind eye, future summers may bring not hope for recovery, but the visible decline of marine life once again, just as in Chile’s past.
Tasmania’s wild coast has survived millennia of change. It does not need to become an open sewer for antibiotics.
Our claim and… their useless response
We pushed the APVMA to take urgent action, and they handed back a pile of bureaucratic nothing.
They insist the emergency use of florfenicol is “rigorous, scientific, and safe,” dressed up with a list of supposed “conditions.” But what they didn’t say is the real story. As reported by the Tasmanian Times, Right-to-Information documents reveal half a year of behind-closed-doors coordination between government and industry. Consultants for the salmon industry even drafted parts of the emergency application and prepared justifications for officials to rubber-stamp.
Meanwhile, they downplay public warnings to stay 3 km away from treated pens, the spread of antibiotics into the ocean, the growing risk of resistant bacteria and ecological fallout…
So we’re escalating. We’re demanding that EPA Tasmania, and once again the APVMA, stop this dangerous charade and refuse to bend to industry pressure.
The health of the ocean, our communities, and our future is not negotiable.
Comments