What are the economic prospects of developing aquaculture in Queensland to supply the low price white fillet market? Lessons from the US channel catfish industry

The farming of channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) is the largest (by volume and value) and most successful (in terms of market impact) aquaculture industry in the United States of America. Farmed channel catfish is the most consumed (in terms of volume per capita) fish fillet in the U.S. market. Within Australia, it has long been suggested by researchers and industry that silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) and possibly other endemic teraponid species possess similar biological attributes for aquaculture as channel catfish and may have the potential to generate a similar industry. The current teraponid industry in Australia, however, shows very little resemblance to the catfish industry, either in production style or market philosophy. A well established budget framework from the literature on U.S. channel catfish farming has been adapted for cost and climate conditions of the Burdekin region, Queensland, Australia. Breakeven prices for the hypothetical teraponid farms were found to be up to 50% higher than those published for catfish farms however were much lower than those reported for silver perch production in Australia using current, endemic styles of production. The breakeven prices for the hypothetical teraponid farms were most sensitive (in order of significance) to feed prices, production rates, interest rates, fingerling prices and electricity prices. At equivalent feed costs the costs of production between the hypothetical catfish farms in the Mississippi, U.S. and the hypothetical teraponid farms in the Burdekin, Australia were remarkably similar. The cost of feeds suitable for teraponid production in Australia are currently around double that of catfish feeds in the U.S. Issues currently hindering the development of a large scale teraponid industry in Australia are discussed.

Comparative public support for conserving reptile species is high: Australian evidence and its implications

This paper investigates factors influencing the public’s support for conservation of tropical reptile species in a focal group drawing on Australian data and an experiment involving a sample of the Australian public. The influences of the likeability of the species, their degree of endangerment, ethical considerations as well as knowledge are examined and found to be important. Likeability is found to be much less important than the existing literature suggests. This is highlighted by comparing the likeability of the focal group of reptiles with that for a group of birds and a group of mammals with differences in willingness to pay for their conservation.

Dependence of public support for survival of wildlife species on their likeability

We surveyed a sample of 204 individuals selected from the public in Brisbane, Australia, to ascertain the extent to which they like or dislike 24 species of wildlife present in tropical Australia. The species belong to three classes: mammals, birds and reptiles. We calculated likeability indices for each of these species. We also asked respondents if they favoured the survival of each of these species and so the percentage of respondents favouring survival of each of these species could be calculated. Thus, using linear regression analysis, the percentage of respondents favouring survival of each of the species was related to their indices of likeability. In addition, the data enables the average likeability of species in the three classes (mammals, birds and reptiles) to be compared with the average support for survival of species in each of these three classes. As a result, we are able to assess how important stated likeability seems to be for preferences for survival of species, and to reconsider the hypothesis in the literature that there is likely to be more public support for the survival of mammals than for birds than for reptiles.