Background on the Issue

Earlier this year, the Victorian Fisheries Authority (VFA) proposed significant cuts to their staff, as part of broader Victorian Government budget savings.
The plan would retrench 35 VFA staff (about 18% of the agency), with the bulk of layoffs coming from the frontline enforcement team.

Essentially, the proposal replaces existing Fisheries Officers – who are critical in protecting our waterways - with a smaller number of “Fisheries Engagement Officers” focused on education, rather than compliance.
Under this reform, the current 73 Fisheries Officer positions statewide would be slashed to just 36. In the Port Phillip Bay and Western Port Bay region (one of Victoria’s busiest fishing areas), staff would be cut from 27 officers down to only 9 – a 66% reduction in on-the-ground enforcement.
The plan also involves closing five local fisheries offices and replacing them with three public-facing “community hubs”.
Fewer officers on patrol raises serious concerns.
Without proper enforcement, illegal fishing, poaching, and non-compliance could escalate—undermining decades of work to manage fish stocks sustainably.
The proposed cuts would strip back oversight across vast coastal and inland waters. With fewer eyes on the water, Victoria’s fisheries face real and immediate risks. Recreational and commercial fishers, environmental groups, and Traditional Owners have all sounded the alarm.
Hard-won progress in protecting marine life, supporting sustainable fishing, and safeguarding our waterways could be undone—placing both ecosystems and community livelihoods in jeopardy.
In short, the Victorian fisheries department would be gutted. And the impact would ripple across the state—from fishers and seafood businesses to everyday people who enjoy a healthy local catch.
Whether you fish, enjoy seafood, care about the environment, support regional jobs, or simply want future generations to experience Victoria’s waterways as you have—this matters.

who are fisheries officers?

CPSU CAMPAIGN DETAILS

THE FACTS

The proposal would cut the number of Fisheries Officers statewide from 73 down to 36, while also changing their role to “engagement officers”.
In Port Phillip and Western Port Bays – hotspots for fishing – enforcement staff would drop by 66%.

27 officers currently watch over these bays; only 9 would remain. Community leaders warn this will weaken compliance and leave popular fishing spots vulnerable.

Person in marine patrol uniform at boat's control panel, navigating at twilight with digital map display and sea visible through windshield.

It’s not just casual rule-breakers – organised criminal networks are drawn to the lucrative illegal seafood trade.
Abalone and rock lobster, for example, fetch high prices on black markets (one diver can illicitly gather 100kg of abalone worth around $3,000 in just a few hours).
Without a strong deterrent, Victoria’s waters could see a surge in black-market fishing operations.
Law enforcement experts warn that if would-be poachers know there are few officers watching, they will take advantage . This creates a dangerous situation that undercuts legitimate fishers and could even fund other criminal activities.
Victoria boasts a vibrant recreational fishing community – with an estimated 838,000 recreational fishers statewide (over half a million of whom name Port Phillip Bay as their favourite spot).
They collectively contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the economy annually (through gear sales, travel, tourism, fishing licences, etc.).

Fisheries officer inspecting a cage filled with crabs on a boat deck.

Only ~5.3% of Victoria’s coastal waters are fully protected in no-take marine parks and sanctuaries – the lowest of any Australian state. This means the majority of our seas rely on regulated fishing to maintain balance.
Enforcement is the backbone of this regulation. If we diminish the enforcement presence now, we risk undoing progress on marine conservation and failing commitments made to industries (e.g. promises of robust compliance when certain areas were closed to fishing).
Fisheries officers play a crucial role in protecting vulnerable species and breeding grounds. They deter poachers from raiding spawning fish aggregations or over-harvesting shellfish. Iconic creatures like the giant spider crabs (which gather en masse in Port Phillip Bay each winter) and the precious abalone and rock lobster populations depend on oversight to prevent overfishing.
Fisheries Officers have been instrumental in busting large poaching operations and without adequate patrols, illegal hauls will become more frequent, pushing species toward decline.

Numerous fish laid out on the ground next to a boat on a trailer and a black vehicle with a "Seized by Fisheries" sign.

A fisheries officer kneels next to a boat with a sign reading 'Seized by Fisheries.' In front of the boat, several fish are laid out on the floor, alongside fishing rods.

Despite generally good compliance by most fishers, serious rule-breaking is still a big problem.
For example, 56% of inspections in marine parks have detected illegal fishing activity (over half of people checked were doing the wrong thing).
In intertidal zones (e.g. rock pools), up to 58% non-compliance has been recorded for abalone collection.
These numbers show that strong enforcement is still very much needed – and cutting officers now would almost certainly make these figures worse.
The presence of fisheries officers has led to real successes in conservation and safety. Besides curbing poaching, their enforcement of boating safety and catch limits has saved lives and wildlife. (Notably, there was a 50% drop in boating fatalities after officers started enforcing lifejacket rules and safe boating laws.)
They’ve also helped maintain sustainable catch rates – one reason Victorian abalone and lobster fisheries have been able to rebound from past overfishing is the strict compliance monitoring in place.
These successes are at risk if enforcement is scaled back.

Photographers Unknown, all photos sourced via https://www.facebook.com/VictorianFisheries

MORE STATS

MARINE PARKS
& INTERTIDAL ZONES

52% of Victoria’s fisheries inspections (44,401 out of 85,213) in the last 19 months were conducted by just 5 stations—Altona, Mornington, Braeside, Cowes & Queenscliff.

These teams are carrying more than half of the state’s enforcement workload due to high rates of non-compliance in these areas and yet are being shut down.
The limited oversight of Marine Parks highlights the urgent need for more officers in key coastal regions to monitor and protect these critical areas.
Marine Parks are vital for preserving biodiversity and protecting endangered species like abalone, which are particularly susceptible to illegal fishing practices.
With insufficient inspections and patrols, these sensitive ecosystems are exposed to significant threats, jeopardising their long-term health and sustainability.
55% of Marine Park inspections between 1 July 2023 and 12 February 2025 were found to be non-compliant.
27.7% of Intertidal Zone inspections between 1 July 2023 and 12 February 2025 were found to be non-compliant, indicating a notable issue with illegal activities in these critical coastal areas, which are vital habitats for marine life and biodiversity.

Map of marine national parks and sanctuaries in Victoria, Australia, highlighting locations such as Port Phillip Heads, Wilsons Promontory, and various reefs and islands, with Melbourne labeled near the center.

MAXIMISING IMPACT

41 out of 45 fisheries prosecutions in 2024 came from Fisheries Officers.
Note: The Victorian Fisheries Authority’s Investigations team, SIG (soon to be the Major Crimes Unit) contributed just 4 of the 45 prosecutions.
Based on data from that period, key fisheries that see the lowest compliance rates include recreational abalone, Marine National Parks, and intertidal zone fisheries.

Two people examining a large collection of abalone shells arranged on grass at night, illuminated by lights.

13FISH REPORTING LINE

The 13FISH hotline received reports leading to 179 enforcement outcomes and 364 intelligence reports in 2023/2024.
However, due to low Fisheries Officer numbers, 90% of calls went unaddressed, with many lacking actionable information or reporting legal activities.
In 2023/24, 1,830 13FISH calls were received, with only 71 investigations initiated.
The discrepancy between calls and investigations points to the overwhelming workload for current officers, demonstrating the urgent need for more staff to handle this influx of reports.

Numerous oysters arranged on a blue tarp outdoors, with a black container and coiled yellow extension cords nearby.

EXPENSES

🎯 What Was Funded:
- 95,000 kits distributed to Grade 5 students across Victoria.
- Each kit included a rod, reel, tackle tray, basic gear, and educational materials to help kids learn how to fish.
- Promoted as a way to encourage youth participation in fishing, supporting mental health and outdoor activity.
🔍 The Problem:
- While encouraging kids to fish is positive, the scale and cost feel more like a PR-driven election promise than a sustainable investment in the future of fisheries.
  • There’s no clear evidence that these kits lead to long-term engagement or responsible fishing habits.
  • Meanwhile, Fisheries Officers — who could educate kids directly, ensure compliance, and protect the fish stocks those kids rely on — face job losses.
- They have largely found their way into landfill and on Facebook marketplace.
🎯 What Was Funded:
- Infrastructure upgrades like fish aggregating devices, kayak reefs, pontoons, and cleaning facilities.
  • Events like Hooked On Festivals, Vic Fish Kids clinics, Trout Season Festivals, and Women in Recreational Fishing and Boating (WIRFAB) network events.
  • Fish stocking, contributing to a record 11.54 million fish stocked statewide.
🔍 The Problem:
- The infrastructure and events lean heavily toward PR and participation boosts — but without enforcement, more participation could lead to more unsustainable fishing.
  • Restocking is valuable but risks becoming a costly cycle if compliance is weakened and overfishing continues.
- These events are excellent PR opportunities and community builders — but the cost feels disproportionate when Fisheries Officers are being made redundant.
- The focus seems skewed toward marketing and participation rather than sustainability and protection of the resource itself.
🎯 What Was Funded:
- Breeding and stocking of native species (Murray cod, golden perch) and salmonids (brown and rainbow trout, chinook salmon).
- Private suppliers also provided additional fish.
🔍 The Problem:
- Stocking is reactive — replacing fish lost to overfishing or poor habitat management — rather than preventing those losses in the first place.
- Heavy reliance on private suppliers raises transparency questions about cost-effectiveness.
- Stocking supports recreational fishing, but sustainable fisheries need proactive management. Strengthening compliance and habitat restoration could reduce the need for such high-cost, ongoing restocking efforts.
🎯 What Was Funded:
- Community fishing events, kids’ workshops, and “come and try” days.
  • Club advertising, websites, uniforms, and branded gear.
  • Local facility improvements like BBQs and portable toilets for events.
🔍 The Problem:
- Many grants funded one-off events or promotional materials — more about visibility than long-term fisheries benefits.
- It’s hard to justify spending on club branding while compliance roles that protect the resource are being cut.
- Community events are valuable, but they shouldn’t overshadow the need for sustainability. A more balanced approach could prioritise education, conservation, or even local compliance support alongside events.
🎯 What Was Funded:
- Club equipment & facilities: BBQs, air conditioners, picnic tables, AV gear, even concrete slabs for upgrades.
- Marketing & promotion: Uniforms, club websites, social media ads, signage, and merchandise.
- Event support: Catering for events, guest speakers, and “come and try” days.
🔍 The Problem:
- PR-leaning spend: A lot of this money went to branding — uniforms, gazebos, marketing materials — rather than practical, long-term improvements to fishing sustainability or club viability.
- Facilities vs. Fisheries Officers: While improving clubhouses and BBQ areas supports communities, it feels hard to justify when frontline enforcement roles — the people protecting fish stocks — are being cut.
- Limited reach: These grants benefit individual clubs directly, but the money could arguably have more impact if funnelled into statewide programs that improve fisheries for all anglers.
- Supporting clubs is important — they’re the heart of many fishing communities — but spending on logos, websites, and events is tone-deaf when Fisheries Officers face redundancies.