109 results
Communities
PROJECT NUMBER • 2021-117
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

A global review on implications of plastic in seafood

Microplastics are commonly consumed by seafood species however, there is still limited understanding of the effects and implications that microplastics may have on the fishing and aquaculture industry. This project summarises research on the effects that microplastic may be having on seafood...
ORGANISATION:
University of Adelaide
TAGS
Pollution
Marine Plastics
Consumer Health
Animal Health
People
People
People

Cumulative impacts across fisheries in Australia's marine environment

Project number: 2018-020
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $391,000.00
Principal Investigator: Beth Fulton
Organisation: CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Hobart
Project start/end date: 17 Mar 2019 - 29 Nov 2020
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Sustainability
Rac Cmwth
Marine Park
Habitat
Fishing Effort

Need

The need for cumulative impact assessment (CIA) is increasingly being recognized. The development process for Australia's Harvest and Bycatch Policies, and their associated guidelines have reinforced the need for assessment of cumulative impacts, and the EPBC Act has also explicitly required consideration of cumulative impacts.

Where multiple activities occur or are planned, an understanding of their combined effects on the environment is necessary to address policy requirements and achieve sustainability. The concept of cumulative impact assessment is not new – indeed cumulative assessment has been recognized for many years, and a range of methods have been proposed around the globe. However, no methodology for undertaking cumulative assessments has been accepted nationally or globally. In addition to considering the impacts across all fishing sectors (commercial, recreational, indigenous, as required by recent changes to the Fisheries Administration Act 1991) and all fisheries, there is also an increasing need to consider other users of marine resources and coastal waters (e.g. renewable energy, shipping etc), especially where space crowding may be an issue.

Target species stock assessments typically consider the species of interest as well as other sources of fishing mortality (e.g. discards), but they do not usually consider their effects on other fisheries sectors or the effects of other sectors on the focal fishery. CIA methods therefore need to consider interactive and indirect effects. To date, interactive effects are often viewed as additive (simple linear addition of one impact to another) with little consideration given to synergistic, antagonistic or non-linear effects. While the ERAEF toolbox used for assessment of bycatch and protected species has some potential options for cumulative impacts (e.g. SAFE method), at this stage they are insufficient for moving to the scales and complexities across multiple fishing sectors and fisheries.

Thus, sustainable fisheries management requires new approaches that consider all sectors and all fisheries and how they impact the environment. Such CIAs will be challenging given that empirical data are often lacking - a dedicated research effort is needed.

Objectives

1. Undertake a two part review. This first part being to review existing cumulative impacts literature on methods applied elsewhere in the world, to produce design principles for a scalable cumulative impacts approach
and a synthesis of current benchmark methods and gaps in methods that must be filled to deliver Australian needs. And the second part being a global ERA review to identify cumulative impacts seen in other fisheries, with the specific focus of this review as specified by the AFMA led ERA/ERM working group – including looking: (i) at the assessment methods used elsewhere
(ii) their information needs and context
(iii) the strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches
(iv) synergies and efficiencies that can be adopted
and (v) recommend cost-effect ERA/ERM integration of additional methods that have been found to be appropriate given an AFMA context.
2. Characterise cumulative issues complicating cumulative impact assessments and, via a methods scan, deliver a list of options for addressing these issues
3. Develop a cumulative impacts framework that structures the sequence of analyses done for each assessment based on the characteristics of the sectors and ecological components involved– target, bycatch and protected species, and habitats and ecological communities
4. Perform an Australia-wide cumulative impacts assessment, with fishery-specific results, for (i) commonwealth fisheries across ecological components, (ii) indigenous and recreational sectors that interact with commonwealth fisheries for these components and (iii) and state and recreational fisheries where they overlap with Commonwealth fisheries.

Final report

Authors: E.A. Fulton Piers Dunstan Rowan Treblico
Final Report • 6.18 MB
2018-020-DLD.pdf

Summary

The world is changing more rapidly than any one individual can track. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (1999) (EPBC Act) requires for all human activities, such as fisheries, to be sustainable not only in isolation but in combination with other anthropogenic activities and the general state of the environment. It is difficult for fishery managers and operators to comply with this requirement without appropriate assessment methods. In addition, trying to understand the complete state of an ecosystem and all its interacting parts is a substantial and challenging task, especially for a nation with national waters as large and diverse as Australia’s.
In response researchers from the CSIRO and the University of Adelaide set about reviewing existing tools used to undertake Ecological Risk Assessments (ERAs) or Cumulative Effects Assessments (CEAs). This information then formed the basis for developing a new Cumulative Effects Assessment framework which was applied to 409 species around Australia to understand what the cumulative effects of fisheries are on Australia’s marine systems. This understanding and the recommendations made around strengthening existing assessment methods used by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) and other fisheries regulatory agencies will place Australia in a better place to ensure it is not only meeting regulatory requirements, but supporting sustainable industries and helping to coordinate across government agencies to safeguard healthy marine ecosystems into Australia’s future.
Final Report • 90.95 MB
2018-020 Appendices 5, 6, 7 and 8.pdf
Final Report • 5.33 MB
2018-020 Appendix 3 Review of ERA.pdf
Final Report • 3.02 MB
2018-020 Appendix 4 Review of Cumulative Effects Assessments.pdf

Compilation of information for the US Marine Mammal Protection Act Comparability Finding process

Project number: 2019-212
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $77,840.00
Principal Investigator: Alice I. Mackay
Organisation: Alice Ilona Mackay
Project start/end date: 11 Oct 2020 - 18 Feb 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Resource Rehabilitation
Population Dynamics
Mortality
Market Opportunities
Fisheries Management

Need

The Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment require relevant information be collated on marine mammal populations that interact with fisheries classified as 'export' under the provisions of the US Marine Mammal Proection Act.

The Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment have listed several marine mammal species for which mortalities have been recorded in Australian fisheries and require an estimate of Nmin, Rmax and Fr for each of these species in order to determine for which a PBR approach is currently feasible. Data deficiencies that prevent PBR being calculated for a given species need to be determined and potential approaches to obtain relevant information identified.

If PBR is not a feasible approach to be undertaken for any of the marine mammal species identified, other relevant data for each species and 'export' fishery will need to collated in order for NOAA to be able to determine if a comparability finding for that fishery can be granted. This could include information on the level of monitoring in that fishery, temporal or spatial overlap with the marine mammals species and existing management of interactions such as fishery specific bycatch management strategies.

Objectives

1. Where possible provide estimates of maximum potential population growth rate (Rmax), minimum estimate of abundance (Nmin) and recovery factor (FR) for each species of marine mammal listed by the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment.
2. For each marine mammal species compile requested information on listed status under Australian and US legislation, including temporal and spatial overlap with relevant fisheries or jurisdictions, information on population structure and behavioural traits of that species that make it more or less likely to interact with fishing operations, and existing bycatch management strategies.
3. Given existing data, determine the ability to calculate PBR for marine mammal species as a means of applying bycatch limits in Australian fisheries, and, if PBR cannot be calculated, investigate specific fisheries management arrangements, including bycatch monitoring regimes, and other information available for each ‘export’ fishery where interactions with marine mammals have been recorded, and provide an assessment of the potential level of impact of interactions for each species and / or population. Where appropriate, identify additional information that could be collected, for each marine mammal species and ‘export’ fishery, that in lieu of PBR, could assist the US in determining a ‘comparability rating’ for that fishery.

Final report

Author: Alice I. Mackay
Final Report • 2021-09-01 • 5.73 MB
2019-212-DLD.pdf

Summary

Recent changes to legislation in the United States (US) requires that nations importing seafood must demonstrate that they have a regulatory program for reducing marine mammal bycatch that is comparable in effectiveness to the US standards under the ‘Fish and Fish Product Import Provisions’ of the Marine Mammal Protection Act 1972 (MMPA). A comparability finding means the marine mammal protection provisions in the relevant fishery are recognised to be equivalent to that of the United States.
Several Australian commercial fisheries have received an ‘exempt’ classification under the MMPA import provisions which means they have been determined to have a remote likelihood, or no known incidental mortality of marine mammals. The remaining fisheries that are seeking a comparability finding have been classified as ‘export’ fisheries as they were determined to have more than a likelihood of incidental mortality to marine mammals. For each of these fisheries, the US requires information on monitoring programs in the fishery, levels of marine mammal bycatch, the species and ‘stocks’ (populations) involved, and the management strategies in place to mitigate bycatch.
This report synthesises the required information for 15 Australian Commonwealth managed commercial fisheries or fishery subsectors, and 29 Australian State and Territory commercial fisheries that are seeking a comparability finding under the US MMPA. Reports and / or observations of marine mammal interactions in Australian commercial fisheries that are not seeking export approval are also synthesised as this information is also required as part of the comparability finding process.
Industry
PROJECT NUMBER • 2017-014
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Informing the structural reform of South Australia's Marine Scalefish Fishery

This study was undertaken by the South Australia Research and Development Institute (SARDI) in collaboration with PIRSA Fisheries and Aquaculture, BDO EconSearch, the Marine Fishers Association (MFA), Fishwell Consulting and University of Canberra. This project guided the reform of South...
ORGANISATION:
SARDI Food Safety and Innovation
TAGS
Wild Catch
Sustainability
Resource Access And Allocation
Recreational Fishing
Rac Sa
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2023-205
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT

Role of marine reserves in sustainable management of Australia's ocean estate - review of the Heard Island and McDonald Islands bioregion

The statutory requirement to undertake a 10-year review of the Heard and McDonald Islands (HIMI) Marine Reserve led to a proposal to expand the HIMI marine reserve and include new National Park Zones (IUCN II) and Habitat Protection Zone (IUCN IV) arrangements. Subsequently, the total...
ORGANISATION:
TJB Management Pty Ltd
SPECIES
Patagonian Toothfish
Blank

Comparative evaluation of Integrated Coastal Marine Management in Australia - Workshop

Project number: 2017-214
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $14,640.00
Principal Investigator: Alistair Hobday
Organisation: CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Hobart
Project start/end date: 19 Jun 2018 - 29 Nov 2018
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Resource Access And Allocation
Policy
Human Dimensions Research
Fisheries Management
Ecosystem

Need

There is widespread evidence, in Australia and internationally, of increased need for an improved, practical approach to integrated management (IM) of fisheries and other coastal marine activities that is able to fully embrace the social, economic and institutional aspects (the so-called ‘human dimensions), of management. Assessment and management systems traditionally neglect the human dimensions. Further, they treat sectors separately, often with different authorities managing diverse activities in different ways, resulting in inconsistencies in management across activities. The result is that there is almost no consideration of the cumulative social, economic or ecological impacts of multiple activities, and no way of informing trade-offs among activities in management decision-making.
Experience to date is that IM has been only partially successful. Management of multiple activities has been additive…squeezing one activity in among others (e.g aquaculture in light of others). While there are some examples of movement toward IM, these have resulted in partial or temporary success. There are examples where management has started toward IM, but progress has been stalled or has fallen back. In general, many preconditions exist, but it has been hypothesized that management is missing key aspects of intentional design that would allow IM to proceed.
The proposed workshop will bring together those with both the science knowledge and the operational knowledge of 8-10 Australian IM case studies and a few with international expertise, to evaluate and compare experience towards identifying key elements of success and failure of Integrated Management.

Objectives

1. Complete the creation of a lens for evaluation of Integrated Management that includes appropriate attention to social, cultural, economic, institutional as well as ecological aspects
2. Convene two workshops involving expert practitioners with sufficient scientific and operational knowledge of existing Australian Integrated Management case studies
3. Evaluate and compare experience on implementing IM in Australia using a single evaluative lens
4. Synthesize and report results of the evaluation and make recommendations for improved IM in Australia

Final report

ISBN: 978-1-4863-1276-4
Authors: Robert Stephenson Alistair Hobday Christopher Cvitanovic Maree Fudge Tim Ward Ian Butler Toni Cannard Mel Cowlishaw Ian Cresswell Jon Day Kirstin Dobbs Leo X.C. Dutra Stewart Frusher Beth Fulton Josh Gibson Bronwyn Gillanders Natalie Gollan Marcus Haward Trevor Hutton Alan Jordan Jan Macdonald Catriona Macleod Gretta Pecl Eva Plaganyi Ingrid van Putten Tony Smith Ian Poiner Joanna Vince
Final Report • 2019-08-02 • 1.16 MB
2017-214-DLD.pdf

Summary

The need for Integrated Management (IM) of diverse marine activities is increasing, but there has been no agreed IM framework. In 2017 and 2018, a team of researchers collaborated to develop a framework for implementation and a ‘lens’ for evaluation of IM.

Project products

Fact Sheet • 408.36 KB
2017-214 - Fact Sheet 1- Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Integrated Management is an approach that links (integrates) planning, decision-making and management arrangements across sectors in a unified framework, to enable a more comprehensive view of sustainability and the consideration of cumulative effects and tradeoffs.
 
Nine key features and five phases of implementation provide a lens for implementation and evaluation of Integrated Management. 
Fact Sheet • 285.61 KB
2017-214 - Fact Sheet 2- Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Integrated Management is an approach that links (integrates) planning, decision-making and management arrangements across sectors in a unified framework, to enable a more comprehensive view of sustainability and the consideration of cumulative effects and tradeoffs.
 
Evaluation of nine key features and five phases important to Integrated Management has been investigated in seven Australian case studies.
Article • 2.85 MB
2017-214 - Stephenson et al 2023.pdf

Summary

Integrated management (IM) has been widely proposed, but difficult to achieve in practice, and there remains the need for evaluation of examples that illustrate the practical issues that contribute to IM success or failure. This paper synthesises experiences of academics and practitioners involved in seven Australian case studies in which there have been attempts to integrate or take a broader, holistic perspective of management. The evaluative framework of Stephenson et al. (2019a) was used as a lens to explore, through workshops and a questionnaire survey, the nine key features and five anticipated stages of IM in the Gladstone Harbour Project, the Great Barrier Reef, the Northern Prawn fishery and regional development, the South-East Queensland Healthy Waterways Partnership, the Australian Oceans Policy, the New South Wales Marine Estate reforms, and progress toward Integrated Management in the Spencer Gulf. Workshops involving experts with direct experience of the case studies revealed that most of the key features (recognition of the need; a shared vision for IM; appropriate legal and policy frameworks; effective process for appropriate stakeholder participation; comprehensive suite of objectives (ecological, social, cultural, economic and institutional); consideration of trade-offs and cumulative effects of multiple activities; flexibility to adapt to changing conditions; process for ongoing review, evaluation and refinement; and effective resourcing) were seen as important in all case studies. However, there are only a few examples where key features of IM were implemented ‘fully’. A subsequent questionnaire of participants using ‘best-worst’ scaling indicated that an appropriate legal and institutional framework is considered to have most influence on IM outcomes, and therefore is the most important of the key features. This is followed in salience by effective stakeholder participation, effective resourcing, capacity and tools, and recognition of the need for IM. Key features may change in relative importance at different stages in the trajectory of IM. 
View Filter

Research

Category

Species

Organisation