257 results

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

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.
Blank

Targeting behavioural change in fisheries and aquaculture

Project number: 2022-027
Project Status:
Current
Budget expenditure: $99,359.00
Principal Investigator: Rachel Kelly
Organisation: Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) Hobart
Project start/end date: 30 Jul 2023 - 29 Jun 2024
Contact:
FRDC

Need

The uptake of best practice approaches in fisheries and aquaculture is influenced by factors that inhibit or enable behaviour change, including psycho-sociological factors (i.e. how change or approaches are framed).
Previous FRDC research has indicated a need to identify how and where behavioural insights/interventions – which draw on psycho-sociological factors such as cognitive biases, social norms, and emotions – can be used to steer behaviour change towards preferred outcomes (e.g. stewardship, safety) in marine sectors. This project builds on current and emerging research on behaviour change in fisheries and aquaculture to consolidate a review of published literature and available grey literature and R&D (from academic and industry domains, including recent FRDC projects relating to behaviour change) that has identified psycho-sociological factors influencing behavioural change. The aim of this literature review is to identify the types of behavioural interventions that can (or potentially, cannot) achieve preferred outcomes for fishing and aquaculture sectors in Australia. Specifically, the review seeks to explore i) which kinds of behavioural interventions can be effective in achieving positive change, ii) where (and just as importantly, where not) these interventions may be applied in fisheries and aquaculture sectors, iii) identify (potential) limitations of interventions, and to iii) bring these findings together to inform and underpin development of two relevant and engaging training webinars and associated resource materials, and iv) make recommendations for further focused trials/intervention research which could be undertaken to further support and expedite desired outcomes in Australian fisheries and aquaculture.

There is rapidly growing interest in the development, application and evaluation of behavioural interventions and they show great potential, however, they are also complex to design, test, and implement. Individuals are more likely to change their behaviours if they have the necessary skills and perceive they can do so (capability), if their environment (physical as well as social) provides an opportunity to do so (opportunity), and if they are motivated to achieve a particular endpoint through this behaviour (motivation), either through conscious decision-making or automatic processes, such as momentary cues. Further, the use of behavioural interventions has not been without critique, with concerns about ethics, manipulation, or risk to human agency. There are also concerns about the effectiveness of behavioural interventions, which may derive from several reasons: for example, due to misunderstanding the behaviour that is intended to be changed and the expected response by the audience. A behavioural intervention will be ineffective if the messaging or delivery causes confusion or if it only has a short-term effect. Some interventions can cause unintended consequences or compensating behaviours resulting in no net effect. These reasons highlight the importance of appropriate contextual understanding and well-defined outcomes for the design of effective behavioural interventions.

There are also different avenues for intervention beyond cognitive biases: education, persuasion, incentivisation, coercion, training, restriction, environmental restructuring, modelling and enablement, and the framing and implementation of these can differ depending on who the intervention is targeted at and under what context. Targeting behaviours in fisheries and aquaculture may enhance engagement and sustainable changes in the longer term (e.g. via development of new social norms), but to achieve this, changes in the determinants of behaviour are required. Actions (e.g. citizen science projects, local management practices), feelings, values (e.g. connectedness to oceans, the realisation of links between ocean health and human health) and social norms are embedded in and influenced by, local environments and social spheres that can transcend geographical boundaries. Our project will explore these nuances and convey concise summaries of behaviour change interventions for end-users via webinars, fact sheets, a simple decision tree tool (described below) and several short videos. The project intentionally has a broad focus (across fisheries and aquaculture sectors) in its review and outputs, as it is designed to equip potential developers and implementers of behavioural interventions with the skills and knowledge to do so in their own unique context. However, we will engage with industry partners (including FRDC extension officers and the industry advisory groups) to specifically ensure that the knowledge and tools produced (i.e. extension products) will be accessible and adaptable to the diversity of relevant contexts across these sectors - and useful for end-users seeking to motivate behaviour change whilst still retaining industry trust and engagement.

The project brings together necessary interdisciplinary research expertise (details outlined below) in the fields of behavioural economics, resource and fisheries economics, socio-ecology, fisheries ecology, science communication and cognitive psychology. In addition, the transdisciplinary potential of this project will be achieved via collaboration with a research advisory panel (to ensure rigorous research outcomes) and an industry level advisory panel (to ensure that the results and suggested interventions/activities are fit-for-purpose and accessible to the sector). Working with these panels (which would ideally include FRDC partners), we will ensure that the research is co-designed – and thus, project outputs are fit-for-purpose/context. Our team’s existing collective research on adoption and uptake of interventions clearly shows that engaging and involving end-user at creation stages increases uptake of results – hence, the value of our industry advisory panel. In addition, by engaging with industry leaders, we will create industry champions for the project who may assist with the dissemination of outputs. Together, the advisory groups will help to further define/adapt the scope of the project to achieve impact.

Overall, these collaborations and contributions will ensure that this project will deliver a comprehensive and industry-relevant overview of current understanding of behaviour change interventions, that addresses end-users’ identified needs, and that inspires community trust, in formats that are palatable and accessible to them and the fisheries and aquaculture sectors more broadly..

Objectives

1. Conduct a systematic review of behavioural interventions for positive outcomes in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors.
2. Develop a two-part webinar series targeted at the FRDC community that aims to provide accessible and implementable knowledge on the theory and practice of behavioural interventions in fisheries.
3. Provide open-access knowledge about behavioural interventions with/to stakeholders via supporting materials (including a decision tree tool), fact-sheets, visual aids, and video.
4. Identify areas for future focused work and interventions that can be implemented to support the fisheries and aquaculture sectors
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2020-036
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Identifying population connectivity of shark bycatch species in NT waters

Charles Darwin University and the Northern Territory (NT) Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade (DITT) Fisheries Division used genetic data to investigate the population structure of two small tropical shark species (Milk Shark [Rhizoprionodon acutus] and Australian Blackspot Shark [Carcharhinus...
ORGANISATION:
Charles Darwin University (CDU)
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2019-036
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Implementation of dynamic reference points and harvest strategies to account for environmentally-driven changes in productivity in Australian fisheries

The need to adapt stock assessment methods and harvest strategies to explicitly and justifiably account for shifts in productivity has been recognised by the AFMA Resource Assessment Group for the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF), not least as a result of clearly evident...
ORGANISATION:
Pisces Australis Pty Ltd
Environment
View Filter

Species

Organisation