With the creation of large marine spatial closures, such as the system of fisheries related closures and MPAs that have been implemented in the South East, complications to the current established framework for fisheries management and risk assessment are introduced.

Management advice for targeted commercial fish stocks is generally based on the results of quantitative or semi-quantitative stock assessment methods. These assessments usually treat the impacted species as unit entities where the complete stock is vulnerable to the fishery, and this is generally acceptable for most species, as the majority of the stock is available to the fishery. Explicit representation of spatial structure is the exception in most target species stock assessments. For non-target species, assessed within an Ecological Risk Assessment framework, an examination of catches in comparison to life-history characteristics, or the species susceptibility and productivity can also give an indication of likely impact. While the spatial overlap of the stock with the fishery is considered in some ERA methods (eg PSA, SAFE), implications for management are not explicit.

Marine spatial closures complicate assessments by changing the relative abundance within and outside closures. They may also alter the location where sampling occurs. In addition to changes to assessments, a key question is how the rules that determine catch levels, including formal harvest strategies, should be modified to account for closures, taking into consideration the characteristics of the closure, the species’ biology and varying levels of monitoring. This project will consider these impacts for all forms of marine closed areas.

The valuable offshore trawl (GABBTF) and non-trawl (GHATF) components of the SESSF fishery are expanding in the GAB, but there are no maps of this large area (~500 miles wide) at scales relevant to fishery use and management. Interpreted maps are needed to underpin sustainable development, particularly because they are relevant to developing area closures. These form a key part of AFMA’s strategic management planning for the fishery - including implementing the recommendations of recently completed Ecological Risk Assessments. The relevant scales when evaluating options for spatial management are: fishing grounds (areas with characteristic patterns of bottom types, fish communities and use), features (including submarine canyons and large rocky banks) and terrains - sediments, rocky bottom and broken bottom that make them up.

Maps alone will not usefully inform management decisions. There is also a need to interpret the structure and functions of their component parts, e.g. individual fishing grounds or certain habitat types. This enables stakeholders to understand their role for fishery production, their value to the fishery, and their natural values – including for threatened species and unique habitats. A wide range of data and knowledge can be collated from industry and scientific surveys. The proposed project will provide the mechanism needed to acquire, collate and map the information, then evaluate and summarise it for management purposes while preserving the confidential nature of industry data.

The project is based on a model used successfully in a previous study. The methodology – including data security measures - and infrastructure (spatial database, portable camera system) is largely in place. This project will build on lessons learned from the previous project (see Risk Analysis).