Disseminating existing bycatch reduction and fuel efficiency technologies throughout Australia's prawn fisheries
SESSF Monitoring and Assessment – Strategic Review
There is increased awareness of the need for ecosystem-based fisheries management, with increased public expectations for sustainable management of fished stocks. However, reduced catch levels and increasing costs have stimulated industry calls for reductions in management costs, or for more effective use of the existing cost-recovered funds. Budget limitations have already led to annual fishery independent surveys (FIS) carried out less frequently, reduced observer monitoring (ISMP) to fund other projects, alternation of FIS and ISMP from year to year, use of Crew Member Observers (CMOs) to collect on-board length frequencies, retaining species at lower tier assessments instead of Tier 1 assessments, ad-hoc implementation of more multiyear TACs combined with adhoc implementation of break-out rules, reduction of the frequency of Tier1 stock assessments, and the postponement of critical Tier 1 stock assessments. Whilst all of these approaches are feasible and practical responses, their combined influence on the effectiveness of the monitoring and assessment at achieving desired management objectives has not been tested or demonstrated.
Current budget restrictions on AFMA have resulted in a departure from scheduled monitoring and assessment work, with increasing ad-hoc decisions about which components of that work undertaken each year. There is growing concern by stakeholders that the present monitoring and assessment program is incapable of addressing these developments. SETFIA and other industry associations are particularly concerned that fishing concession levies funding current arrangements will become unaffordable.
Given AFMA's legislative objectives to ensure ecologically sustainable development, to maximise net economic returns and to ensure cost-effective fisheries management, AFMA has proposed this project to develop proposals for a structured and cost-effective research, monitoring and assessment program to respond to requirements and emerging issues in the SESSF over the next 5 years. It may be possible to extend this horizon should a fully quantitative project follow this proposal.
Final report
Estimating fishing mortality of major target species and species of conservation interest in the Queensland east coast shark fishery
Shark fisheries worldwide are extremely valuable economically though are universally threatened through a combination of high susceptibility to depletion, poor data on levels of fisheries exploitation and uncertainty about what are appropriate levels of exploitation. These facts hold true for the Queensland east coast shark fishery as a high diversity of shark species are harvested through a complex combination of targeted and non-targeted fishing effort spread throughout 18 degrees of latitude. The current data void prevents effectual management, assessment and monitoring; problems well documented by the recent Gunn et al (2008) review of proposed management measures for the Queensland fishery completed for the Hon Peter Garrett MP, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts. The Gunn et al (2008) review put forward 14 conditions and 8 recommendations, most pertinent being to determine exploitation and mortality rates, and improve the understanding of the shark complex with which the fishery interacts through improved reporting, observing and validation.
Significant changes in the management of the Queensland fishery began on 1 July 2009 and include substantial changes including modifications in the way commercial fishers are permitted to harvest shark stocks, as well as improved catch reporting. The need to move forward quickly in gathering information relevant to sustainable use of Queensland sharks is paramount. The Gunn et al 2008 report concluded that on the basis of the poor coverage of some, and complete absence of other data vital for confident management, the proposed management arrangements for the fishery were insufficiently cautious. The proposed project will directly address not only these concerns, but also the key research priorities relevant to shark identified by the Queensland FRAB.
Gunn, J, Meere, F, Stevens, J (2008). Independent review proposed manage,ment arrangements for Queensland’s east coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery.
Final report
Shark and other chondrichthyan byproduct and bycatch estimation in the SEF Trawl and non-trawl Sectors
Australia is a signatory to the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks) which was ratified by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) Committee of Fisheries during February 1999. As a signatory, Australia is obliged to develop a National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks).
AFFA has established a Shark Advisory Group to prepare a Shark Assessment Report and to develop the Australian NPOA-Sharks. The Group includes representatives from all key government and non-government stakeholder groups, including shark specialists. Progress on development of the Report and Australia's NPOA-Sharks was reported to the FAO Committee of Fisheries during February 2001.
In addition, through the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture, all Australian Commonwealth and State fisheries ministers have endorsed the National Policy on Fisheries Bycatch, which includes sharks and other chondrichthyans. The Commonwealth has recently released its bycatch policy, which builds on the endorsed National Policy on Fisheries Bycatch and commits the Commonwealth to developing a Bycatch Action Plan for each major Commonwealth fishery by 31 March 2001.
Australia is well placed to meet its international and national obligations for conservation and management of its chondrichthyan species. The major shark fisheries of southern Australia, Western Australia and northern Australia are well documented and are data rich. However, biproduct and bycatch of these species are not well documented.
In south-eastern Australia, most chondrichthyans are taken by the Southern Shark Fishery (SSF) and South East Fishery (SEF). Data on byproduct and bycatch have been collected from the SSF and are currently being analysed (FRDC Project 99/103). In the SEF, data are collected by Integrated Scientific Monitoring Program, but no attempt has been made to analyse the chondrichthyan data.
The present project proposal will not be complete in time to provide results for the first draft of the Australian Shark Assessment Report and NPOA-Sharks. Similarly, it will not be complete in time to prepare Bycatch Action Plans for the SEF (Trawl Sector) and the SSF and SEF (Non-trawl Sector) but the project outputs will be vital inputs to subsequent drafts.
Outputs from the project will assist Environment Australia with two recent initiatives taken under the Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. One relates to the requirement for an Environment Impact Assessment for each Commonwealth managed fishery. The other initiative is the Conservation Overview and Action Plan for Australian Threatened and Potentially Threatened Marine and Estuarine Fishes.
Final report
The project met all four objectives completely and the outputs from the project are important inputs for the management of byproduct and bycatch.
Data from the Integrated Scientific Monitoring Program (ISMP) and from fisher logbooks were analysed for the South Eastern Trawl Fishery (SETF) during 1994–06, the Great Australian Bight Trawl Fishery (GABTF), where available, the Gillnet Hook and Trap Fishery (GHATF) during 2000–06. The project delivered several important outputs.
Saw shark and elephant fish assessment and bycatch evaluation in the southern shark fishery
Saw shark and Elephant Fish Investigation
Catches of saw shark rose from 52 tonnes during 1970 to reach a peak of 359 tonnes during 1995 before beginning to decline. Catches of elephant fish rose from 10 tonnes during 1970 to peak at 118 tonnes during 1985 and then declined to 63 tonnes by 1997. These species are currently valued at about $1 million per annum to the fishermen.
Stock assessments of gummy shark and school shark are periodically updated and refined through SharkFAG, but assessments have never been made for any of the non-target species. With the fishery changing to catch quota management and with the need to ensure that the non-target species are harvested sustainably, it is essential to provide basic data needs and assessments for these species.
Because most saw shark is landed in Victoria (90%) and elephant fish is landed in Victoria (64%) and Tasmania (36%), most of the sampling will be undertaken in Bass Strait.
Bycatch and discard evaluation
Over the last decade, national and international attention has increasingly focused on fishing activities that take animals other than those intended for human consumption and other uses. There are concerns that animals might be killed and then discarded and that fishing may be depleting some of these populations.
Public perceptions of discards and bycatches associated with the use of demersal gillnets are often confused with those associated with the use of surface-set driftnets. Whilst it is understood within industry that the discard of dead fish is neglible in the SSF, there is a need to provide better information for the purpose of managing public perceptions.
Effect of high grading/discarding on the TAC setting process
One concern following the introduction of quota management in the SSF is that lower valued gummy sharks and school sharks might be discarded at sea for high grading. Large sharks or sharks damaged by sea lice or other fish often receive lower prices than smaller undamaged sharks. From onboard observations, there is a need to provide estimates of (a) quantities of sharks damaged and marketed, (b) quantities of sharks damaged and discarded, and (c) quantities of undamaged sharks discarded because of lower prices.