129,954 results

Using scat DNA to inform sustainable fisheries management and Ecological Risk Assessments: a Shy Albatross case study

Project number: 2016-118
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $96,500.00
Principal Investigator: Rachael Alderman
Organisation: Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania (NRE TAS)
Project start/end date: 26 Oct 2017 - 17 Mar 2019
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Rac Cmwth
Nutrition
Food Web
Fisheries Management

Need

Due to the biases and unethical sampling methods conventionally used to collect dietary data, the most recent data for shy albatross is over 20 years old (Hedd et al 2001). A recent international review of albatross diets highlighted the need to 1) incorporate appropriate dietary studies as an integral component of species recovery and management plans, and 2) elevate the importance of dietary studies in long term monitoring plans to link observed demographic parameters to ecological drivers (McInnes et al 2016a). With changing environmental conditions and improvements to mitigation measures used by fisheries, it is important to monitor how TEP species may adapt to these changes. Current, reliable diet information will allow risk assessment tools such as trophic models to be developed and provide a baseline of diet information in which we can test what drives any dietary shifts in TEPs. There is also paucity in information about if and when seabird-fishery engagements occur. This was raised at the AFMA Seabird Workshop in late 2016. Quantification of albatross engagements with vessels would assist with the development of the Seabird Strategy for Commonwealth fisheries to ensure fisheries are managed sustainably.

This project seeks to apply new high-resolution DNA-based diet-analysis (DNA metabarcoding) to characterise the diet of shy albatross, including intra- and inter-annual variability. This trophic information, in combination with existing fine-scale tracking data, will contribute valuable information to assist in fisheries management and ecological risk assessment processes. Specifically, this information will enable us to: i) estimate the range of prey species consumed by shy albatross, (ii) develop trophic models to estimate the relative resource requirements of shy albatross, (iii) evaluate intra-and inter-annual level of engagement of shy albatross with fisheries, (iv) provide baseline data for evaluating efficacy of fisheries management changes, (v) provide a demonstration of the applicability of this technique to other TEP species and regions.

Objectives

1. Develop a South East Australian marine prey DNA database
2. Characterise of the range of prey species consumed by shy albatrosses to high taxonomic resolution (species or genus where possible) and the relative frequency of occurrence of each taxa within the diet.
3. Assess the extent to which the shy albatross engage with fisheries by quantifying the frequency of target, secondary and bycaught species in the diet
4. Assess the spatial and temporal variability of both objectives 2 and 3

Final report

Authors: McInnes J.C Tuck G.N. and Alderman R.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.
Final Report • 2019-01-01 • 6.07 MB
2016-118-DLD.pdf

Summary

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. However, it is difficult to estimate what proportion of the population may be at risk. We use DNA metabarcoding of scats to characterise the intra- and inter-annual variability in the diet of Shy Albatross at Albatross Island, and combine this dietary data with foraging range estimates to examine spatial overlaps and species overlaps between albatross and fisheries in the region. Shy Albatross diet consisted predominantly of fish (93% of samples) and cephalopods (38% of samples), with 84 fish and 11 cephalopod species detected. The majority of food was sourced naturally, however, at least 13% of the population overall is sourcing food from fisheries, with up to 29% during some breeding stages. There were spatial overlaps between Shy Albatross and six Commonwealth managed fisheries operating in South-East Australia and two Tasmanian managed fisheries. There was considerable intra-annual variation in the level of engagement with the Commonwealth fishery, but little inter-annual variability. Blue Grenadier, Ling and Warehou sp. were the main Commonwealth managed fishery discard species consumed. This study highlights that fisheries still pose a risk for Shy Albatross in Australian waters. As the majority of albatross food is sourced naturally, it shows that albatross are unlikely to be reliant on discards, therefore a reduction in discard availability would benefit shy albatross populations and improve the sustainability of fisheries in the region. DNA dietary analysis in conjunction with spatial foraging data provides a valuable tool to assess the proportion of a population at risk from fishing operations.

NEAO: addressing current health issues confronting warm water culture of yellowtail kingfish

Project number: 2016-117
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $159,000.00
Principal Investigator: Gavin J. Partridge
Organisation: Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) Fremantle
Project start/end date: 30 Jun 2017 - 30 Dec 2018
Contact:
FRDC
SPECIES
Yellowtail Kingfish

Need

Yellowtail kingfish (YTK) farming is identified nationally as the greatest opportunity for new aquaculture development in the next few decades through substantial increases in farmed area. This will deliver substantial increase in product to market, and increased use of locally produced aqua feeds, resulting in growth in regional economies and employment. Within 10 years, YTK production is expected to increase by 34,000 tonnes, worth $440 million, and using 68,000 tonnes of aqua feed worth $136 million.

The culture of this species in warm water has many advantages, yet creates some unique challenges. Managing flukes in the warm water environment is currently a major cost burden on the YTK industry because the life cycle duration of the monogenean parasites is more rapid, therefore requiring more frequent bathing. Moreover, the standard management practice of bathing in hydrogen peroxide carries a greater risk in warm water and must therefore be optimised and more carefully managed. Whilst we are aware that some research has been conducted previously on peroxide optimisation for YTK, this information has not been made available to WA YTK farmers and has had a significant financial impact on the fledgling WA industry.

Bacterial diseases are also problematic in warm water YTK farming. Photobacterium damselae ssp damselae is a recurring problem in warm water culture and outbreaks of this disease are often associated with Vibrio harveyi. An autogenous vaccine has been developed for Photobacterium, but its efficacy has not been tested experimentally.

Objectives

1. Optimise the use of hydrogen peroxide to treat flukes in warm water
2. Investigate alternative fluke management methods to hydrogen peroxide in warm water
3. Quantify the benefits of an autogenous vaccine against Photobacterium damselae subspecies damselae.
4. Determine in vitro whether interactions exist between Photobacterium damselae subspecies damselae and Vibrio harveyi that influence virulence

Final report

ISBN: 978-0-6486988-0-7
Authors: Dr Gavin Partridge Dr Lindsey Woolley Mr Luke Pilmer Dr Nicky Buller Dr Terry Miller Dr Andrew Barnes
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.
Final Report • 2020-09-01 • 5.93 MB
2016-117-DLD.pdf

Summary

This project addressed a number of key issues associated with the culture of yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi, YTK) in warm water, including optimising the use of hydrogen peroxide (which is more toxic in warm water), investigating alternatives to the management of monogenean flukes (Neobenedenia girellae and Zeuxapta seriolae) in warm water and several aspects relating to a better understanding of the bacteria which cause disease in YTK, including an assessment of an industry-funded autogenous vaccine against the pathogenic bacteria Photobacterium damsellae subspecies damsellae.

Development of a 5-year sector and NT Strategic Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan for Northern Territory fisheries and aquaculture based on priority needs of major stakeholder sectors

Project number: 2016-116
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $141,659.98
Principal Investigator: Ian Knuckey
Organisation: Fishwell Consulting Pty Ltd
Project start/end date: 30 Jun 2017 - 29 Jun 2018
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Workshop
Wild Catch
Survey
Stakeholder
Rac Nt

Need

A 5-year Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan is a major strategic need of NT. However, for a number of reasons including the diversity and geographical separation of sectors (commercial wild catch, recreational, indigenous and aquaculture) and their wide stakeholder bases, there is limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan.

The importance of fishery and aquaculture sectors to have strategic plans that include the R&D priorities has been well recognised (eg FRDC project 2016-504). While RD&E plans are in place or under development for a number of groups (eg Indigenous groups, Fisheries Research, Aquaculture and Indigenous Liaison units within NT Department of Primary Industry and Resources), there is no comprehensive plan that encompasses all sectors throughout the Territory. One of the main challenges is in reaching the membership base, and incorporating the diversity of views and opinions into provided. Fortunately, most of the major groups within the three sectors have representative organisations that can be used to collate and present views of their membership, although developing RD&E priority areas often falls outside their current remit or level of expertise.

RD&E plans are important for guiding investment into areas that stakeholders consider as high priority, and assist with providing balanced investment amongst and between stakeholders. A recently finalised project aimed to elicit initial research priorities for the NT RAC RD&E plan (FRDC project 2016-504) noted that, for the successful development of such a plan, it is crucial “for the commercial, seafood and recreational fishing sectors to have strategic industry plans that include the R&D priorities of their members”. We will work with key representative organisations (NTSC, AFANT and the 3 Land Councils – NLC, ALC and Tiwi) to develop initial individual RD&E plans for the commercial, recreational and indigenous sectors and aquaculture respectively. Based critically on these, we will develop an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for the Northern Territory fisheries and aquaculture.

Objectives

1. Hold workshops and conduct surveys to determine sector priority RD&E areas
2. Deliver a 5-year RD&E Plan to NTRAC that includes input from stakeholders.
3. Develop Strategic R&D Plans for each of: commercial, recreational, indigenous and aquaculture sectors.
4. Leave each stakeholder group with the tools and a process to conduct repeatable surveys of their membership's RD&E needs so that priorities and strategic plans can be updated and fed into the 5-year NT Strategic Plan.

Final report

ISBN: 978-0-6480172-7-1
Authors: Knuckey I. Koopman M. and Calogeras C.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Final Report • 2020-09-09 • 5.62 MB
2016-116-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation’s (FRDC) Northern Territory Research Advisory Committee (NT RAC) recognised that a 5-year Research Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan was a major strategic need of the NT but acknowledged that there was limited capacity among sectors to undertake the necessary consultation and compile the required information, to successfully develop such a plan — particularly because of the diversity and geographical separation of various sectors (Indigenous, recreational, commercial wild-catch and aquaculture) and their wide respective stakeholder bases. NT RAC therefore contracted Fishwell Consulting to liaise with each of the sectors to develop separate sector-specific strategic RD&E Plans; and based on these, produce an overarching 5-year RD&E Plan for NT fishery and aquaculture.
 
The context under which this Strategic RD&E Plan was developed is very much driven by the FRDC — which is a co-funded partnership between its two stakeholders, the Australian Government and the fishing and aquaculture sectors — whose role is to plan and invest in fisheries RD&E activities in Australia. The FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E plan is framed around the National RD&E Strategy, while the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan guides development, and is itself guided by the FRDC sector-based Industry Partnership Agreement (IPA) RD&E plans and FRDC Research Advisory Committee (RAC) jurisdictional-based RD&E plans. The sector-based and jurisdictional-based plans are also informed by end users. Given this arrangement, development of the NT RD&E Strategy should be guided directly by a combination of the FRDC 2015-2020 RD&E Plan and input from stakeholders, with consideration of the structures of other jurisdictional plans.
 
Existing plans and strategies were summarised to develop the RD&E framework on which to base this Strategic RD&E Plan. At a high level, there are existing strategic plans that are relevant and influential to setting the Northern Territory’s commercial wild-catch and aquaculture research agenda. These include the northern Strategic plans put in place by relevant peak bodies and the Land Councils, NT Fisheries Strategic Plan and associated portfolio plans, the Department of Primary Industry and Resources Industry Development Plan, Success through Innovation – the National Fishing and Aquaculture Research, Development and Extension Strategy 2016, the Northern Territory Fishery Resource Sharing Framework, the ‘Our North, Our Future’ white paper on developing northern Australia and science strategies put in place by research agencies.
 
Key stakeholders were identified in the commercial fisheries and aquaculture, Indigenous, recreational and guided fishing tour sectors. These sectors cover a wide geographical distribution, and use a range of equipment to catch and culture a diverse range of species. Representative bodies were engaged via face to face and phone interviews and online surveys. Online surveys were chosen as the main data gathering tool because of the wide spatial extend of NT fisheries. These were distributed and promoted by representative bodies.
 
Common themes across sectors were identified and formed the basis for a draft overarching RD&E Plan for the NT which was developed in line with a format agreed upon by NT Fisheries and stakeholders. Draft RD&E Plans for each sector were returned to each stakeholder group (in confidence) for comment. Following this, revisions were made and the final draft document returned for comment prior to broader release.
 
Across all sectors, the main issues were related to access regarding native title, particularly associated with the Blue Mud Bay decision. In all three plans issues relating to access featured heavily, including developing an understanding of the value each sector places on coastal resources, building awareness of access requirements to and appropriate behaviours on Aboriginal land, the capacity to enforce changed access arrangements and fostering strategic alliances and partnerships between sectors. Many goals, priority areas and outcomes are common across plans for each sector. These outcomes were grouped under the relevant FRDC program (https://www.frdc.com.au/research/rde-planning-and-priorities/frdc-program-areas). Common priority areas for the Environment program are demonstrated resource sustainability and fine-scale spatial information on sectoral catches, effort and “values”. Only priority areas relating to successful, secure and profitable businesses (either commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, FTOs or Indigenous) were common across sectors for the Industry program, however equitable cross-sectoral access and allocation arrangements were common to the commercial wild-catch and aquaculture and recreational sectors, and this priority area has goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Maintaining a social licence to operate is a priority common to the Communities program, and this also includes goals relating to developing strategic partnerships with all sectors and a mutual understanding of the value that each sector places on coastal resources. Under this program, both Indigenous and commercial sectors have priority areas that include increasing capacity of Marine Rangers programs. The People program includes priority areas for capacity building and industry leadership. Priority areas for Adoption are common across sectors.
Environment

Lever opportunities for social and economic benefits through aquatic resource management in Western Australia

Project number: 2016-113
Project Status:
Current
Budget expenditure: $273,240.00
Principal Investigator: Emily Ogier
Organisation: University of Tasmania
Project start/end date: 31 Dec 2017 - 29 Jun 2020
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Stakeholder
Social Science
Social Science
Resource Access And Allocation
Rac Wa

Need

Commercial in confidence. To know more about this project please contact FRDC.

Objectives

Commercial in confidence

Socio-ecological assessment of the ecosystems, industries and communities of Spencer Gulf

Project number: 2016-104
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $150,000.00
Principal Investigator: Timothy M. Ward
Organisation: SARDI Food Safety and Innovation
Project start/end date: 31 Jul 2017 - 29 Apr 2019
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Stakeholder
Rac Sa
Ecosystem
Data
Aquaculture

Need

This project is a case study that addresses science needs identified in the National Marine Science Plan 2015, relating to:

i) systematic collection of environmental, social and economic baseline data;
ii) establishing a monitoring program to support effective management and conservation;
iii) incorporating social, economic and cultural data into marine assessments.

This socio-ecological assessment of Spencer Gulf is needed to evaluate and support future management of the gulfs ecosystems, industries and communities.

It will: i) improve current understanding of the web of interactions that drive patterns and trends in the Gulfs key ecological, economic and social feature and ii) help ensure that ecological, economic and social benefits from future use of the Gulf’s assets are balanced and maximised.

This assessment of Spencer Gulf is needed to build on progress towards 1) ecosystem-based management of the fishing and aquaculture sectors achieved through previous FRDC projects (see references in Goyder application attached) and 2) ecosystem-based management of the gulfs ecosystems, industries and communities (especially stakeholder engagement) achieved as part of the $2.5M industry-funded SGEDI.

Funding provided by FRDC and the Goyder Institute for Water Research are needed to ensure that momentum towards ecosystem-based management achieved through SGEDI previous projects is maintained during a period where the availability of additional industry funds is limited.

Objectives

1. Establish a time series of key indicators for monitoring the social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf.
2. Establish online interactive maps of the environmental conditions, ecological assets, human activities and socio-ecological values of the gulf.
3. Undertake an integrated assessment of the status of the gulf’s socio-ecological systems.

Final report

Authors: Tanner J.E. Bailleul F. Bryars S. Doubell M. Foster N. Gaylard S. Gillanders B.M. Goldsworthy S. Huveneers C. James C. Jones A.R. Maher J. Nursey-Bray M. van Ruth P. and Ward T.M.
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.

Project products

Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
Final Report • 2020-12-04 • 3.63 MB
2016-104-DLD.pdf

Summary

Traditionally, management of marine activities has occurred on a sector-by-sector basis, with limited consideration of the interactions between different activities and users, or their cumulative impacts. There is increasing global recognition of the need for Integrated Management (IM) of the complex array of commercial and recreational activities that occur in marine environments, and their impacts on the socio-ecological assets that comprise these systems. An integrated monitoring program that includes social, economic and ecological indicators is an essential element of IM. 
This report collates existing information on the threats to the ecosystems of Spencer Gulf and its industries and communities.  Datasets that may provide a useful indicator for one or more assets or threats are collated.  The focus is on datasets for which there are available time-series data. Most existing monitoring programs are designed to assess the impacts of and/or manage individual activities, or to monitor particular species.  While we have identified a broad range of valuable data sets for Spencer Gulf (~170), we have also identified many gaps, and a number of data sets that are only collected sporadically, and for which there is no guarantee of continuation.
Overall, we have identified around 170 different data time-series that could be used as the basis for a suite of indicators of the overall social, economic and ecological status of Spencer Gulf, as well as numerous data gaps.  One challenge identified by this work is that a number of potentially important data sets are collected and reported at spatial scales that are not useful for examining the status of Spencer Gulf.  This data is either collected/reported at a statewide scale, or for terrestrially-based natural resources management regions.  The next step is be to consolidate the datasets collated here into a smaller subset that provide a useful and amenable set of actual indictors that can be utilised to monitor the status of the gulf and assess the impacts of the range of activities undertaken in it, going forward.  The collation of information undertaken in this report is an important steps towards undertaking an Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of Spencer Gulf.
Article • 3.49 MB
2016-104-SPG Task 2 Industries & Communities Report.pdf

Summary

This report describes a new software platform - named 'Gulfview' - that was developed to allow stakeholders to efficiently access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf. 
Map • 408.16 KB
2016-104-Spencer Gulf socio-ecological status.pdf

Summary

This map depicts the socio-ecological Status of Spencer Gulf 2019
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 1.58 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation Gulfview.pdf

Summary

This presentation highlights the interactive software platform called Gulfview, which allows stakeholders to access spatially-explicit information about the environmental characteristics, ecological assets, human activities, management arrangements and socio-economic values of Spencer Gulf 
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 3.33 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG socio-ecological status and recommendations.pdf

Summary

This presentation reports the socio-ecological assessment of the industries, communities and ecosystems of Spencer Gulf by:
• Collating existing data-sets
• Developing potential social, ecological and economic indicators
• Assessing status of the Spencer Gulf
• Identifying key knowledge gaps and other data limitations
• Recommending next steps
Presentation • 2019-04-01 • 2.47 MB
2016-104-Goyder Presentation SG Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Why Spencer Gulf?
• increasingly crowded marine space
• gateway for SA’s agriculture, mining and energy sectors
• produces approximately half of SA’s seafood
• recreational hotspot and growing ecotourism
• important conservation values
• nationally recognised case-study for integrated management
• process needed to resolve conflict among user groups (fishers, conservation, miners, desalination plants)
• need a more efficient and transparent decision-making process
People
PROJECT NUMBER • 2016-103
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Visiting scientist: Kostas Ganias - expert on fish reproductive biology related to egg production methods

The Daily Egg Production Method is used to estimate the spawning biomass of several Australian fisheries for pelagic species, including the South Australian Sardine Fishery and Commonwealth Small Pelagic Fishery. Dr Kostas Ganias of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki is a world leader in the...
ORGANISATION:
SARDI Food Safety and Innovation
TAGS
Sustainability
Survey
Stock Assessment
Reproduction
Rac Sa
SPECIES
Blue Mackerel
Pilchards

FRDC submission to the review of the Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity (IGAB)

Project number: 2016-069
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $4,659.69
Principal Investigator: Mark Boulter
Organisation: Safe Sustainable Seafood Pty Ltd
Project start/end date: 7 Feb 2017 - 27 Feb 2017
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Marketing
Fisheries Management
Climate Change
Biosecurity
Animal Health

Objectives

1. To develop a submission into the review of the Intergovernmental Agreement on Biosecurity (IGAB)

Final report

Author: Mark Boulter
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Final Report • 2017-04-26 • 997.20 KB
2016-069-DLD.pdf
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2016-068
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Vulnerability of the endangered Maugean Skate population to degraded environmental conditions in Macquarie Harbour

Maugean Skate (Zearaja maugeana) are only known from two isolated estuarine systems located on the west coast of Tasmania, representing one of most restricted distributions of any elasmobranch. There is, however, uncertainty about the continued persistence of the species in one of these estuaries...
ORGANISATION:
University of Tasmania (UTAS)
TAGS
Remote Sensing
Physiology
Ecosystem
SPECIES
Skates
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2016-067
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Understanding oxygen dynamics and the importance for benthic recovery in Macquarie Harbour

This report provides an update on the status of dissolved oxygen (DO) and benthic conditions in Macquarie Harbour. It follows on from the results outlined in the IMAS reports released in January, May, September 2017 and January 2018. These reports described a deterioration of benthic and water...
ORGANISATION:
University of Tasmania
TAGS
Survey
Depredation
SPECIES
Atlantic Salmon
Salmons
View Filter

Research

Category

Product Type

Species

Organisation