There is an opportunity to create a new partnership with the Australian Recreational Fishing Foundation (ARFF) to aggregate information from a regional and jurisdictional level to a national forum with the view to provide advise the FRDC in prioritising strategic and tactical investments in RD&E to deliver positive outcomes for the Australian recreational sector.
An ARFF – FRDC partnership could be extend beyond simply prioritisation, to include establishing opportunities for effective and targeted extension and adoption of R&D outputs to effect cultural and behavioural changes within recreational sector beneficiaries.
A properly resourced and coordinated collaboration may also identify opportunities for co-investment with traditional and non-traditional sources, particularly those linked to the ARFF network.
This proposal looks to formalise a partnership between the recreational fishing sector and the FRDC and outlines the structure, function, resourcing and phases of that partnership model.
The effective delivery of this partnership model will in turn derive benefits to the recreational sector, its supporters, the broader Australian community, and the FRDC through the delivery of the R&D Plan 2020-2025.

Australia’s fisheries span a large area of ocean. Australia has the world’s third largest Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), with an area of over 8 million km2. This zone contains mainly Commonwealth managed fisheries, with State jurisdictions mainly in coastal waters up to the 3 nautical mile limit. Australia's total wild-catch fisheries gross value of production is $1.6 billion, of which 28% is from Commonwealth fisheries and 72% from the smaller coastal inshore fisheries managed by state jurisdictions. The wildcatch fisheries sector employs about 10,000 people across Australia (https://www.awe.gov.au/abares/research-topics/fisheries/fisheries-and-aquaculture-statistics/employment).

The commercial fishing industry has a network of thousands of vessels working mainly in inshore waters around Australia. They can supply a potential platform for extensive and fine scale spatial and temporal monitoring of the waters of the continental shelf (0-1200m), from the surface to the ocean floor. Given that their livelihoods depend on it, they have a keen understanding of oceanographic conditions with respect to fish behaviour, feeding and spawning and the various oceanographic factors that may influence this. In some fisheries (e.g. surface tuna longlining), fishers eagerly seek and use readily available fine-scale oceanographic data such as sea surface temperature and sea level, to improve their targeting and achieve higher resultant catch rates. For many other fisheries, however, it is the fine-scale sub-surface oceanographic conditions (feed layers, thermoclines, temperature at depth etc) that have a critical influence on their fishing dynamics. Unfortunately, this type of oceanographic data is far less readily available. Although fishers and scientists know these factors are important, the time series of fine scale spatial and temporal data relevant to fishery operations is not available to include in stock assessments. As a result, it is often assumed that variations in catch rates reflect changing stock abundance, when it may simply be a result of changing oceanographic conditions.

Marine scientists collect a vast range of oceanographic data using satellites, subsurface drones, and static and drifting buoys. Sea surface data, however, is much easier and more cost-effective to collect at high spatial and temporal resolutions than sub-surface data. Hence, understanding of sub-surface oceanographic conditions tends to be derived from modelling more than actual measurement. This may be sufficient at a wide-scale global or continental level, but it is not adequate at the fine-scale spatial and temporal resolution required for fisheries management.

The use of commercial fishing gear as a research data platform has been increasing in popularity internationally (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.485512/full). A number of groups in Europe have been doing this for a decade (e.g Martinelli et al 2016), and New Zealand are also now involved (https://www.moanaproject.org/te-tiro-moana). However, this approach has yet to be implemented in Australia in a coordinated way. In particular, our approach dictates open access data served through the IMOS Australian Ocean Data Network (www.aodn.org.au) that can be collected once and used many times.

In this project we intend to instrument seafood sector assets (e.g Trawl Nets, longlines, pots) with fit-for- purpose quality-controlled (QC'd) temperature/pressure sensors to increase the sub-surface temperature data coverage around Australia’s shelf and upper slope regions (0-800m) at low cost. Not only will this assist in the collection of data at relevant spatial and temporal scales for use by fishers, but it will also provide a far more extensive level of QC’d data to oceanographers in near real time (NRT) for evaluation and ingestion into data-assimilating coastal models that will provide improved analysis and forecasts of oceanic conditions. In turn, this will also be of value to the fishing sector when used to standardise stock assessments.

Martinelli, M., Guicciardi, S., Penna, P., Belardinelli, A., Croci, C., Domenichetti, F., et al. (2016). Evaluation of the oceanographic measurement accuracy of different commercial sensors to be used on fishing gears. Ocean Eng. 111, 22–33. doi: 10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2015.10.037

The proposal is for the production of the sixth edition of the SAFS reports. SAFS is Australia's only coordinated, national-scale stock-status reporting framework, and as such is a critical driver of jurisdictional collaboration and strategic processes. The current application is to produce the SAFS reports in 2023 and address strategic issues outlined above. In order to ensure the continuation of SAFS beyond 2023, it is essential for jurisdictions to develop ownership of the reports and to embed SAFS processes in core business, and for efficiencies in production and report management to continue to progress. A parallel project to develop jurisdictional reporting services is also underway to assist jurisdictions develop their jurisdictional chapters. As documented in the independent audit of SAFS 2016 (FRDC project 2016-143), the process of compiling SAFS on a co-operative basis between FRDC, Australian government agencies and all fisheries jurisdictions has led to greater joint collaboration, as well as transfers of methodologies and processes, to deliver higher quality and more credible stock status reporting which can be accessed nationally and internationally, as well as assisting in policy decisions regarding changes to particular fisheries management arrangements and in research priorities. Primary drivers for National reporting of the SAFS include: (i) the State of the Environment Report 2011, i.e., ‘lack of a nationally integrated approach inhibits effective marine management’; (ii) a recommendation of the House of Representatives Inquiry into the Role of Science for Fisheries and Aquaculture (Netting the Benefits Report 2012), i.e., ‘producing national status report regularly’; (iii) the Australian Fisheries Management Forum national statement of intent, i.e. a key outcome of ‘Goal 1’ is the National Status of Australian Fish Stocks Report; (iv) the National Fishing and Aquaculture Strategy 2015–20, i.e., ‘Goal 1’ of this strategy will be partially measured by an increased number of fisheries assessed as environmentally sustainable in the Status of Australian Fish Stocks Reports (this includes reducing the number of stocks assessed as uncertain); (v) the FRDC RD&E Plan 2020–25, enabling strategy V (tracking and reporting on sustainability of fish stocks and performance of fisheries).

Australia’s fisheries research agencies all conduct stock assessments of varying complexities to assess the status of key fish stocks. However, the modelling approaches taken, data analyses that underpins the stock assessments and the level of peer review that is undertaken are variable (Dichmont et al. 2018, Haddon et al. 2018). The Status of Australian Fish Stocks (SAFS; Flood et al. 2016) program has aimed to make the reporting of these assessments consistent among jurisdictions. Additionally, in recognition of the data limited nature of many of the species being assessed in SAFS there has also been work undertaken to train jurisdictional stock assessment staff in data limited stock assessment techniques (Haddon et al. 2019). However, while there are a substantial amount of modelling tools available, most jurisdictions have stock assessment scientists that are model users rather than developers. Consequently, there is a need to provide guidance on how to use these appropriately so as to strengthen the quality of the outputs of the models. Developing guidance (defined as help and advice about how to do something or about how to deal with problems) is important and a set of stock assessment guidelines that describes each method currently used in Australia, outlines the method, required biological and fishery data, levels of uncertainty, and pros and cons is an important facet to demonstrating best practice in management of Australia’s fisheries. The guidance will provide transparency in the modelling process and has the potential to remove or moderate controversy regarding modelling outputs and the resulting management implications. This guidance (hereafter guidelines) are not intended to be prescriptive but provide guidance on a suite of methods from full-blown bioeconomic models and integrated assessments (e.g., SS3) through to data-poor approaches such as catchMSY.

This project seeks to position the NT seafood industry to have a clear understanding of suitable and cost effective, valued systems and processes for adoption. It is the critical first step required to aid a shift in the behaviour and culture from a government driven data collection process for legislative purposes, to a process that is trusted and valued by industry to deliver data insights beyond regulatory requirements. As a result, it will help position the NT wild harvest and aquaculture sectors with securing access, investment and development opportunities.

Current negotiations for access to Aboriginal-owned tidal waters have reached a critical point. A gap exists in understanding what level of industry adjustment might be required to ensure Indigenous investment in the industry is not unnecessarily impacted. Better understanding the full value of the NT seafood industry to the NT community could assist with all strategic decisions related to Blue Mud Bay negotiations, infrastructure investments – and help support investment in the industry going forward.

Without a plan to enhance the visibility of the wider socio-economic value and benefits of our industry, we will continue to face increasing pressure on our social licence to operate – which has the potential to impact all aspects of the local industry, including access, industry structure and increased fees. It will also limit our ability to identify the best opportunities for future growth and sustainability.

Further, there is limited availability of current financial and economic information for our individual NT wild harvest fisheries and sector specific aquaculture activities. Due to this lack of information there is little scope for economic analysis, hence limiting opportunities for providing advice to policy and decision makers.

Project aim
• What is the value proposition and the processes and resources required which will engage researchers in incorporating an adoption pathway in the design and delivery of the projects they are involved in, where researchers can articulate ‘where’ on the impact pathway their research starts and finishes and what role it plays in identifying core problems and finding solutions.
Project outcome
• Researchers and extension officers actively engaged in the design of a theory of change that will best inform the pathways to adoption and impact.
Context
• This is not about the design of the technology or the research methodology (although these will contribute to adoption and impact), it is specifically about mapping the role of extension in supporting projects to optimise adoption and impact.

FRDC requires mechanisms to assess and govern the data for which it is custodian or may become custodian of. FRDC requires a data governance framework that builds on the concepts of the NFF Farm Data Code and other Agricultural data best practices for use by FRDC data stakeholders. A data governance framework will ensure that FRDC BAU and project data is captured, managed and distributed with accountability, consistency, security and meets defined standards throughout the data lifecycle. As a coordinating industry body, it is essential that FRDC leads the way with a robust, considered approach to data management. This will place FRDC as a best practice example, it will enable consistent discussion and guidance to stakeholders and data partners and will provide a consistent foundation for overall trust and capability in the use of data as well as providing a foundation for the FRDC to maximise the value of data created through the Australian innovation system. It is expected that subsets of the FRDC data governance framework will be developed in the future to extend support to FRDC stakeholderss.

A program to direct WRL BBE research over the next four years will increase the strategic focus of research and increase the efficiency of the application and granting process, thus leading to a more rapid implementation of outcomes into the management of the fishery.
Quantitative methods used by DPRID to assess WRL stock and predict recruitment are based on the historical research, and have served the industry well, with current stock levels being extremely healthy and the fishery targeting maximum economic yield. Recently, perceived anomalies in observations and predictions have led to concerns by some within industry that the understanding of the BBE of WRL is not as robust as once thought, and that gaps within our knowledge exist. Members of industry, including investors, fishers, processors and government, all have different views on what research is important, what we currently have a good understanding of, and what information is potentially missing from our current suite of knowledge, in addition to what may be important in the future. Some knowledge gaps may be perceived rather than actual with prior research existing, but has not been disseminated wide-enough, while other gaps will be novel and unknown. There is an expansive back catalogue of research on WRL that currently is unknown to many within the WRL industry and re-iterating this research to industry would aid many in increasing their understanding of the current sustainability of the stock and the value for future investment. There also exists a number of knowledge gaps identified by industry and prioritising these is required. Thus, there is a need to review and collate historical research on WRL and disseminate this in a report for the WRL stakeholders.
There is also a need to strategically align current and future research with contemporary requirements such as addressing information requirements to maintain MSC certification, ecosystem-based fisheries management, the effects of adjacent marine activities (e.g. seismic) and marine parks, and the constantly changing seascape through climate change and extreme events.